VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Determination for Second Succession Tenancy Set by First-tier Tribunal

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for a second succession assured tenancy, taking into account the property's condition and market conditions. The rent was set at £200.00 per week.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent for their assured tenancy based on market conditions.

Topics

tenancyrent determinationsecond succession

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

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 the tenancy. The tribunal will determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The determination considers the property's condition and market conditions.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.11

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, section 11 implies certain repairing obligations in short leases. It requires the landlord to keep the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house, along with installations for water, gas, electricity, and sanitation, in repair and proper working order. Additionally, the landlord must ensure that installations for space heating and heating water are also kept in repair and proper working order.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the rent for a second succession assured tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for a second succession assured tenancy based on market conditions and the property's state, setting the rent at £200.00 per week.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/29UQ/MDR/2022/0001

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 1 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Mr R Brown FRICS Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] 3rd Floor East, 1 London Bridge, London, [POSTCODE]

[APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 200.00 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15 August 2022

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

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 31 March 2022

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per section 11 of the Landlord & [APPELLANT] 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises Older style 3 bedroom semi-detached house.

Chairman Mr R Brown FRICS Date of Decision 26 August 2022

1

Case Reference

: CHI/29UQ/MDR/2022/0001

Property : 1 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted]

[COMPANY] (Landlord)

Date of Application : 13th June 2022

Type of Application : Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal

: Mr R T Brown FRICS Chairman Mr M Woodrow MRICS

Date

: 26th August 2022

_____________________________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022

2 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

Background 1. The Tribunal gave formal notice of its decision by a Notice dated 26th August 2022 that the rent will be £200.00 per week (£865.00 pcm) with effect from 15th August 2022.

2. By an application dated 13th June 2022, the [APPELLANT] of the above property referred a notice of increase in rent served by the landlord under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 to the Tribunal.

3. The landlord's notice dated the 7th July 2022 proposed a rent of £200.00 per week (£867.00 pcm) with effect from 15th August 2022, in place of the current rent of £188.50 pw (£817.00 pcm).

4. The tenancy is a second succession assured tenancy. There is no written tenancy agreement. The succession took place on the death of the [APPELLANT]’s mother on 31st March 2022 (the original [APPELLANT] died January 2020). The tenancy is subject to the Landlord's repairing obligations defined in Section 11 the Landlord and [APPELLANT] 1985.

Property and Inspection 5. Following the Directions dated 7th July 2022 and the explanation contained therein, the Tribunal did not inspect the premises. There was no request to inspect the premises and the Tribunal therefore proceeded on the papers submitted.

6. Extracting such information as it could from the papers supplied to the Tribunal by the parties, by reference to information publicly available on the internet and with the benefit of its knowledge and experience the Tribunal reached the following conclusions and found as follows:

7. The property is situated on a narrow single lane road off [ADDRESS] on the outskirts of Cranbrook. All local amenities are available in the town.

8. The property comprises a centrally heated and single glazed semi-detached house constructed with brick faced and weatherboarded elevations under a pitched and tiled roof.

9. The accommodation comprises: 2 living rooms, kitchen, bathroom with WC and 3 bedrooms. Outside: gardens and off street parking.

10. The property is let unfurnished without floor coverings, curtains or white goods.

11. The Tribunal assumed that mains water and electricity services are connected. There is said to be oil fired central heating.

Documents supplied to and considered by the Tribunal 12. Tribunal Directions dated 7th July and 11th August 2022.

13. Landlord: Tribunal Reply Form and Notice of Increase.

14. [APPELLANT]: Application and emails to the Tribunal.

3

Landlord's Representations (summarised):

15. The Landlord says in the Reply Form and attachments: a) Electrical upgrade was carried out in 2014. b) The weatherboarding and windows are defective. c) The kitchen and bathroom are dated.

16. As to rental the Landlord refers to two comparables:

18 Broadcloth, Cranbrook: Small modern 3 bedroom mid terrace house available to let in June 2022 at £1,250 pcm. Smaller garden, central heating, double glazing, modern kitchen and unfurnished.

[NAME], Cranbrook: Modern detached house available to let in June 2022 at £1,495.00 pcm. 3 bedrooms, family bathroom/WC, ensuite shower room, separate WC on ground floor, average sized garden and unfurnished.

17. Fully modernised, they assess the value of the subject property at £1,325.00 pcm. (They base this on the assumption that 18 Broadcloth let for £1,200.00 pcm and [NAME] for £1,450.00 pcm).

18. The subject property is a larger semi detached period property with a larger garden.

19. Landlord’s deductions from fully modernised property:

Decorating liability, no floor coverings/curtains or white goods: £125.00 pcm Disrepair: Singe glazed windows in poor repair, external decorations: £100.oo pcm. Kitchen dated and lack of units: £65.00 pcm. Bathroom: dated with no shower: £40.00 pcm

Total £330.00. (£1,325.00 - £330.00 = £995.00 pcm (£230.00 pw)

20. Notice of Increase was served at £200.00 pw (£867.00 pcm).

[APPELLANT]'s Representations (summarised)

21. The [APPELLANT] says in the Application and emails to the Tribunal:

a) The Landlord initially proposed a rent of £230.00 pw (£997.00 pcm). b) The [APPELLANT] succeeded to the tenancy by succession following the death of his mother on 31st March 2022. c) The Landlord has said it will send a team to look into the repairs needed but the [APPELLANT] has little faith in the Landlord’s promises.

22. Photographs of the property are included showing the dilapidated stated of the weatherboarding at first floor level and the need for external decoration.

23. The [APPELLANT] made no submissions as to the calculation of the rent.

4

The Tribunal’s Deliberations 24. The Tribunal found as a matter of fact that the notice was a Notice under section 13 as prescribed by Statute.

25. 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 [APPELLANT] or Landlord are not relevant to this issue.

26. As a second succession [APPELLANT], [NAME] is entitled to the benefit of security of tenure but not a fair rent registered by the Rent Officer under the provisions of Section 70 of the Rent Act 1977.

27. The Tribunal checked the National Energy Performance Register and noted that the subject property has a certificate registering the property at E expiring on the 11th May 2028. The legal minimum standard for letting a property is rating E.

28. Based on the knowledge of its members the Tribunal finds that the market for this type of property is very sensitive to condition and inventory.

29. The Tribunal, acting as an expert tribunal, determined what rent the landlord could reasonably be expected to obtain for the subject property in the open market if it were let today in the condition and subject to the terms of such a tenancy that is considered usual for such an open market letting. It did this by having regard to the evidence supplied by the parties and the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels. Having done so, it concluded that such a likely market rent for a similar modernised property with double glazing in fair condition with modern central heating, modern bathroom and kitchen facilities, floor coverings, all white goods and an EPC Rating of E or above would be £1,200.00 pcm.

30. The Tribunal, after careful consideration of the current market conditions and the apparent condition (as submitted by the parties) of the subject property determined to make deductions in respect of issues identified:

a) General disrepair including single glazing: £115.00 b) Lack of floor coverings, curtains and white goods: £80.00 c) Internal decorating liability: £60.00 d) Dated kitchen and Bathroom fittings: £80.00

Total deduction £335.00 pcm

31. Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that the market rent for the subject property is £200.00 pw (£865.00 pcm).

32. The rent will take effect from 15th August 2022 being the date specified by the landlord in the notice of increase.

Relevant Law 33. Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

5

34. Assured Tenancies and Agricultural Occupancies (Forms) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015 No.620)

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. A person wishing to appeal this decision (on a point of law only) to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) 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. Where possible you should send your application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal Regional office to deal with it more efficiently.

2. 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.

3. 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 time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

4. 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.

📊 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 Tribunal determined the market rent for a modernised property with good facilities and an EPC rating of E or above would be £1,200.00 pcm.
  • The Tribunal made a deduction of £115.00 pcm for general disrepair, including the single glazing.
  • The Tribunal made a deduction of £80.00 pcm due to the lack of floor coverings, curtains, and white goods.
  • The Tribunal made a deduction of £60.00 pcm for the internal decorating liability.
  • The Tribunal made a deduction of £80.00 pcm because the kitchen and bathroom fittings were dated.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £200.00 per week (£865.00 pcm) effective from 15 August 2022.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the appropriate rent for an assured periodic tenancy, considering the property's condition and inventory.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £200 per week based on the property's condition and inventory, making deductions for disrepair and lack of amenities.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition and inventory of the property, leading to deductions for disrepair and lack of amenities.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case, setting a fair rent based on the property's condition and inventory.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, the decision means that the rent for an assured periodic tenancy can be set based on the property's condition and inventory, with appropriate deductions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents that mattered included the property's condition and inventory, as well as the applicable laws and regulations.

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.