VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Due to Property Condition

Case No.

📌 In brief

In a recent case, a tenant successfully argued for a lower rent because the property was in poor condition. The First-tier Tribunal agreed and set the new rent at £1513.25 per month, starting from April 11, 2025.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a reduced rent if the property is in poor condition.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent adjustment

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 assured tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a reasonable rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent increase due to the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted a proposed rent increase due to the property's condition, reducing the rent to £1513.25 per month from £1750.00 per month, effective from 11 April 2025.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference

: HS/LON/OOAG/MNR/2025/0704

Property : 14 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Ms [APPELLANT]

Landlord : Ms [APPELLANT] of Objection : 19 March 2025

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

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] of Full Reasons : 1 August 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1513.25 per calendar month with effect from 11 April 2025. ____________________________________

Full REASONS

Background FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1. On 7 March 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1750.00 per month in place of the existing rent of £1450.00 per month to take effect from 11 April 2025.

2. An application dated 19 March 2025 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 19 March 2025.

Inspection

3. The Tribunal did inspect the property and found the flat is housed in a block dating from the 1960s. The flat is located on the top floor and there is no lift nor outside space. The flat comprises a living room, double bedroom, kitchen and bathroom. The ceilings of the flat are covered in polystyrene type tiles, there is central heating to all rooms, all rooms have adequate electrical sockets, there is double glazing through the property but only the kitchen appears to have trickle vents in the window. Spefcically the kitchen is in a tired condition, the fridge freezer is supplied by the landlord but is said not to function fully, the tenant has purchased a second fridge freezer. The cooker is gas, and the ignition not fully functioning, the washing machine is the landlords. The tenant reports problems with mice. The bathroom is functionally but old. There is a small outside balcony off the living room. The tenant reports problems of mould in the rooms and staining on the ceilings.

Evidence

4.Neither party requested a hearing, and the Tribunal has determined the issue on the basis of the inspection and the written submissions.

5. Directions were issued 4 June 2025.

The Tenant’s submissions included;

6. A copy of the current tenancy agreement dated 4 July 2023 fixed term of 12 months at a rent of £1450.00 per month. A copy of the previous tenancy was also included which ran also for 12 months from 11 March 2020 at a rent of £1400 per month.

7. A completed Reply Form noting a request for an inspection but not an inspection.

8. The Form notes the property comprises a one-bedroom flat, with living room, bathroom and kitchen,

9. Additionally, is a copy of correspondence between the tenant and the landlord's agent. In particular an email of 11 March 2025 which noted the following concerns regarding the proposed rent increase; financial hardship, poor quality of property specifically – unresolved repairs- bathroom mould –

3 white goods replacement- mice infestation and non-access to a garage. Photographs were also included.

10. The tenant by way of email to the Tribunal dated 5 July 2025 submitted a completed Reply Form, photographs and videos. The Reply Form noted the landlord supplied double glazing, central heating and white goods. The carpets and curtains being supplied by the tenant. Three video clips were included. The contents of the Reply Form were noted by the Tribunal.

The Landlords Submission

11. By e mail dated 25 June 2025 the landlord made submission containing a completed Reply Form and a schedule of rental comparisons.

12. The Reply Form noted the landlord did not request an inspection nor a hearing. The form detailed the extent of the property but differed from the tenant in the submission that the landlord supplied the curtains and carpets.

Determination and Valuation

13. The Tribunal having inspected the property has a detailed understanding of its condition. The Tribunal considers the ownership of the curtains or carpets not to have a material impact on the rent level to be determined.

14. Additionally, the Tribunal notes the garage is used by persons not connected to the tenant having been let out by the landlord. The tenant confirms they do not have any outside space in their tenancy.

15. Having consideration of the views of the parties and any comparable evidence provided 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 £1750 per month, if the property was in good tenantable condition.

Decision

16.The Tribunal found the property to be in less than in a good tenantable repair and noted issues above. The Tribunal makes a deduction of 12.5% to reflect these and so determines a rent of £1513.25 per month.

17. No application for hardship was received and the Tribunal determines the 11 April 2025 the date effective in the Notice of Increase of rent.

18. The Tribunal therefore determines the new rent of £1513.25 per month to take effect on 11 April 2025.

4

Chairman: [NAME]: 1 August 2025

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.

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HS/LON/OOAG/MNR/2025/0704

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 14 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord Ms [APPELLANT]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1513.25 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 11 April 2025

*3. The amount included for services is

not applicable n/a Per n/a

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 11 July 2023

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 white goods by landlord additional fridge by tenant

9. Description of premises Flat – one bedroom, one living room, one bathroom and a kitchen.

[NAME] of Decision 1 August 2025

📊 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 kitchen was in a tired condition, with a fridge freezer not fully functioning and a cooker ignition not working.
  • There were problems with mould in the rooms and staining on the ceilings.
  • The bathroom was functional but old.
  • The tenant reported problems with mice infestation.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided to reduce the proposed rent increase due to the property's condition.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in a dispute over rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to reduce the rent because the property was in poor condition, as evidenced by issues such as mold and non-functioning appliances.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property, which was deemed unsatisfactory.

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 be able to argue for a reduced rent if the property is in poor condition.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence such as inspection reports, emails, and photographs of the property condition were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law within 28 days.

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

It is always recommended to get 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.