AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·02 December 2024

Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Due to Property Disrepair

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £2,200 to £1,870 per month because the property had significant disrepair issues, such as water damage and mould. The decision was made on 19 September 2024.

⚖️ Legal holding

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

Topics

tenancy disputesrent adjustment

Provisions

Housing Act 1988 s.14

📖 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. The tribunal will then determine a fair rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive in the open market. This includes considering the condition of the property, such as disrepair issues.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent due to disrepair issues in the property.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent from £2,200 to £1,870 per month due to disrepair issues in the property, including water damage and significant mould. The decision took effect on 7 June 2024.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00AQ/MNR/2024/0273

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 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Landlord [NAME] [RESPONDENT] c/o [NAME] 3 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT] & [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1,870 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 7th June 2024

*3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 7th May 2008

6. Length of the term or rental period Statutory Tenancy Agreement

7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises A 1930s built three bedroom semi-detached house.

Chairman Duncan Jagger MRICS Date of Decision 19th September 2024

Case Reference

: LON/OOAQ/MNR/2024/0273

Property : 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant : [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME] & [NAME] [APPELLANT] [NAME]

Landlord : [NAME] [RESPONDENT] c/o [NAME] of Objection : 3rd May 2024

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

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 19 September 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,870 per calendar Month with effect from 7 June 2024. ___________________________________

SUMMARY REASONS

Background

1. On the 1 May 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,200 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,150 per month to take effect from 7 June 2024. The Tribunal were provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement which commenced on the 7 May 2008.

2. On the 4th 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.

Evidence

3. Following Directions prepared by the Tribunal on the 17th July 2024. The Tenants application to the Tribunal set a schedule of disrepair which included water damage, significant mould to the bedrooms and bathroom, damaged kitchen fittings, door frames and oven.

Determination and Valuation

4. Having consideration of our own expert general knowledge of rental values in the Edgware area, we consider 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 £2,200 per month.

5. From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to the matters listed above which equates to approximately 15%

Decision

6. 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 in its current condition was £1,870 per calendar month.

7.The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1,870 per month to take effect on the 7 May 2024. This, being the date set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase

3 and the Tribunal was satisfied that a starting date of that specified in the Landlord’s notice would not cause the tenant undue hardship.

Chairman: Duncan Jagger MRICS Date: 19 September 2024

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:

Allowed12 cases

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 adjusted for the property's deficiencies.
A fair market rent is determined by comparing with similar properties.
Rent adjustments are made considering the tenant's financial circumstances.

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 proposed rent from £2,200 to £1,870 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to adjust the rent based on the disrepair issues in the property.

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 presence of significant disrepair issues in the property.

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 entitled to a reduced rent if their property has significant disrepair issues.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of disrepair issues, such as water damage and mould, was presented.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed, but the details of how to do so are outlined in the full reasons.

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

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases like this.

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.