Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal determined a new rent of £1,465 per month for an assured periodic tenancy after considering comparable evidence and making adjustments for the tenant's responsibilities.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair rent determination based on comparable evidence and adjustments for their responsibilities.
📖 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. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is already set by 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 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 property in the open market, taking into account the same terms and conditions as the original tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and adjustments for the tenant's responsibilities.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a new rent of £1,465 per month for an assured periodic tenancy, taking into account comparable evidence and adjustments for the tenant's responsibilities.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/29UK/MNR/2025/0701
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 Tudor Cottage 6 The Village Chiddingstone Edenbridge Kent [POSTCODE]
[NAME] Mr J [NAME] Judge Skinner
Landlord The National Trust Address Scotney Castle, Lamberhurst, Kent, [POSTCODE]
Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 1,465.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 16 June 2025
3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a
4. Date assured tenancy commenced September 2020
5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly
6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord
7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
8. Description of premises Grade II Listed, semi-detached house with 2 bedrooms
[NAME] of Decision 22 September 2025
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/29UK/MNR/2025/0701 Property : Tudor Cottage 6 The Village Chiddingstone Edenbridge Kent [POSTCODE] Applicant Tenant : Ms [COUNSEL] :
None
Respondent Landlord : The National Trust Representative : [RESPONDENT] of Application :
Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] Judge C Skinner Date of Application : 5th May 2025 (received 26th May 2025) Date of Decision : 22nd September 2025
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,465 per calendar month with effect from 16th June 2025.
HAV/29UK/MNR/2025/0701
SUMMARY REASONS
Background 1. On 11th April 2025 the Landlord’s Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,465 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,395 per month to take effect from 16th June 2025.
2. On 5th May 2025 under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent. The Tenant’s referral was received by the Tribunal on 26th May 2025. Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence
4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord, including the initial application form. Determination and Valuation 5. Having given consideration to the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal determines that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be £1,600 per calendar month.
6. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets, curtains/blinds and associated fittings to all be provided by the Landlord.
7. In this case the property is not let in such condition or with white goods, carpets and curtains all supplied so some adjustments to the ‘open market rent’ are necessary. In particular the Tribunal has made the adjustments for the Tenant’s provision of some white goods, the Tenant’s responsibilities for internal repair and decoration, the Tenant’s provision of curtains and dampness resulting in some mould growth.
8. The full valuation is shown below: Full open market rent in good condition £1,600 Less deductions for:- Tenants’ provision of white goods
£20 Tenant’s repair and decoration liability
£70 Tenant’s provision of curtains
£10 Damp/mould
£35
HAV/29UK/MNR/2025/0701
____ Total adjustment per month
£135 TOTAL RENT PAYABLE PER MONTH
£1,465
9. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy was £1,465 per month.
10. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship.
11.
Accordingly, the Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,465 per month should take effect from 16TH June 2025, this being the date specified in the notice.
APPEAL PROVISIONS
These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Any request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on [NAME].
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Reduces Rent Due to Property Defects
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent of £2,200 Per Month
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition and Location
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Health and Safety Issues
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Health and Safety Issues
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 £1,600 per month for the property in good tenantable condition based on comparable evidence and its own expert knowledge.
- The tenant's provision of white goods justified a £20 reduction from the market rent.
- The tenant's responsibility for internal repair and decoration justified a £70 reduction from the market rent.
- The tenant's provision of curtains justified a £10 reduction from the market rent.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant did not argue that the proposed start date for the new rent would cause them undue hardship.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided on a new rent of £1,465 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.
Who was involved?
The decision involved a tenant and a landlord, specifically the National Trust.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on comparable evidence and adjusted the rent to account for the tenant's responsibilities.
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 comparable evidence used to determine the fair rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider comparable evidence and their responsibilities when seeking a rent determination.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Comparable evidence and the tenant's responsibilities were crucial in determining the rent.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed according to the procedures outlined in the judgment.
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 determinations.
