Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Due to Property Defects
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal reduced the rent for a tenant because the property had issues like damp and mould. The Tribunal considered the property's condition and compared it to similar properties in the area.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent reduction if the property is not in good condition.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord. The determination considers the condition of the property and disregards certain factors like improvements made by the tenant or reductions in value due to the tenant's non-compliance.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined a reduced rent due to property defects.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a rent of £1,615 per month for a Victorian mid-terrace house, reducing the landlord's proposed rent due to property defects such as previous damp and associated mould. The decision was based on the Housing Act 1988, section 14.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BB/MNR/2024/0689
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 57 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Mr [RESPONDENT] Ms [RESPONDENT]
Landlord Dr [RESPONDENT] [NAME] [RESPONDENT] c/o [NAME] 4a [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant [APPELLANT] & [APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 1615 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15 November 2024
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable
Per
*4. Service charges are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 15 October 2022
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly Assured Periodic Tenancy
7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises A mid terrace Victorian house. Accommodation comprises: two bedrooms, living room, kitchen, bathroom/wc, lean-to storage area, rear garden with large shed.
Chairman Duncan Jagger MRICS Date of Decision 11 April 2025
1
Case Reference
: LON/OOBB/MNR/2024/0689
Property : 57 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: [APPELLANT] [NAME]
Landlord : Dr [RESPONDENT] c/o [NAME] of Objection : 27 October 2024
Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Ms [NAME] of Summary Reasons
: 11 April 2025
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,615 per calendar Month with effect from 15 November 2024. ____________________________________
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2 © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023
SUMMARY REASONS
Background
1. On the 15 October 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,100 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,550 per month to take effect from 15 November 2024.
2. The Tenants application is dated the 27 October 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.
Evidence
4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written submissions provided by the Tenants together with photographs, schedule of condition, the tenancy agreement and a detail of comparable properties which ranged up to £1,850 per month.. The Landlord did not provide any written evidence.
The Inspection
5. The Tribunal members inspected the property on the 11 April 2025 in the presence of the tenants and their family. The property is a Victorian mid- terrace house located in an established road with small rear garden. On the ground floor is a living room, kitchen and lean-to utility area. The first floor comprises two bedrooms and a bathroom/wc. The property is suffering from previous damp and associated mould to bathroom wall. The cause of this damp appears to have been the defective flat roof covering which has been repaired.
Determination and Valuation
6. Firstly, having consideration of our expert, general knowledge of rental values in the Plaistow area, The Tribunal considers that the open market rent for the property if it were in good marketable condition with reasonably modern kitchen and bathroom, modern services, carpets and curtains and white goods supplied by the landlord would be £1,900 per month.
7. The Tribunal now needs to adjust this rent to allow for the damp and mould to the bathroom wall, dated kitchen and sanitary fittings, misting to window units, uneven flooring in the kitchen and damaged laminate flooring. Using its own expertise the Tribunal considers that a deduction of £285 (approximately 15%) should be applied. This reduces the rental figure to £1,615 per month.
3
Decision
8. The Tribunal therefore determines 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 in its current condition is £1,615 per calendar month.
8. The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1,615 per month to take effect on the 15 November 2024. This being the date set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase.
Chairman: Duncan Jagger MRICS Date: 11 April 2025
APPEAL PROVISIONS
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 Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Property with Faulty Appliances
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal reduces rent due to property's poor condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for Tenancy Dispute
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Unfurnished Property
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 poor condition.
- The property has disrepair issues.
- Rent should reflect the open market value adjusted for the property's condition.
- Rent should be adjusted based on the property's condition and market comparables.
- Rent should consider the condition and furnishings of the property.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal decided to reduce the rent to £1,615 per month due to property defects.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved in the dispute over the rent.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to reduce the rent after inspecting the property and considering its condition compared to similar properties.
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 condition of the property, which included damp and mould issues.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may also be able to negotiate a lower rent if the property has significant defects.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs, a schedule of condition, and a comparison of similar properties were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent disputes.
