VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. The rent was set at £240.71 per week, effective from 5 April 2021, following the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent determination under the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant with an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, a tenant can also apply to challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). When determining the rent, the tribunal considers what a willing landlord would charge for a similar periodic tenancy in the open market.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £240.71 per week, effective from 5 April 2021.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AF/MNR/2021/0083

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 121 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

[COMPANY] 30 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Miss [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 240.71 Per week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 5 April 2021

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 14 March 2017

6. Length of the term or rental period weekly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord none

9. Description of premises Extended end of terrace house Ground floor 2 rooms kitchen and bathroom, first floor 3 rooms bathroom

Chairman A [NAME] of Decision 23 July 2021

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed12 cases

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 determination under the Housing Act 1988.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • No specific factors identified as leading to a decision against the claimant in these cases.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £240.71 per week.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the tenant were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the Housing Act 1988, which provides the framework for determining rents.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered around the statutory requirements for setting the rent under the Housing Act 1988.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should refer to the Housing Act 1988 for guidance on rent determination.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents related to the tenancy agreement and statutory requirements were 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.