VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Maintains Rent at £600 After Successful Appeal

Case No.

📌 In brief

A tenant successfully appealed a proposed rent increase because the property was in poor condition. The rent was kept at £600 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent assessment that reflects the property's condition and market expectations.

Topics

rent assessmentproperty conditiontenancy agreement

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to propose rent increases under specific conditions. It also outlines the procedures and timelines for serving notices regarding rent increases.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

This section allows tenants to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their assured tenancy. It specifies conditions under which such applications can be made and how the tribunal should determine the open-market rent.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal maintained the rent at £600.00 per calendar month due to the property's poor condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal upheld the tenant's appeal against a proposed rent increase, maintaining the rent at £600 per calendar month due to the property's poor condition.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference : BIR/00CN/MNR/2018/0044

Property

: 25 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : Appeal against a notice proposing a new rent under an

Assured Periodic Tenancy under section 13(4) of the Housing

Act 1988

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME].[NAME]. [NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS

Mr [NAME]. [NAME] and Venue of : Not Applicable, paper determination Hearing

Date of Decision : 13 November 2018

____________________________________________________________

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2018

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1 The rent is determined at £600.00 (Six Hundred Pounds) per calendar month from 8 July 2018.

REASONS

Introduction

2 The tenant, Mr [APPELLANT], holds an assured monthly tenancy of property at 25 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]. The original tenancy had been granted for six months from 8 May 2017 at a rent of £600.00 per calendar month.

3 On 1 June 2018 the landlord served notice under section 13(2) of The Housing Act 1988 to increase the rent from £600.00 to £750.00 per calendar month to take effect on 8 July 2018. Neither the previous nor proposed rents included any amounts for Council Tax, water rates or fixed service charges.

4 The tenant applied for the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber on 27 June 2018.

5 The effective date for the new rent had initially caused some confusion but was determined as 8 July 2018 at a preliminary Tribunal Hearing on 6 August 2018.

6 The Tribunal inspected the property on 20 September 2018 and issued its Decision to maintain the rent at £600.00 p.c.m. with effect from 8 July 2018.

7 The tenant telephoned the Tribunal on 8 October 2018 to request reasons for the Decision which are the subject of this document.

The Law 8 Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 states:

'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee 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;...'

'(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 the

immediate landlord ...

3

9 The jurisdiction of the Rent Assessment Committee was transferred to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) with effect from 1st July 2013.

Facts Found

10 The Tribunal inspected the property on 20 September 2018 with the tenant. The landlord was not present or represented although he had been advised of the date.

11 The property comprises a two storey inner terrace Victorian house in an area of similar housing in Handsworth, Birmingham. The house is of brick and slate construction with a two storey rear wing.

12 The accommodation comprises a hall with access to cellar, two reception rooms, a kitchen, lobby, bathroom and w.c. on the ground floor with landing, three bedrooms and box room on the first flo0r. It has central heating and double glazing.

13 The house is in poor internal condition. The front wall of the living room is damp, there is loose plaster on the hall ceiling, a section of plaster is missing from the second bedroom, the kitchen is finished to basic standard in poor condition and the bathroom is also poor.

Submissions

14 Neither party requested a Hearing to determine the rent.

15 Furthermore, neither party sent any submissions or rental evidence to support their case.

Decision

16 In the absence of any submissions or evidence from the parties the Tribunal relied on its own general knowledge and experience to determine the rent. In arriving at its decision, the Tribunal paid particular attention to the poor quality of the internal repair and the fact that the rent had been agreed in the previous year at £600.00 per calendar month. There had been no apparent change in the circumstances or quality of accommodation over that period and the property's condition would be reflected in the rent achievable.

Accordingly, the Tribunal considered all the acts available to it and determined the rent under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 at £600.00 per calendar month with effect from 8 July 2018.

[NAME] B.Sc.(Est.Man.) FRICS Chairman

Appeal

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, Property Chamber (Residential Property) on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after the decision and accompanying reasons have been sent to the parties (Rule 52 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013).

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The rent was maintained at £600.00 per calendar month based on the property's poor condition.
  • The Tribunal considered the lack of significant changes in the property's condition since the previous year's rent agreement.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's proposed rent increase to £750.00 was not supported by any evidence or submissions.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided to maintain the rent at £600 per month for an assured tenancy in Handsworth, Birmingham.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about the proposed rent increase from £600 to £750 per month for an assured tenancy in Handsworth, Birmingham.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to maintain the rent at £600 per month because the property was in poor condition, and there had been no significant changes since the previous year's agreement.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied to determine the rent for the assured tenancy.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the poor condition of the property, which influenced the Tribunal's decision to maintain the rent at £600 per month.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case, maintaining the rent at £600 per month.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, the decision suggests that the condition of the property can influence the rent set for an assured tenancy.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The inspection of the property and the evidence of its poor condition were crucial in the decision-making process.

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.
Tenant Wins Rent Appeal at First-tier Tribunal | VadeLab