Rent Adjustment for Property Condition - First-tier Tribunal Decision
📌 In brief
The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent increase from £1,350 to £1,280 per month, considering the property's condition, including single-glazed windows and some damp issues.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment reflecting the condition of the property.
📖 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 the tenancy. The tribunal will determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market, considering the condition of the property and any relevant improvements or disrepair.
The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11 implies a covenant by the landlord to keep in repair the structure and exterior of the dwelling house, including drains, gutters, and external pipes, as well as installations for water, gas, electricity, and sanitation. The landlord is also responsible for keeping in repair and proper working order the installations for space heating and heating water. However, the landlord is not required to carry out repairs unless they affect the tenant's enjoyment of the dwelling house or any common parts to which the tenant is entitled to use.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase to account for the property's condition.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase to reflect the property's condition, reducing the rent from £1,350 to £1,280 per month.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HS/LON/00AF/MNR/2023/0385
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 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tribunal Judge S.J. Walker Tribunal member [NAME] MA MRICS
Landlord [NAME], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 1,280 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 3 October 2023
*3. The amount included for services is/is
negligible/not applicable n/a Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 3 September 2021
6. Length of the term or rental period Periodic monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord none
9. Description of premises A one-bedroom ground-floor flat with a rear garden situated on a bus route and a short distance from the centre of Bromley
Chairman Tribunal Judge S.J. Walker Date of Decision 1 February 2024
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AF/MNR/2023/0385 Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]. Tenant : Mr. [APPELLANT]. [APPELLANT] Landlord : Ms. [APPELLANT]. [APPELLANT]. Type of Application : Determination of market rent following a notice of increase served pursuant to section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 Date of Application : 11 September 2023 Tribunal Members : Tribunal Judge S.J. Walker Tribunal Member [NAME] MA MRICS Venue and date of hearing : 10, [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] 1 February 2024 Date of Summary Reasons : 2 February 2024
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,280 per calendar month with effect from 3 October 2023.
SUMMARY REASONS Background 1. On 19 August 2023 the landlord served a notice under section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,350 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,100 per month to take effect from 3 October 2023.
2 2. On 11 September 2023 the tenant referred the landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent under section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988.
Inspection 3. The Tribunal carried out an inspection of the property on 1 February 2024.
Evidence 4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by both the landlord and the tenant. A face to face hearing took place on 1 February 2024 which was attended by both parties. Neither party provided its own comparable evidence.
Determination and Valuation 5. Having considered our own knowledge of rental values in the area as an expert Tribunal, our view is that the open market rent for the property would be £1,350 per month if it was in good condition.
6. Much of the tenant’s case at the hearing concerned the high cost of heating the property. However, he had provided to the Tribunal an energy performance certificate dated 20 December 2022 which showed that the property had an energy rating of 63 D and so enabling the property to be let.
7. To reflect the fact that the property has a large bay window which is only single-glazed and draughty together with the existence of some damp in the kitchen and bedroom we considered a deduction of 5% should be applied. This amounts to a deduction of £67.50 per month.
8. The Tribunal therefore determined that the market rent was £1,282.50 rounded down to £1,280 per month.
Effective Date 9. At the hearing the tenant argued that the date of increase should be later than the date specified in the landlord’s notice pursuant to section 14(7) of the Housing Act 1988 as otherwise the increase would cause undue hardship. No documentary evidence was provided by the tenant to substantiate this argument.
10. The tenant’s oral evidence was that he was currently on sick-leave from work and receiving statutory sick pay. He was also in receipt of Universal Credit and he had been receiving payments of Universal Credit for his housing costs since his wife had stopped working.
11. Given the fact that most if not all of the tenant’s housing costs would be met from benefits, the Tribunal was not satisfied that increasing the rent from the date specified by the landlord would cause undue hardship.
12. The Tribunal therefore decided that the effective date should be 3 October 2023.
3
Name: Tribunal Judge S.J. Walker Date: 2 February 2024
ANNEX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
• The Tribunal is required to set out rights of appeal against its decisions by virtue of the rule 36 (2)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Property Chamber) Rules 2013 and these are set out below.
• If a party wishes to appeal against this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
• The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application.
• If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.
• The application 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 making the application is seeking.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Reduced for Unmodernised Property - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Reduced to £2,500 Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
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 property's single-glazed, draughty bay window and damp in the kitchen and bedroom justified a rent deduction.
- The Tribunal used its expert knowledge of local rental values to determine the market rent.
- The property's energy performance certificate showed it had an energy rating of 63 D, allowing it to be let.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's argument that high heating costs should lower the rent was not accepted.
- The tenant's request for a later rent increase date due to undue hardship was rejected.
- The tenant failed to provide documentary evidence to support his claim of undue hardship.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase to reflect the property's condition, setting the rent at £1,280 per month.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over the rent increase.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to reduce the proposed rent increase because the property had some issues like single-glazed windows and damp spots.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition of the property, including single-glazed windows and damp spots, was the most important factor.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, who wanted a lower rent due to the property's condition.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be able to negotiate a lower rent if they can prove the property has significant issues.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The energy performance certificate showing the property's condition was important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent adjustments.
