VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Reduced Due to Property Disrepair - First-tier Tribunal Decision

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal reduced the proposed rent because the property was in poor condition. The Tribunal took into account the disrepair and adjusted the rent accordingly.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment if the property is in disrepair.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

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 then 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 condition of the property and disregards certain factors such as improvements made by the tenant or reductions in value due to the tenant's non-compliance.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent due to disrepair issues.

📜 Headnote Official document

In a First-tier Tribunal case, the Tribunal reduced the proposed rent due to significant disrepair in the property. The decision was based on the condition of the property and the lack of comparable evidence.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AZ/MNR/2025/0723

Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination or Section 22 Determination)

Housing Act 1988 Section 14

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 20C [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Mr [RESPONDENT] [COMPANY] 99 Clapton Common London [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 875.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15 March 2025

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 15 January 2013

6. Length of the term or rental period monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord full repairing

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Cooker & white goods

9. Description of premises One bedroom flat on second floor in a converted house

[NAME] of Decision 8 September 2025

1

Case Reference : LON/00AZ/MNR/2025/0723

Property

: 20C [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant : [APPELLANT]

Landlord : P41

Date of Objection : 3 March 2025

Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal : Mr [NAME] [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 8 September 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £875.00 per calendar month with effect from 15 March 2025. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 13 February 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £ 1291.98 in place of the existing rent of £ 850.00 per month to take effect from 15 March 2025.

2. On 3 March 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 3 March 2025.

Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties.

Evidence 4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written submissions provided by the parties. The evidence included photographs of significant disrepair.

Determination and Valuation

5. No comparable evidence was provided by the parties. The tribunal relied on our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area. We consider that the open market rent for the property in the condition and with the amenities the market would expect would be in the region of £1250.00 per calendar month. From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to:

Disrepair at the photographs.

6. The full valuation is shown below:

Decision 8. The Tribunal therefore determined that 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 was £875.00 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal directs the new rent of £875.00 to take effect on 1 May 2025 This being the date as set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase.

[NAME]: [NAME]: 8 September 2025

PCM AST Market rent 1,250.00 £ less poor condition 30.0% 375.00 -£ 875.00 £

3

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 subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

📊 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 adjusted the rent downwards due to significant disrepair shown in the photographs.
  • The Tribunal used its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area to determine the market rent.
  • The Tribunal determined the market rent for the property in expected condition to be £1250.00 per calendar month.
  • The Tribunal reduced the market rent by 30% due to the poor condition of the property.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's proposed new rent of £1291.98 was not accepted by the Tribunal.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided to reduce the proposed rent due to disrepair in the property.

Who was involved?

The case involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to reduce the rent after considering the disrepair in the property.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the disrepair.

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

The decision was for the tenant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may also be able to get their rent adjusted if they can prove disrepair in their property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs of the disrepair were important evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed.

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.