Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy: Case Summary
📌 In brief
The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the property's condition and market comparables. The decision took effect on 1 April 2024. The judge was a person of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent determination based on the property's condition and market comparables.
📖 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. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent based on the property's condition and market comparables. However, applications cannot be made if the rent is already set by a previous determination 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 determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on the property's condition and market comparables. The decision took effect on 1 April 2024. Judge: Mr D Jagger, First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00BA/MNR/2024/0168
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 15 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY], [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Dartford, Kent, [POSTCODE]
Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ £360 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 April 2024
*3. The fixed amount included for services is: £15.62 Per Week
*4. Service charges are variable are included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 12 October 2015
6. Length of the term or rental period Statutory Periodic Tenancy
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises A third-floor purpose built flat forming part of a four storey block. Accommodation comprises 2 bedrooms, living room, kitchen, bathroom, separate lavatory.
[NAME] of Decision 15 March 2024
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/OOBA/MNR/2024/0168 Property : 15 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant : [redacted] : None Respondent: [redacted] : None Type of [NAME] : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal members :
Mr [NAME] : Paper determination Date of Reasons : 15 October 2024
DECISION
2
Decision of the tribunal (1) The Tribunal determines that the rent that the property in its current condition as at the 1st April 2024 might reasonably be expected to achieve in the open market under an assured tenancy is £360 per week. Background 1. The tenant has lived in the property as assured periodic tenant since 12 October 2015.
2. On the 12th March 2023 the social landlord served a notice pursuant to section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 seeking to increase the rent from £231.82 per week to £249.67 per week, inclusive of fixed service charges of £15.62 effective from 1 April 2024.
3. By an [NAME] dated 18 March 2023, the tenant referred that notice to the Tribunal for a determination of the market rent. The Tribunal issued Directions for the conduct of the matter on 18th April 2023.
4. The Tribunal considered the matter suitable for a determination on the papers and therefore a hearing or inspection was not necessary. The parties did not disagree with this arrangement. The Evidence 5. The Tribunal has before it a bundle of evidence which includes a background to the case, the [NAME], tenancy agreement, floor plan, the directions, completed rent appeal statement on behalf of the landlord together with details of comparable rental evidence.
6. The accommodation comprises: 2 bedrooms, living room, kitchen, bathroom and separate wc. There is gas central heating. The property is a third floor self contained purpose built flat. The Tenant provided curtains, carpets and white good. The Law 7. The rules governing a determination are set out in section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. In particular, the Tribunal is to determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, subject to disregards in relation to the nature of the tenancy (i.e. it being granted to a “sitting tenant”) and any increase or reduction in the value due to
3 the tenant’s improvements or failure to comply with the terms of the tenancy. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the landlord is responsible for repairs to the structure, exterior and any installations pursuant to section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and the tenant for interior decoration. The valuation 8. Having carefully considered all the evidence the Tribunal considers that the rent that would be achieved a good marketable condition with reasonably modern kitchen and bathroom fittings, modern services, carpets, curtains and white goods supplied by the landlord would be £380 per week This figure is based upon the Tribunal’s professional judgement and experience and helpful comparable evidence supplied by the Landlord.
9. The Tribunal now needs to adjust this rent to allow for the lack of curtains and white goods. It considers a deduction of £20 should be applied. This reduces the rental figure to £360 per week. It should be noted that this figure cannot be a simple arithmetical calculation and is not based upon capital costs but is the Tribunal’s estimate of the amount by which the rent would need to be reduced to attract a tenant. 10 The average rent for rental properties in the Mitcham area has increased every quarter since the end of 2020, according to the online property portal Rightmove. The rent increases are due to not enough properties coming to the market to meet ever increasing demand and the number of homes for rent is 46 per cent below 2019 levels. This puts this decision in context with the current rental market. It is often the case that market rents are in excess of those that maybe charged by social landlord’s as it is a significant part of their remit to provide affordable housing. As such depending on the type of tenancy agreement their calculation of rent is either at a percentage of market rent or by way of index. Comparison is made with the open market rather than limited to other properties which are offered by social housing providers. It is assumed that the landlord will by usual convention of social landlord’s not seek to increase the rent proposed in its original notice as a result of this determination.
[NAME] 15 October 2024
4
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First- tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] 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 [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Designates Management Company as Principal Accountable …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation from Consultation Requirements for …
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Allowed to Skip Consultation for Urgent Cladding Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Rules on Lease Breaches
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for Sheltered Housing Tenants
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy Set by First-tier Tribunal
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Grants Dispensation for Urgent Fire Safety Works
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Tenancy at £1,675
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Allows Urgent Repairs Without Statutory Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
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 based on the property's condition.
- The tenant is entitled to a rent determination based on market comparables.
- Urgent works can exempt the tenant from consultation requirements if they pose significant safety risks.
- A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent assessment under an assured tenancy.
- It is reasonable to dispense with consultation requirements if the works are urgent and necessary.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy, setting it at £360 per week.
Who was involved?
The case involved a tenant and a landlord, Moat Homes Limited.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and market comparables, adjusting for the lack of curtains and white goods.
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 condition and market comparables.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, setting the rent at £360 per week.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider the property's condition and market comparables when disputing rent.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included a background to the case, the application, tenancy agreement, floor plan, and details of comparable rental evidence.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.
