VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Secures Lower Rent After Proving Property Disrepair

Case No.

📌 In brief

A tenant successfully argued for a lower rent due to the poor condition of their rented property. The First-tier Tribunal set a new rent of £1870.00 per month, considering the property's disrepair and local market conditions.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a reduced rent if the property is in disrepair, reflecting the market conditions and the property's condition.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent adjustments

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under this section, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then decide on a rent that a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This decision takes into account the property's condition, the market conditions, and the terms of the existing tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase due to the property's disrepair, setting a new rent of £1870.00 per month.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a new rent of £1870.00 per month for a tenant, taking into account the property's disrepair and market conditions, following a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AC/MNR/2024/0362

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 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1870.00 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 October 2024

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable n/a Per n/a

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 30 June 2022

6. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord n/a

9. Description of premises Flat within purpose-built block, sixth floor, comprising two bedrooms, one living room and two bathrooms.

[NAME] of Decision 14 November 2024

Case Reference

: LON/OOAC/MNR/2024/0362

Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: [APPELLANT] [NAME]

Landlord : [APPELLANT], [RESPONDENT] and [RESPONDENT] [NAME].

Date of Objection : 8 July 2024

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

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] of Full Reasons

: 14 November 2024

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

_______________________________________________ FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1870.00 per month with effect from 1 October 2024. ____________________________________

Full REASONS

Background 1. On 20 June 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2300.00 per month in place of the existing rent of £ 1700.00 per month to take effect from 30 July 2024.

2. An application dated 8 July 2024 was made 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 8 July 2024.

Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property. The property a sixth floor flat comprised two bedrooms, one living room and one living room, is located in purpose-built block.

Evidence

Tenant 4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions, oral submissions made at the hearing, provided by the parties. The Tribunal was attended by the Tenant and her partner. The Landlord did not attend.

5. The Tenant submitted a number of photographs showing issues around ventilation and leaks. The Tenant asserted that the bathroom had a ventilation extractor, however this was found to be in disrepair, as identified by the Landlord’s contractors. This has resulted in mould in the bathroom. The Tenant submitted that the kitchen which had no nearby window, had an extractor in the hood of the hob which was filtering and recirculation only.

6. The Tenant asserted there were a number of defects;

• mould due to lack or air circulation in the living room and the bedroom asserted the Tenant.

• leaks in the bathrooms said to be confirmed by the landlord's plumber.

7. The Tenant asserted that if the property was in good repair, it should command a rent of £1800.00 to £1850.00 the basis of which had been informed by consideration of the market for flats in the vicinity. Taking into account the level of disrepair, the tenant considered a reasonable rent would be £1600.00 per month.

Landlord

8. The Landlord submitted evidence of properties asserted to be similar which had asking rental figures of £2300.00 to £2350.00 per month. Submitting also they considered the flat to be in good order.

Determination and Valuation

9. Having consideration of the comparable evidence proved by the parties and of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £2200.00 per calendar month.

Decision 10. The Tribunal considered what discount was applicable for the condition of both the room and the wider property. The discount determined was 15% the Tribunal therefore determined a rent of £1870.00 per month.

11. The Tenant did make an application on the basis of hardship, for the effective date of the rent to be later than that contained in the Notice of the rent Increase by the Landlord.

12. Given this evidence the Tribunal did make an adjustment for the hardship aspect of the Application. The tribunal has the power to determine any effective date from that requested by the Landlord in the Notice through to the date of the hearing.

13. The Tribunal in consideration of the evidence provided by the tenant, determines the test for hardship is made. The Tribunal considers there is hardship but not at its maximum. The Tribunal therefore determines an effective date of 1 October 2024.

14. The Tribunal therefore determines the new rent of £1870.00 per month to take effect on 1 October 2024. Chairman: [NAME]: 14 November 2024

APPEAL PROVISIONS

Appeal to the Upper Tribunal

A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Property Chamber) on a point of law must seek permission to do so by making a written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case which application must: a. be received by the said office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision. b. 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. If the application is not received within the 28–day time limit, it must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for it 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.

📊 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 property is in a state of disrepair.
  • The rent is adjusted based on the property's condition.
  • The rent reflects the open market value of the property.
  • The rent is determined under the relevant housing act.
  • The rent takes into account the property's wear and tear.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided on a new rent of £1870.00 per month for the tenant.

Who was involved?

The case involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to reduce the proposed rent due to the property's disrepair, as evidenced by the tenant.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tenant's argument about the property's disrepair was crucial.

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

The decision was in favour of the tenant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may be able to negotiate a lower rent if they can prove the property is in disrepair.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and reports of the property's condition were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a person can appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law.

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

It is 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.