VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Rent Reduced to £4,500 Per Month for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal reduced the rent for an assured periodic tenancy to £4,500 per month, concluding that the original rent was too high compared to similar properties in the area.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent adjustment under an assured periodic tenancy if the current rent is significantly higher than what the landlord might reasonably expect to obtain.

Topics

rent adjustmentassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.22

Under certain conditions, a tenant can apply to an appropriate tribunal for a determination of a fair rent if the current rent is significantly higher than what the landlord might reasonably expect to obtain. The tribunal will adjust the rent if there are enough similar properties in the area and the current rent is excessively high compared to those.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the rent for an assured periodic tenancy to £4,500 per month.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the rent for an assured periodic tenancy to £4,500 per month, finding the current rent significantly higher than what the landlord might reasonably expect to obtain.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BK/MDR/2024/0604

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

Housing Act 1988 Section 22

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

[NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] [NAME] 35 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 4,500 Per Calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 30 September 2024

3. The amount included for services is not applicable N/A Per N/A

5. Date tenancy commenced 30 September 2024

6. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S.11 Landlord & Tenant Act, 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Sofa and lounge chairs and rug, television, dining table and chairs, three beds with mattresses, carpets and curtains.

9. Description of premises Two storey terraced house containing three bedrooms, two bathrooms, reception room and kitchen,

[NAME] of Decision 31 January 2025

Case Reference

: LON/00BK/MDR/2024/0604

Property : 20 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant : [NAME]

Landlord : [RESPONDENT] [NAME] of Application : 30 September 2024

Type of Application : Market Rent section 22 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Member : [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 31 January 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £4,500 per calendar month with effect from 30 September 2024. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

SUMMARY REASONS

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Background

1. On 30 September 2024 the Tenant made an application under Section 22(1) of the Housing Act 1988 relating to 30 [ADDRESS],[POSTCODE].

2. The tenancy commenced on 01 September 2024 at a rent of £5,500 per calendar month.

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 considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant. There were no written submissions from the Landlord.

The Law

5. The law is found in section 22 of the Housing Act 1988, which is annexed to this decision.

Determination [and valuation]

6. Having consideration of the evidence submitted by the Tenant and our expert, general knowledge and experience. The Tribunal is satisfied that there are a sufficient number of similar properties in the locality let on assured tenancies and, in the Tribunal’s opinion the rent that the Landlord could reasonably expect to achieve is in the region of £4,500 per calendar month.

Decision

7. The Tribunal therefore directs a new rent of £4,500 per calendar month to take effect from the date of application, 30 September 2024.

Tribunal Member: [NAME]: 31 January 2025

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 request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

ANNEX

Housing Act 1988

22 Reference of excessive rents to appropriate tribunal.

(1) Subject to section 23 and subsection (2) below, the tenant under an assured shorthold tenancy may make an application in the prescribed form to the appropriate tribunal for a determination of the rent which, in the appropriate tribunal’s opinion, the landlord might reasonably be expected to obtain under the assured shorthold tenancy.

(2) No application may be made under this section if—

(a) the rent payable under the tenancy is a rent previously determined under this section;

(aa) the tenancy is one to which section 19A above applies and more than six months have elapsed since the beginning of the tenancy or, in the case of a replacement tenancy, since the beginning of the original tenancy; or

(b) the tenancy is an assured shorthold tenancy falling within subsection (4) of section 20 above (and, accordingly, is one in respect of which notice need not have been served as mentioned in subsection (2) of that section).

(3) Where an application is made to the appropriate tribunal under subsection (1) above with respect to the rent under an assured shorthold tenancy, the appropriate tribunal shall not make such a determination as is referred to in that subsection unless they consider—

(a) that there is a sufficient number of similar dwelling-houses in the locality let on assured tenancies (whether shorthold or not); and

(b) that the rent payable under the assured shorthold tenancy in question is significantly higher than the rent which the landlord might reasonably be expected to be able to obtain under the tenancy, having regard to the level of rents payable under the tenancies referred to in paragraph (a) above.

(4) Where, on an application under this section, the appropriate tribunal make a determination of a rent for an assured shorthold tenancy—

(a) the determination shall have effect from such date as the appropriate tribunal may direct, not being earlier than the date of the application;

(b) if, at any time on or after the determination takes effect, the rent which, apart from this paragraph, would be payable under the tenancy exceeds the rent so determined, the excess shall be irrecoverable from the tenant; and

(c) no notice may be served under section 13(2) above with respect to a tenancy of the dwelling-house in question until after the first anniversary of the date on which the determination takes effect.

(5) Subsections (4), (5) and (8) of section 14 above apply in relation to a determination of rent under this section as they apply in relation to a determination under that section and, accordingly, where subsection (5) of that section applies, any reference in subsection (4)(b) above to rent is a reference to rent exclusive of the amount attributable to rates.

📊 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 current rent is significantly higher than the reasonable market expectation.
  • Rent adjustments are based on the condition of the property and local market conditions.
  • Fair market rent is determined using comparable evidence and local rental values.
  • Tenants are entitled to a rent reduction if the property is not in good condition.
  • Rent adjustments take into account the condition and furnishings of the property.
  • Rent determinations are made under the Housing Act 1988, specifically Section 14.

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 rent for an assured periodic tenancy to £4,500 per month.

Who was involved?

The case involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to adjust the rent downwards because the original rent was significantly higher than what the landlord could reasonably expect to obtain.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 22, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the original rent was significantly higher than what similar properties in the area were renting for.

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

The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may also be entitled to a rent adjustment if their rent is significantly higher than reasonable expectations.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Written submissions from the tenant and the expert's general knowledge and experience mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed, but the details of how to appeal are set out in the full reasons.

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 adjustments.

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.