VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Assessment for Assured Tenancy Under Housing Act 1988

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal assessed the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £132.50 per week, effective from June 26, 2023, after considering the open market value of the property.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent assessment under the Housing Act 1988 that reflects the open market value of the property.

Topics

rent assessmentassured periodic tenancyopen market value

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their assured tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent based on what a willing landlord would charge in the open market for a similar periodic tenancy.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal assessed the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, determining the rent based on the open market value of the property.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/41UK/MNR/2023/0121

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 30 Medway Tamworth [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord One (Housing and Support) CIC Address Unit 7, The Warehouse Studios, Culcheth, Warrington, [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £132.50 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 26 June 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable - Per -

4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 20 September 2019

6. Length of the term or rental period Weekly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S11 LTA 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises First floor double bedroom in 6-bedroom HMO house with shared entrance/ lobby and communal kitchen/ living room. Shared first floor bathroom with WC, WHB and shower cubicle and shared ground floor toilet with shower cubicle, WHB and WC. Rear garden area. Gas fired central heating, UPVC double glazed windows and carpets and curtains and all white goods provided by landlord.

[NAME] of Decision 23 October 2023

Page 1 of 5

Case Reference : BIR/41/UK/MNR/2023/0121

Property : 30 Medway Tamworth [POSTCODE]

Landlord : [NAME]

Tenant : [APPELLANT] of Application : An Application for a Determination under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members : [NAME]

[NAME] of Decision : 7 April 2024

_____________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF REASONS _____________________________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Page 2 of 5

BACKGROUND

1. The Landlord served a notice on the Tenant dated 24 April 2023 under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 seeking to increase the rent of the Property from £130 to £143 per week with effect from 26 June 2023.

2. The Tenant made an application dated 1 June 2023 referring the notice of the proposed increase to the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber (Residential Property).

3. The Tribunal issued its Directions dated 24 July 2023 and listed the case for a paper determination (without a hearing) on 23 October 2023 following its inspection on the same day.

4. The Tenant did not complete or return a Reply Form to the Tribunal. The Landlord did however complete a Reply Form and enclosed in their submissions evidence in support of their proposal for consideration by the Tribunal.

5. No further written submissions were received from either party.

6. After the inspection and after consideration of the available evidence and the applicable law, the Tribunal determined a rent of £132.50 per week with effect from 26 June 2023 and issued its decision on this basis.

7. Upon receipt of an email dated 13 November 2023 received by the Tribunal the Landlord requested the Tribunal provide reasons. These written reasons should therefore be read in conjunction with the Decision of the Tribunal dated 23 October 2023.

THE PROPERTY

8. The Property is located in the Wilnecote area of Tamworth surrounded by properties of a similar type and age.

9. The Property is a 6-bedroom semi-detached HMO house with a shared entrance, kitchen, and bathroom with a rear garden area, garage but no off-street parking.

10. The subject room is located on the first floor and comprises a double bedroom with wall mounted radiator and a double-glazed window.

11. The first-floor shared bathroom is tiled and includes a WC, WHB, towel rail and shower cubicle. The shared kitchen has fitted units and includes all the white goods. On the ground floor there is another shared bathroom which includes and WC, separate WC and shower cubicle.

Page 3 of 5

12. All the windows are double glazed and there is gas fired central heating throughout. The Landlord advises that they have provided all the carpets and curtains as well as the white goods (cooker, washing machine and fridge).

13. The rent includes and amount for internet, rubbish collection, electricity, gas, , insurance, council tax, general cleaning/ repairs, water and a management fee.

14. Neither party advises any improvements have been carried out to the Property since it was first let.

EVIDENCE

15. In the Landlord’s Reply Form, it describes the Property as above having six bedrooms and two shared bathroom/ shower rooms and that the Landlord has supplied all the floor coverings and white goods. The Landlord also included details of various comparable properties from the locality ranging in rent from £425 to £620 per month.

16. The Tenant did not complete or submit a Reply Form or make any submissions for the Tribunal’s consideration.

THE LAW

17. Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 states:

'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy -

(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the

tenancy to which the notice relates; (b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice; (c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the

same as those of the tenancy to which the notice relates;...'

'(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded -

(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a [NAME]; (b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a [NAME]

improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out

was the tenant, if the improvement-

Page 4 of 5

(i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the

immediate landlord ...

18. The jurisdiction of the Rent Assessment Committee was transferred to the First- tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) from 1st July 2013.

19. In accordance with the terms of section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 the Tribunal must determine the rent at which it considers that the subject property might reasonably be expected to let on the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy.

20. In so doing the Tribunal, as required by section 14(1), must ignore the effect on the rental value of the property of any [NAME]’s improvements as defined in section 14(2) 0f the Act.

VALUATION

21. In reaching its determination, the Tribunal has had regard to the evidence and submissions of the parties, the [NAME] law and their own knowledge and experience as an expert Tribunal but not any special or secret knowledge.

22. In the first instance, the Tribunal determined what rent the landlord could reasonably be expected to obtain for the Property if it were let today in the condition that is considered usual for such an open market letting.

23. The Tribunal used its own general knowledge of market rental levels in local area and from its own research into rental values for similar types of property from the surrounding areas. The Tribunal found similar type properties to let at between £425 to £736 per month in similar locations, that offered similar sized accommodation. The Tribunal also had regard to the Landlord’s statement and evidence in arriving at its valuation of the Property.

24. There were no Tenants’ improvements and so no deductions were made in this respect. From its inspection the Tribunal found the Property to be in reasonable condition and decorative order similar to the standard of the comparables on the market. However, the Tribunal was of the view that although the Property has two shared bathrooms the Tenant’s room lacked an ensuite which several of the bedsits have and therefore made adjustments for this.

25. Taking all these factors into consideration, the Tribunal determined the open market rent at £137.50 per week and deducted £5.00 per week for the lack of an ensuite and concluded that the likely market rental would be £132.50 per week after making these adjustments.

Page 5 of 5

26. The rent determined by the Tribunal for the purposes of Section 14 was, therefore, £132.50 per week.

RIGHT OF APPEAL

27. If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on a point of law only. Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this decision (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.

[NAME] (Hons) FRICS

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:

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 tenant is entitled to a rent assessment reflecting the open market value of the property.
  • The rent should reflect current market conditions for similar properties.
  • Rent adjustments are allowed if the increase causes undue hardship.
  • Rent determinations must consider the property's condition and the tenant's ability to pay.
  • Rent levels should reflect open market conditions and terms of the tenancy.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the open market value of the property, taking into account comparable rents in the area.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the comparison of the property's rent with similar properties in the area.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect their rent to be assessed based on the open market value of the property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of comparable rents in the area was important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on a point of law only.

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 assessments.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.