Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
📌 In brief
The Tribunal decided on a rent of £193.92 per week for a a person, effective from 10th March 2019. The decision was based on the a person's condition and local market rates, taking into account issues like damp and layout inconveniences.
⚖️ Legal holding
Under the relevant tenancy legislation, the rental value should reflect the property's condition and comparables in the local market.
📖 What the law says
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 their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair rent based on what a willing landlord would charge for a similar property in the open market. This determination considers the property's condition and local market rates.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal determined the rent based on the current condition of the property, disregarding personal circumstances and past improvements.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a rent of £193.92 per week for a property, effective from 10th March 2019, based on the property's current condition and local market rates. The decision considered the property's damp issues and layout inconveniences.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] Chamber File Ref No. CAM/00MD/MNR/2019/0004
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 11 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Judge JR Morris Mrs M Wilcox BSc MRICS
Landlord [NAME] 93 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 193.92 Per week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 10th March 2019
*3. The amount included for services is/is negligible/not applicable N/A Per N/A
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 10th November 2015
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 Living Room, Kitchen, Bedroom, Bathroom & w.c..
Judge
John R Morris Date of Decision 25th March 2019
1
Case Reference
: CAM/00MD/MNR/2019/0004
[NAME]
: 11 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Applicant (Tenants) : Ms [APPELLANT]
Respondent (Landlord): Mr [RESPONDENT] of Application : Determination of a market rent under
Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : Judge JR Morris Mrs M Wilcox BSc MRICS
Date of Decision : 25th March 2019
_______________________________________________
DECISION ____________________________________
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2019
DECISION
1. The Tribunal determined a rent of £193.92 per week to take effect from 10th March 2019.
REASONS
THE [NAME]
2. The [NAME] is a first floor flat in a converted late Victorian early Edwardian end of terrace house of brick under a pitched tile roof.
Accommodation There is an entrance hall from which rise stairs to the first floor. There is a sitting room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom. There is no off-road parking.
Services Space and water heating is by a gas fired central heating system. The [NAME] has mains gas, electricity, water and drainage.
Furnishing The [NAME] is let unfurnished. FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] CHAMBER ([NAME])
2
Location The [NAME] is in a residential area of the town centre.
THE TENANCY
3. The Tenancy commenced as a contractual Assured Shorthold Tenancy on 10th November 2015. A copy of the agreement was provided. Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 applies in respect of Landlord’s repairing obligations. The Tenant is responsible for internal decoration.
THE REFERRAL
4. The current rent is £193.92 per week which equates to £840.32 per calendar month. The Landlord by a notice in the prescribed form dated 22nd January 2019 proposed a new rent of £213.31 which equates to £924.34 per calendar month from 10th March 2019. On 13th February 2019 the Tenant referred the notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal. The referral was by way of written representations.
THE INSPECTION
5. The Tribunal inspected the [NAME] in the presence of the Tenant. Externally the [NAME] is in fair condition. It has double glazed upvc windows although the seals on most if not all of the units have failed, compromising their insulation qualities. There is also no restrictor on the window to prevent falls when opened. The rainwater goods are upvc. There is a small area in the front of the building for bins. There is no off-road parking and no outside space to sit or to dry clothes.
6. Internally the [NAME] is in fair decorative order although there are signs of significant damp and mould growth in the bathroom probably due to condensation. The lack of an extractor and the presence of a large bay window (with failed double- glazed units) in the bathroom would tend to exacerbate the formation of condensation. The attempt to obscure the bay window glass for privacy was unattractive. The bathroom and kitchenette are serviceable. However, the three electrical sockets in the kitchenette appear insufficient and the lack of any drawers in the units is inconvenient. White goods are provided by the Tenant. Floor coverings are provided. The Tenant complained in written representations that there had been problems with the boiler and the Tribunal noted that it was dated.
THE LAW
7. By virtue of section 14 (1) Housing Act 1988 the Tribunal is to determine a rent at which the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured periodic tenancy- (a) 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 rent) are the same as those of the subject Tenancy
8. By virtue of section 14 (2) Housing Act 1988 in making a determination the Tribunal shall disregard – (a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant;
3 (b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant improvement (as defined by section 14(3) Housing Act 1988) carried out by a tenant otherwise than as an obligation; and (c) any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house due to the failure of the Tenant to comply with any terms of the subject Tenancy.
REPRESENTATIONS
9. The Tenant provided written representations which are summarised as follows: Before the Tenant moved in the bathroom had been the kitchen and the kitchen the bathroom. There are only two double electrical sockets and one is used constantly for the fridge. In addition, there had been problems with the electricity when the Tenant moved in, although these are now resolved. There are 9 cupboards in the kitchen but no drawers. Mould has been a major problem, forming on the walls and clothes. The Tenant’s daughter has asthma and the dampness aggravated the condition. Although mould is still present the situation has been improved. There was an issue with a plumbing leak, although that has now been resolved. The boiler operates intermittently. There was a problem over the transition to [NAME], although that has now been resolved. The Tenant added that she struggled financially and that her daughter and she had health problems.
10. The Landlord stated in written representations that the 10% increase from £840.32 to £924.34 is the first increase since the tenancy started in November 2015. He said he believed the flat to be very spacious compared with many ‘new build’ flats and that it was in a very convenient location. He said that the internal condition of the [NAME] is dependent on how the Tenant chose to keep it.
11. He added that he did not agree with all that the Tenant had said but understood that many of her representations were not relevant.
DETERMINATION
12. With regard to the written representations of the Tenant the Tribunal bases its assessment on the condition of the [NAME] as it is on the day of the inspection, subject to any tenant’s improvements or non-compliance. Therefore, the position of the kitchenette and bathroom prior to the commencement of the Tenancy are not relevant. Also, although it may have taken some time to resolve the issues regarding the electricity and plumbing and to mitigate the mould problems, nevertheless, the Tribunal can only consider the position as it is at the present time. In addition, the legislation makes it clear that the Tribunal cannot take into account the personal circumstances of the Tenant.
13. With regard to the written representations of the Landlord, the Tribunal bases its assessment on the level of rents for comparable properties let on similar terms in the locality as at the time of the inspection. It therefore does not relate its assessment to the current rent or percentage increases.
4 14. The Tribunal found the general level of rents for one-bedroom flats to be around £850.00 per calendar month which equates to about £196.00 per week and two- bedroom flats around £875.00 per calendar month which equates to about £200 per week. There are flats which command higher rentals but these, unlike the [NAME], are well appointed with modern facilities and have off road parking.
15. The Tribunal found that the rental value of the [NAME] was adversely affected by problems with damp. Condensation causing mould can be due to the level of heating, lack of ventilation and lack of insulation in roofs or where walls are solid. Although condensation may be mitigated or aggravated by the actions of tenants, here, condensation may be reduced by the Landlord by installing an extractor fan in the bathroom, replacing the failed double-glazed units, making provision for the drying of clothes and ensuring that the boiler is operating efficiently.
16. The Tribunal also found that prospective tenants would find the layout of the kitchenette with its limited number of electrical sockets inconvenient and the present attempt to obscure the bathroom bay window unappealing.
17. The Tribunal determined that the rental value for the [NAME] taking into account its present condition to be £840.00 per calendar month. It is noted that this, when expressed as a weekly amount in accordance with the Tenancy, is effectively the same as the existing rent. The Tribunal therefore determines the rent to be £193.92 per week to take effect from 10th March 2019.
Judge JR Morris
Caution: The Tribunal inspected the subject [NAME] for the purposes of reaching this decision. The inspection was not a structural survey and any comments about the condition of the [NAME] in this statement must not be relied upon as a guide to the structural or other condition of the [NAME].
APPENDIX - RIGHTS OF APPEAL
1. If a party wishes to appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.
2. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the Regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application.
3. If the application is not made within the 28 day time limit, such application 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 application for permission to appeal to proceed despite not being within the time limit.
4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the [NAME] and the case number), state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £800
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Tenant's Accommodation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Social Housing Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property Based on Condition and Lo…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1550
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent Considering Tenant Improvements
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic 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 flat's rental value was negatively affected by damp problems, which could be reduced by landlord actions.
- The kitchenette's layout, with limited electrical sockets, and the unappealing bathroom window obscuring, would inconvenience prospective tenants.
- The Tribunal based its assessment on the condition of the property at the time of inspection.
- The Tribunal considered the general level of rents for comparable one-bedroom flats in the locality.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set a rent of £193.92 per week for the property, effective from 10th March 2019.
Who was involved?
The decision involved a tenant and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's current condition and local market rates, considering factors like damp issues and layout inconveniences.
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 condition of the property and its comparison to similar properties in the area.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, maintaining the current rent based on the property's condition.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure their property is in good condition and compare it to similar properties in the area.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included the condition of the property, local market rates, and the current rent.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
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 determination.
