Market Rent Set for Poorly Maintained HMO Room
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the market rent for a poorly maintained room in a house in multiple occupation (HMO) in London. The tribunal considered the condition of the property and compared it to similar properties in the area to determine a fair rent.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a reasonable market rent for their accommodation.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a reasonable market rent for the property, considering factors such as the condition of the property and comparable rents in the area.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined the market rent for a poorly maintained HMO room.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent for a poorly maintained room in a house in multiple occupation (HMO) in London. The tribunal took into account the condition of the property and comparable rents in the area.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. JM/LON/00BH/MNR/2022/0134
Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination)
Housing Act 1988 Section 14
Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 25 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [RESPONDENT] [NAME]
Landlord [APPELLANT] 83 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT] & Ms [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 390.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 08 September 2022
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable
Per
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 8 July 2021
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Ss 11 and 12 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Double bed, 3 sets of Drawers, refrigerator, table
9. Description of premises Small room in HMO with shared use of kitchen and bathroom
[NAME] of Decision 23 November 2022
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2021
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : JM/LON/00BH/MNR/2022/0134 HMCTS Code (paper, video, audio) : Face to Face Hearing
Property : 25 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME] & Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME] by : [NAME] [RESPONDENT] of Safer Renting Landlord : [RESPONDENT] by
: In Person Type of [NAME] : Section 13 and 14 Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] and venue of Consideration : 23 November 2022 at [ADDRESS] W1 Date of Decision : 29 November 2022
2
Decisions of the tribunal (1) The tribunal determines that the market rent is £390 (Three Hundred and ninety) per month with effect from 8 September 2022 (the date stated in the landlord’s notice of increase). (2) The tribunal makes the determinations as set out under the various headings in this decision. The [NAME]
1. The applicant seeks a determination pursuant to section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 following the service of a notice of increase dated 21 July 2022 proposing a new rent of £950 per month in place of the existing rent of £700.00 per month (as stated in the notice) to take effect on 8 September 2022. The tribunal issued directions on 14 September 2022.
2. The tribunal was provided with written submissions prepared by [NAME] [NAME] on behalf of the tenants and who also represented the tenants at the hearing. The landlord sent several emails to the tribunal with photograph attachments. There was no appearance at the hearing on behalf of the landlord although he did attend the inspection.
3. The tribunal is solely concerned with setting a market rent for the property in accordance with section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. The papers included allegations of harassment by the landlord and confirmation that the property is an unlicensed HMO. In the reply form the tenant also requested a refund of rent. These are not matters with which the tribunal can deal on this [NAME].
4. The tribunal inspected the property following the hearing. The property 5. The subject property is the ground floor front room in a typical small Victorian terraced house. The room is accessed of the entrance hall and has a blocked off doorway opening to the rear room. It is not clear to the tribunal whether there was a proper fire resisting partition between the rooms.
6. The tribunal found that the house was in poor condition. Rain water gutters were incomplete and the felt flat roof over the bathroom was in poor order. There is an insubstantial canopy over the rear entrance
3 door formed from some form of plastic sheet propped up by timber. The shared bathroom opens off the kitchen and the fittings are worn. The bathroom contains a washing machine which is incorrectly wired in. There are loose electric cables in the entrance hall. The kitchen is incomplete and there is no seating or dining area in the property. The tenant states that heating is not operating although a radiator in the hall was warm during our inspection. The tenant alleged that it was turned on purely for the purposes of the inspection. Building work has been carried out to the property but much of this is a poor standard.
7. Furniture is in poor repair, the bed is propped up on bricks, the fridge is iced up and the other furniture has been repaired in a piecemeal fashion.
8. Water comes through the ceiling, possibly from a bathroom above on an intermittent basis. Video evidence was provided.
9. Photographic evidence was provided that the rear garden had previously been filled with building materials and other rubbish although much of this had been transferred to the front garden. The rear garden was still unusable.
10. Evidence was provided of disrepair found by officers of Waltham Forest Council and that an [NAME] for a selective licence as an HMO had been refused. The tenancy agreement 11. The tenancy commenced in July 2021. The landlord’s evidence included a tenancy agreement which is not signed by the tenant. The agreement shows a rent of £700 per month but the tenant provided bank statement evidence that payments of £650 per month had been made to the landlord. The tribunal prefers the evidence of the tenant.
12. In the absence of a signed tenancy agreement the provisions of sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 apply and the rent may be increased by using the provisions of section 13 of the Housing Act 1988.
13. Under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 the landlord is responsible for repairing the structure and exterior but not for internal painting and decoration to the room. The landlord is responsible for all repairs to shared spaces The landlord is also responsible for keeping in good repair and working order installations for heating water heating and sanitation and for the supply of utilities. Any provisions in the tenancy agreement to the contrary are of no effect.
14. There is an implied covenant on the tenant to use the property in a tenant like manner.
4
The Tenant’s evidence 15. The submissions for the Applicant stressed the poor condition of the property. In addition evidence of a number of comparables was provided.
16. Comparable 1 seeks two tenants to share a house. One room is on the ground floor and one room on the upper floor. The property is furnished and the rent includes bills. Amenities include a shared living room and the rent includes broadband. One room is available at £700 per month and the other at £650 per month.
17. Comparable 2 is one room in a flat share at a rent of £620 per month excluding bills. There is a shared living room and parking is included but not broadband. The flat is furnished.
18. Comparable 3 is a single room in a flat share available on an unfurnished basis at £700 per month including bills. The flat included balcony/patio and broadband.
19. Comparable 4 is a double bedroom to let in a flat share at a rent of £650 per month inclusive of some bills. The property is furnished, has a garden/terrace, parking and a shared living room. Broadband is included.
20. Comparable 5 is has 3 double bedrooms to rent in a flat, two at £563 per month and one at £650 per month. The advert says that if 2 people share one room can be used as a living room. Broadband and bills are included.
21. Comparable 6 is a double room available in a 5 bedroom house at a rent of £750 per month inclusive of bills. The room is furnished has access to a garden and the rent includes broadband.
22. Comparable 7 is a double room to rent consisting of the smallest of 3 rooms upstairs. The property is to let at £550 per month excluding bills and is furnished. There is a shared living room and broadband is included.
23. Comparable 8 is a double room in a flat share at a rent of £600 per month excluding bills. The room is furnished, has parking and shared use of a living room.
5
The landlord’s evidence 24. The landlord submitted an email with photograph attachments which were said to refute the claims of disrepair. The photographs are not dated on their face although the description states a date. A number of the photographs are of other rooms in the property and not concerned with this tenancy.
25. The landlord states a section 21 notice has been served seeking possession of the property. This is not a matter for this tribunal.
26. The evidence includes an email dated 19 October from [NAME] [NAME] of the Council concerning disrepair and contravention of HMO management regulations.
27. The landlord states that the property is for sale, the tenants are vacating or have vacated the property although the subject tenant refuses to leave. A licence [NAME] was made in May 2021 but no response was received until the tenants unfounded allegations in April 2022.
28. No rental evidence has been provided by the landlord. The Law 29. Section 14 the Housing Act 1988, allows a tenant who has received a notice of increase to apply to the tribunal for a determination of the rent which in the tribunal’s opinion the rent at which the dwelling might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as the tenancy, beginning at the beginning of the notice period and on the same terms other than the amount of rent as are contained in the tenancy.
30. The assessment is required to disregard any effect on rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant, any increase in the value attributable to any voluntary improvement carried out by a tenant and any reduction in the value of the dwellinghouse attributable to a failure by the tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Valuation 31. The tribunal has considered the evidence of the parties relating to the condition of the property. The tribunal has also inspected. In addition to the comparable rental evidence provided by the parties the tribunal also relies on its knowledge and experience.
6 32. The tribunal considers that this room, in repair let in the market on an AST on normal market terms, in the condition the market would expect including carpets, curtains and white goods would achieve a rent of £650 per month including bills. The tribunal has deducted 40% to reflect the lack of carpets, curtains, shared living space and general state of repair of the property and furnishings to arrive at a rent of £390 per month inclusive of bills.
33. The rent takes effect from 8 September 2022, being the date set out in the landlord’s notice.
Name: [NAME]: 29 November 2022
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case.
The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28 day time limit, such [NAME] must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.
If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Double Room at £650
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment to Prevent Financial Hardship for Tenant
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Ground Floor Flat in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1350
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tribunal determined a market rent of £390 per month for the property.
- The property was in poor condition, with incomplete gutters and a poor felt flat roof.
- The shared bathroom fittings were worn, and the washing machine was incorrectly wired.
- The furniture was in poor repair, including a bed propped on bricks and an iced-up fridge.
- Water was coming through the ceiling intermittently, supported by video evidence.
- The rear garden was unusable, having been filled with building materials and rubbish.
- The landlord's evidence of a tenancy agreement was not signed by the tenant.
- The tenant's bank statements showed payments of £650 per month, which the tribunal preferred over the £700 stated in the unsigned agreement.
- The tribunal deducted 40% from a hypothetical market rent to reflect the property's poor condition and lack of amenities.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Allegations of harassment by the landlord and the property being an unlicensed HMO were not within the tribunal's scope.
- The landlord's photographs to refute disrepair claims were not dated and some were of other rooms.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The market rent for a poorly maintained room in a house in multiple occupation (HMO) in London was set at £390 per month.
Who was involved?
The tenant of a room in an HMO and the landlord of the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court inspected the property and considered comparable rents in the area to determine a fair market rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied to determine the market rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition of the property and the comparison with similar properties in the area were crucial in determining the market rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant, setting a lower rent than what the landlord proposed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation can seek a determination of a fair market rent if they believe their rent is too high due to poor conditions.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs and descriptions of the property's condition, along with comparable rental prices, were important in the decision.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination and property conditions.
