Tenant Successfully Challenges Proposed Rent Increase
📌 In brief
A tenant challenged a proposed rent increase in the First-tier Tribunal. After considering the property's condition and comparable rents, the Tribunal set a new rent of £900 per month.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant may challenge a proposed rent increase through the First-tier Tribunal.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, Section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to the appropriate tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The application can also be made to challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). However, applications cannot be made if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent after considering the property's condition and comparable rents.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a new rent of £900 per month for a tenant challenging a proposed increase. The Tribunal considered the property's condition and comparable rents.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. GB/LON/00AL/MNR/2024/0227
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 8 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Ian B [NAME] [NAME] [RESPONDENT]
Landlord [RESPONDENT] 2 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 900 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 23 October 2024
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable Nil Per
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1/1/2022
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with tenancy agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Wardrobe and small table
9. Description of premises A single room with ensuite shower room situated within a House in multiple occupation with 5 rooms and shared kitchen facilities. There is a garden at rear.
Chairman Ian B Holdsworth Date of Decision 23 October 2024
1
Case Reference
: GB/LON/00AL/MNR/2024/0227
Property : 8 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: [APPELLANT]
Landlord : [RESPONDENT] of Objection : 27 March 2024
Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal
: [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] of Summary Reasons
: 23 October 2024
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £900 per calendar month with effect from 23 October 2024. ____________________________________
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2
SUMMARY REASONS
Background 1. On 31 January 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,150 in place of the existing rent of £ 740 per month to take effect from 1 April 2024
2. On 27 March 2024 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.
Hearing and Inspection 3. At a hearing held on 23 [NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME], and [NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME], the representative of the Landlord Respondent attended. An inspection of the property was undertaken following the hearing.
Evidence 4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written and oral submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord.
5. At the hearing details of defects at the property were described by the Tenant. No validated comparable property rental letting evidence was submitted by the Tenant. The Landlord’s representative provided details of recent lettings at the property which are as follows:
- Room 4 with a gross internal area of 16.7 m2 was let on 15 March 2024 at a monthly rent of£875; and,
- Room 5 with a gross internal area of 20.70 m2 was let on 1 January 2024 also at a monthly rent of £875.
The Tribunal were told that Room 3 has a gross internal area of 21.25 m2.
6. [NAME] [NAME] also referred the Tribunal to a recent rental determination of the ground floor flat 1 at the same property by another Tribunal (see reference Lon/OOAL/ANR/24/0174 dated 1 October 2024). She claimed this offered support for her proposed new rent however this Tribunal is not bound by earlier First-tier Property Tribunal findings about the property.
Determination and Valuation 7. Having consideration of the comparable evidence provided by [NAME] [COUNSEL], the Landlord’s representative and of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in its current condition would be in the region of £1,000 per calendar month. From this level of rent we have made adjustments to reflect tenant improvements, tenant furniture and floor coverings, dilapidation and obsolescence at the property.
3
8. The full valuation is shown below:
Decision 9. 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 £900 per calendar month.
10. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £900 to take effect on 1 April 2024 This being the date as set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase Chairman: Ian B Holdsworth
Date: 23 October 2024
APPEAL PROVISIONS
You can only appeal if the First-tier Tribunal decision was wrong on one or more points of law and you must say why the First-tier Tribunal was wrong in law.
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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition and Comparable Evidence
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent of £900 for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for HMO Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent After Considering Property Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Market Rent Determination for a Room in a Licensed HMO
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Due to Property Condition
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 considered its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area.
- The tribunal adjusted the rent to account for improvements made by the tenant.
- The tribunal adjusted the rent to account for the property's dilapidation and obsolescence.
- The landlord provided details of recent lettings for other rooms in the same property.
- The tribunal determined the market rent for the room to be £900 per month.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal set a new rent of £900 per month for the property.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the property's condition and comparable rents in the area.
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 comparison of the property's condition and comparable rents.
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 can challenge a proposed rent increase if they believe it is unfair.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Details of defects at the property and recent lettings at comparable properties were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed if there are grounds for appeal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.
