VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Successfully Challenges Rent Increase in First-tier Tribunal

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, a tenant challenged a landlord's proposed rent increase. The First-tier Tribunal reviewed the property's condition and local market conditions and decided on a new rent of £950.00 per month starting from January 1, 2023.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant may challenge a rent increase under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. However, the application 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 set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions and the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions and the property's condition, setting the rent at £950.00 per calendar month effective from 1st January 2023.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/00LC/MNR/2022/0129

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 16 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Miss [RESPONDENT] Mr M [RESPONDENT] [NAME] 80 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[APPELLANT] [NAME] [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 950.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 01 January 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 01 October 2019

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per section 11 of the [RESPONDENT] & [APPELLANT] 1985

7. Furniture provided by [RESPONDENT] or superior [RESPONDENT].

8. Description of premises Modern two bedroom mid terrace, double glazed with central heating.

[NAME] of Decision 13 January 2023

1

Case Reference

: CHI/00LC/MNR/2022/0129

Property : 16 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : 4th November 2022

Type of Application : Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] Mr M Woodrow MRICS

Date

: 13th January 2023

_____________________________________________

REASONS FOR DECISION ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

2 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

Background 1. The Tribunal gave formal notice of its decision by a Notice dated 13th January 2023 that the rent will be £950.00 per calendar month (pcm) with effect from 1st January 2023.

2. By an application dated 4th November 2022, the [APPELLANT] of the above property referred a notice of increase in rent served by the [RESPONDENT] under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 to the Tribunal.

3. The [RESPONDENT]'s notice dated the 14th October 2022 proposed a rent of £1,000.00 pcm with effect from 1st January 2023, in place of the current rent of £830.00 pcm.

4. The tenancy is an assured shorthold tenancy. The tenancy agreement is in common form and commenced on 1st October 2019. The tenancy is subject to the [RESPONDENT]'s repairing obligations defined in Section 11 the [RESPONDENT] and [APPELLANT] 1985.

Property and Inspection 5. Following the Directions dated 7th December 2022 and the explanation contained therein, the Tribunal did not inspect the premises.

6. Extracting such information as it could from the papers supplied to the Tribunal by the parties, by reference to information publicly available on the internet and with the benefit of its knowledge and experience the Tribunal reached the following conclusions and found as follows:

7. The property is located in a cul de sac within a residential area to the north of the M2 and south of the railway line. Local amenities are available.

8. The property comprises a modern mid terraced house. It appears to be of cavity brick and block construction with brick faced elevations under a pitched roof.

9. The accommodation comprises: Living Room, kitchen, bathroom/w.c and two bedrooms. Outside: Garden and parking.

10. The property is let unfurnished with floor coverings. It is double glazed with gas central heating to radiators.

11. The Tribunal assumed that all mains services are connected.

Documents supplied to and considered by the Tribunal 12. Tribunal Directions.

13. [RESPONDENT]: Tribunal Reply Form.

14. [APPELLANT]: Application, Reply Form, Notice of Increase and Tenancy Agreement.

[RESPONDENT]'s Representations (summarised):

3

15. The [RESPONDENT] says in the Reply Form and attachments: a) No improvements have been carried out since commencement of the tenancy in October 2019. b) The property suffers from the usual wear and tear expected after a 3 year occupation. c) The kitchen and bathroom fittings are estimated to be 10 to 15 years old. d) Undated photographs of parts of the interior and the front elevation are attached.

16. As to rental value the [RESPONDENT] says; a) On 7th December there were 6 unfurnished houses available to let in Walderslade Chatham at rents ranging from £1,000.00 to £1,150.00 pcm. b) On the 18th December there were no two bedroom houses available. c) If the property were to come onto the market today, a rent of £1,100.00 would be asked. The [RESPONDENT] considers that £1,000.00 is reasonable and represents good value for money in the current market.

[APPELLANT]'s Representations (summarised)

17. The [APPELLANT] says in the Application and Reply Forms:

a) No improvements have been carried out since moving into the property. b) The property generally, including the bathroom and kitchen fittings, are outdated. Leaks occur in the bathroom. c) The property was poorly looked after before the [APPELLANT] moved in. d) Some undated photographs are attached showing the condition of various areas including the kitchen, bathroom and living room.

18. As to the proposed rent, the [APPELLANT] says that the [RESPONDENT]’s examples are all of properties that have been looked after and updated.

The Tribunal’s Deliberations 19. The Tribunal found as a matter of fact that the notice was a Notice under section 13 as prescribed by Statute.

20. The Tribunal is required to determine the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing [RESPONDENT] under an Assured Tenancy. The personal circumstances of the [APPELLANT] or [RESPONDENT] are not relevant to this issue.

21. The Tribunal checked the [NAME] and noted that the subject property has a certificate registering the property at C and expiring 27th July 2024. The legal minimum standard for letting a property is rating E.

22. Based on the knowledge of its members the Tribunal finds that the market for this type of property is very sensitive to condition and inventory.

23. The Tribunal, acting as an expert tribunal, determined what rent the [RESPONDENT] could reasonably be expected to obtain for the subject property in the open market if it were let today in the condition and subject to the terms of such a tenancy that is considered usual for such an open market letting. It did this by

4

having regard to the evidence supplied by the parties and the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels. Having done so, it concluded that such a likely market rent for a similar modernised property in fair condition with central heating, modern bathroom and kitchen facilities, floor coverings, cooker, washing machine and fridge and EPC Rating of E or above would be £1,100.00 pcm.

24. The Tribunal, after careful consideration of the current market conditions and the apparent condition (as submitted by the parties) of the subject property determined to make deductions in respect of issues identified:

a) General fair wear and tear (as identified by the [RESPONDENT] and [APPELLANT]): £150.00 pcm.

Total deduction £150.00 pcm

25. Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that the market rent for the subject property is £950.00 pcm.

26. The rent will take effect from 1st January 2023 being the date specified by the [RESPONDENT] in the notice of increase.

Relevant Law 27. Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

28. Assured Tenancies and Agricultural Occupancies (Forms) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015 No.620)

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. A person wishing to appeal this decision (on a point of law only) to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case. Where possible you should send your application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal Regional office to deal with it more efficiently.

2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28 day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for 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.

4. The application for permission to appeal must 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.

📊 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 determined the market rent for a modernised property in fair condition with specific amenities would be £1,100.00 per calendar month.
  • The property's Energy Performance Certificate rating was C, which is above the legal minimum standard for letting.
  • The Tribunal found that the market for this type of property is very sensitive to its condition and inventory.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the rent for the assured periodic tenancy at £950.00 per calendar month effective from January 1, 2023.

Who was involved?

The case involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition and local market conditions, considering factors such as the property's age and maintenance.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 Section 11 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the current market conditions for similar properties.

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 can challenge a proposed rent increase if they believe the proposed rent is unreasonable given the property's condition and market conditions.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence such as the property's condition, market rental values, and the terms of the tenancy agreement mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) 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 cases involving rent determination under assured periodic tenancies.

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.