VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Wins Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £1250.00 to £1045.00 because the property had issues with mould and vermin infestation. This decision helps tenants get fair rents based on the actual condition of their homes.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment based on the condition of the property.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent adjustments

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. The tribunal will then determine a fair rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This determination takes into account the condition of the property and any relevant improvements or failures by the tenant to maintain the property.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent due to property conditions.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent of £1250.00 to £1045.00 due to issues with mould and vermin infestation in the property. The decision took effect on 14 October 2024.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AK/MNR/2024/0681

Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination or Section 22 Determination)

Housing Act 1988 Section 14

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 45b [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord Mrs [RESPONDENT] c/o [APPELLANT] ( Managing Agent) 207-[ADDRESS], N9

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1045.00 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 14 October 2024

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 15/9/2020

6. Length of the term or rental period monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord none

9. Description of premises First floor converted flat with 1 bedroom, living room kitchen and bathroom

[NAME] of Decision 12 August 2025

1

Case Reference

: LON/00AK/MNR/2024/0681

Property : 45b [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME]

Landlord : Mrs [RESPONDENT] of Objection : 11 October 2024

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

Tribunal

: Mr [NAME] [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 12 August 2025

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1045.00 per calendar month with effect from 14 October 2024. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

SUMMARY REASONS

Background

1. On 6 September 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £ 1250.00 in place of the existing rent of £ 1150.00 per month to take effect from 14 October 2024

2. On 10 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. The Tenant’s referral was received by the Tribunal on 11 October 2024. In a decision dated 13 June 2025 the tribunal determined it had jurisdiction to determine the market rent.

Inspection

3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties. The property is a one bedroom converted flat in a Victorian terrace house. Correspondence and photographs show the property has issues with mould caused by poor ventilation with no evidence this has been resolved. Likewise with a vermin infestation.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written submissions provided by the Tenant. There were no written submissions from the Landlord.

Determination and Valuation

5. The Tenant provided details of a single comparable, a one bedroom flat in [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS] N9 which is a modern purpose built flat listed on 12 October 2024 at £1100.00 per month. The tribunal has also relied on of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in the condition and with the amenities the market would expect would be in the region of £1100.00 per calendar month. From this level of rent we have made adjustments in relation to:

a. Mould caused by poor ventilation and vermin infestation

6. The full valuation is shown below:

3

i.

7. The Tribunal determines a rent of £1045.00 per calendar month

Decision

8. 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 £1045.00 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1045.00 to take effect on 14 October 2024 being the date set out in the Landlord’s notice.

Chairman: [NAME]: 12 August 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.

PCM AST Market rent 1,100.00 £ less condition 5.0% 55.00 -£ 1,045.00 £

📊 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 adjustment reflects the property's condition.
  • The rent adjustment considers both the property's condition and local market conditions.
  • The rent is set at the fair market rate based on the property's condition.
  • The rent adjustment is based on the open market rate as determined by a tribunal.

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 £1250.00 to £1045.00.

Who was involved?

The tenant challenged the landlord's proposed rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to adjust the rent based on the poor condition of the property, specifically issues with mould and vermin infestation.

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, particularly the presence of mould and vermin infestation.

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 be able to negotiate a lower rent if the property condition is poor.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and correspondence showing the property's condition 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 such cases.

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.