VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tenant Wins Rent Reduction Due to Property Disrepair

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the tenant successfully challenged a proposed rent increase due to issues with the property, such as leaks and non-functioning smoke alarms. The Tribunal adjusted the rent accordingly.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a reduction in rent due to disrepair and defects in the property.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent adjustment

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

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 takes into account various factors including the terms of the existing tenancy and any improvements or disrepair issues.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent after considering the disrepair issues raised by the tenant.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £2,350 to £2,170 per month after considering the tenant's claims of disrepair and defects in the property. 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. GB/LON/00AJ/MNR/2024/0082

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 8B, [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Judge Niamh O’Brien Mrs [NAME] [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Karyn Hunter

1. The rent is: £ 2170.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 12 February 2024

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable 0.00 Per n/a

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 12 November 2022

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S.11 Housing Act 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises Self contained flat in a converted Victorian premises with full central heating. Accommodation is 3 rooms, kitchen and 2 bathrooms

Chairman Judge Niamh O’ Brien Date of Decision 18 July 2024

Case Reference

: LON/00AJ/MNR/2024/0082

Property : 8B. [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Tenant

: [APPELLANT]

Landlord : Mr [APPELLANT], c/o [RESPONDENT] of Objection : 9 February 2024

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

: Judge O’Brien

Tribunal Member [NAME] of Decision : 18 July 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION The Tribunal determines a rent of £2,170 per calendar month with effect from 12 February 2024. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 14th December 2024 (presumably 2023 was intended) the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,350 per month in place of the existing rent of £2160 per month to take effect from 12th February 2024.

2. By application date-stamped 9 February 2024 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.

Evidence 3. There was no hearing. The Tribunal considered evidence from the tenant which outlined disrepair and defects and gave a short history of what had gone wrong at the property. The tenant reported a number of items of disrepair including a leaks from the en-suite bathroom, a non- functioning smoke alarm in the main bedroom, and disrepair to the windows in the lounge. Photographs were also provided.

Inspection 4. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered the evidence provided by the tenant.

Determination and Valuation 5. Having considered such evidence as was provided, the tribunal also drew on its own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal considered that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the £2,350 per month. From this level of rent the Tribunal made adjustments in relation to the general repair of the property.

6. The full valuation is shown below:

Market Rent

£2,350 per calendar month

Less

General Landlord’s Repair: 7.5%

(£176.25)

Total £2137, say £2170 per month

7. The Tribunal determines a rent of £2,170 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 £2,170 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £2,170 per calendar month to take effect on as advised in the notice of increase.

Date: 18th July 2024 Chairman Judge N O’Brien

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 request for full reasons should be made within a month. 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:

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 had significant disrepair and defects.
  • The rent was adjusted to reflect the fair market value considering the property's condition.
  • The tenant provided furnishings which should be considered in adjusting the rent.
  • The rent adjustment took into account the property's deficiencies and the open market value.
  • The rent was adjusted based on the condition of the property and local rental values.

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 £2,350 to £2,170 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the tenant's claims of disrepair and defects 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 tenant's report of disrepair and defects 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 be able to challenge a proposed rent increase if there are significant disrepair issues in their property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and reports of disrepair and defects in the property mattered.

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 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.