VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy Set by First-tier Tribunal

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, taking into account the property's condition and market value. The decision reflects the open market rent, adjusted for the lack of central heating and other factors.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent determination reflecting the open market value of the property, adjusted for its condition.

Topics

rent determinationassured tenancyproperty valuation

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is already determined 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 the open market value of the property, excluding any increases due to improvements made by the tenant.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions and the property's state.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, adjusting for the property's condition and market value. The decision reflects the open market rent excluding improvements made by the tenant.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/43UH/MNR/2019/0074

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 65 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] c/o [RESPONDENT], 104 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1240.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 07 February 2020

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 06 May 2003

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per section 11 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises Semi-detached house circa 1900. 4 bedrooms, double glazed, no central heating, dated kitchen & bathroom.

[NAME] of Decision 7 February 2020

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2020

Case Reference : CHI/43UH/MNR/2019/0074

Property : 65 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant : Mr. [APPELLANT]. [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT].

Represented by : [NAME] of Application : Rent determination in accordance with Section 14 Housing Act 1988 (as amended)

Tribunal Members : [NAME] (Surveyor/Chairman)

Mr. K. Ridgeway MRICS (Valuer Member)

Date of Inspection : Friday 7th February 2020

No Hearing - paper determination

Date of Decision : Friday 7th February 2020

______________________________________________________

DECISION AND REASONS _________________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 Background 1. On 22nd November 2019 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 (as amended) which proposed a new rent of £1,241.67 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,220 per month to take effect from 13th January 2020. No services are provided by the Landlord.

2. The Tribunal received an objection from the tenant to the proposed rent by way of an application dated 18th December 2019 under Section 13(4) (a) of the Housing Act 1988.

3. Directions for the conduct of the matter were issued by the Tribunal Office on 6th January 2020 and, amongst other things, the parties were advised that the determination will be made on the written representations unless a request for an oral hearing is made within fourteen days 4. Neither party made a request for an oral hearing and the matter was determined on the basis of a paper determination. Inspection 5. The Tribunal Members inspected the property on Friday, 7 February 2020 in the company of the tenant, Mr. [APPELLANT] and his brother. The landlord had been informed of the inspection but was not present or represented.

6. The property is a semi-detached house which was probably built about 1900. It has frontage to a busy local traffic route and parking on roads in the general area is restricted. There is a small front garden area and a rear garden which appears to have shared vehicular access from a side road. There are two covered vehicles in the rear garden and two small sheds provided by the tenant.

7. The main roof is pitched and has been recovered with concrete tiles. The elevations are part brick, part rendered. Windows were replaced by the landlord a few years ago with uPVC double glazed casements. Externally, the building appeared to be in generally satisfactory order although the external woodwork has not been painted for many years and there are defects to the rendered plinth to the front bay.

3 8. The accommodation comprises landing, four bedrooms, bathroom and separate WC on the first floor. On the ground floor is a hall, front room, rear dining room and kitchen leading to a lobby in which the tenant has formed a shower and incorporated a former external WC.

9. The present tenant has been in occupation for over 50 years and has carried out various works including the work in the rear lobby mentioned above. The landlord has recovered the main roof slopes, and rewired the house and fitted uPVC double glazed windows and external doors in recent years. There is no central heating. Space heating is provided by fires installed by the tenant with the exception of the gas fire in the front living room which was supplied by the landlord. The Tribunal noted that there are cracks to wall and ceiling plaster around the front bay and various damp patches internally. Notwithstanding the work that has been carried out, the house is being maintained to a minimal standard. In particular, the fittings and units in the bathroom and kitchen are old and both rooms require complete modernisation.

10. The tenant has supplied floor coverings and white goods and refurbished the kitchen to a limited extent. Hot water is supplied by a gas fired unit in the kitchen and this was recently replaced by the landlord.

11. The Tribunal has not been supplied with a copy of any Tenancy Agreement and neither party has made any observations on the apportionment of liability for repairs and decoration. Evidence and representations 12. Neither party made any relevant representations and no evidence of comparable transactions was supplied.

Accordingly, the tribunal relied on its own knowledge and experience of local rental values in determining the rent. The law S14 Determination of Rent by First-tier Tribunal

(1) Where, under subsection (4) (a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a

4 First-tier Tribunal a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the Tribunal shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the Tribunal consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy- (a) which is a periodic tenancy 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 the rent) are the same as those of the tenancy to which the notice relates; and (d) in respect of which the same notices, if any, have been given under any of Grounds 1 to 5 of Schedule 2 to this Act, as have been given (or have effect as if given) in relation to the tenancy to which the notice relates. (2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded- (a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant; (b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the tenant, if the improvement- (i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to his [NAME], or (ii) was carried out pursuant to an obligation to his [NAME] being an obligation which did not relate to the specific improvement concerned but arose by reference to consent given to the carrying out of that improvement; and (c) any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a failure by the tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy. (3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, in relation to a notice which is referred by a tenant as mentioned in subsection (1) above, an improvement is a relevant improvement if either it was carried out during the tenancy to which the notice relates or the following conditions are satisfied, namely- (a) that it was carried out not more than twenty-one years before the

5 date of service of the notice; and (b) that, at all times during the period beginning when the improvement was carried out and ending on the date of service of the notice, the dwelling-house has been let under an assured tenancy; and (c) that, on the coming to an end of an assured tenancy at any time during that period, the tenant (or, in the case of joint tenants, at least one of them) did not quit. (4) In this section "rent" does not include any service charge, within the meaning of section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, but, subject to that, includes any sums payable by the tenant to the landlord on account of the use of furniture, in respect of council tax or for any of the matters referred to in subsection (1) (a) of that section, whether or not those sums are separate from the sums payable for the occupation.

Consideration and Valuation 13. The Tribunal is required to determine the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under an assured tenancy. The personal circumstances of the Tenant are not relevant to this issue.

14. In the first instance the Tribunal determined what rent the landlord could reasonably be expected to obtain for the property in the open market if it were let today on the terms and in the condition that is considered usual for such an open market letting. The Tribunal relied on its own knowledge and experience of lettings of similar properties and determined that the starting point should be £1,650 per month. This rent excludes any value attributable to the shower and WC installed by the tenant.

15. However, this rent is on the basis of a letting in good, modernised condition. In this case, there are outstanding issues mentioned above and a deduction must be made to reflect the fact that the rental bid in present condition would differ from the rent if the house were in good, modernised condition. In order to reflect these considerations, the Tribunal has made a

6 deduction of £410 from the starting point of £1,650 per month to produce an adjusted rent of £1,240 per month. 16. The calculation of the market rent is as follows: Open market rent

£1,650 Less allowance for: Floor coverings provided by tenant

£ 60.00 Lack of central heating

£ 60.00 White goods provided by tenant

£ 30.00 Unmodernised kitchen

£ 55.00 Cracks, dampness and general disrepair £100.00 Internal redecoration required

£ 75.00 unmodernised bathroom

£ 30.00

Total deductions

£410.00

Net market rent £1,240 Determination 17. 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 is £1,240 per month.

18. Section 14(7) of the Act provides that the starting date for any rent determined by the tribunal is either the date agreed by the parties, the date specified in the notice or, if it appears to the tribunal that there would be undue hardship, any date directed by the tribunal, but no later than the date that the rent is determined. The tenant made no representations in respect of hardship.

Accordingly, the tribunal directs that the new rent of £1,240 per month will take effect on 13th January 2020 being the date specified in the Landlord’s notice. Chairman: [NAME]:

Friday 7th February 2020

7 Appeals 19. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case.

20. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

21. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28- day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend the time limit, or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

22. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. Any appeal in respect of the Housing Act 1988 should be on a point of law.

23. If the First-tier Tribunal refuses permission to appeal, in accordance with section 11 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, and Rule 21 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2010, the Applicant/Respondent may make a further application for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]). Such application must be made in writing and received by the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) no later than 14 days after the date on which the First-tier Tribunal sent notice of this refusal to the party applying for permission.

📊 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 is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.
  • The rent determination must consider the property's condition and comparable rental values.
  • The tenant can refer a landlord's rent increase notice to the Tribunal for review.
  • The rent should be adjusted for any discrepancies in provided amenities and property condition.
  • The tenant has the right to a rent determination under the Housing Act 1988.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • (No significant factors identified that went against the claimant in the provided cases.)

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the property's condition and market value.

Who was involved?

The decision involved a tenant and a landlord, with the tenant objecting to the proposed rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on its assessment of the property's condition and comparable rental values in the area.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied to determine the rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and its comparability to other rental properties in the area.

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

The decision was for the tenant, setting a lower rent than initially proposed by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure their property is well-maintained and compare it to others in the area.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The condition of the property and comparable rental values were key pieces of evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a person wishing to appeal this decision must seek permission from the First-tier Tribunal within 28 days.

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

Yes, it is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determinations.

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.