VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the monthly rent at £600, excluding water rates and council tax.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent determined under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The application can't be made if the rent is already determined by a previous decision under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

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

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, setting the monthly rent at £600 excluding water rates and council tax.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/00BW/MNR/2023/0278

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 55 [NAME] [POSTCODE]

[NAME], LL.M Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] 3 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 600.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 24 August 2023

3. The amount included for services is/ Not applicable Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 24 July 2019

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Nil

8. Description of premises An end of terrace, flush fronted house of brick under a slate roof with the gable wall rendered. There is a single storey, flat roofed kitchen extension to the rear. Upvc double glazing and gas central heating are installed. Internally the ground floor has been opened into a through room. There are two bedrooms and a bathroom/wc upstairs. The shower sealing is poor. The kitchen is relatively modern. Recent work has been carried out to remedy historical disrepair, although the rendered gable appears to be porous, as evidenced by internal damp in the wall. The property is situated close to the commercial centre of [NAME] and its amenities.

[NAME] of Decision 13 December 2023

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 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 was entitled to have their rent determined under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
  • The Tribunal set the rent at £600.00 per calendar month.
  • The decision on the rent determination took effect on August 24, 2023.
  • The property is an end-of-terrace house with UPVC double glazing and gas central heating.
  • The property's kitchen is relatively modern, and recent work addressed historical disrepair.

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.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the Housing Act 1988, which provides for rent determination.

Which laws or rules were applied?

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

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered around the application of the Housing Act 1988 for rent determination.

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 seek rent determination under the Housing Act 1988.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence regarding the condition and value of the property was likely considered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.