Tribunal Adjusts Rent Due to Property Disrepair and Licensing Issues
📌 In brief
A tenant's rent was reduced by the First-tier Tribunal after they argued that their property needed repairs and did not meet local safety standards. The new rent is set at £295 per month starting January 1st, 2026.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent adjusted based on the property's condition and compliance with local licensing requirements.
📖 What the law says
This section allows landlords to propose increases in rent for assured periodic tenancies, provided they follow a prescribed notice procedure and adhere to specific timing requirements.
This section implies a covenant by the lessor to keep the structure and exterior of the dwelling-house, along with certain installations for utilities and heating, in repair and proper working order.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy, adjusting it due to disrepair and safety concerns.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured tenancy, reducing it from £450 to £295 per month due to disrepair, inadequate heating, and non-compliance with local selective licensing requirements.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Case Reference
MAN/00EF/MNR/2025/1078
Property
[ADDRESS], Stockton-On-Tees, TS1 83EH
[NAME] [COUNSEL]
Tenant’s Representative
Landlord
AA [APPELLANT]
Landlord’s [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
Landlord’s Representative
Date of Application
17 December 2025
Type of Application Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] of Decision
19 March 2026
Rent Determined
£295.00 per calendar month
Date the new rent takes effect
1 January 2026
2
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Background
1. On 29 November 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £450.00 per calendar month (pcm) in place of the existing rent of £380.00 pcm to take effect from 1 January 2026.
2. On 17 December 2025, 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.
3. The assured tenancy commenced on 1 December 2011. No tenancy agreement was provided to the Tribunal but the rental period is agreed to be monthly.
Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.
4. As per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.
Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtain and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.
5. £Nil
Liability for Council Tax
6. The Tenant is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.
Any other terms of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.
7. None
Inspection/Hearing
8. A hearing was held on 19 March 2026 at Teesside Magistrates’ Court. The Tribunal has considered this case on the basis of an inspection, an oral hearing, the papers provided by the parties and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.
3
The Property
9. The Tribunal carried out an inspection of the Property on 19 March 2026 in the presence of the Tenant. The Landlord was notified of the inspection but did not attend.
10. The Property is a second-floor (top) flat forming part of a converted three storey terraced house, offering the following accommodation:
Hall, open plan kitchen/lounge, one bedroom, and shower room / wc.
The Property benefits from electric heating by way of two wall heaters.
The Property is situated in a street of similar properties within the Central Stockton-upon-Tees Selective Licensing Area.
Evidence
11. The Tenant returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms. No response was received from the Landlord who did not attend the inspection nor the hearing.
The Tenant.
12. The Tenant made the following comments in his written submissions and / or within his oral submissions at the hearing:
a) Very little maintenance has been carried out during his occupation which commenced in 2011. During that period there have been several changes of landlord. When [NAME] bought the property (c. Oct 2024) he increased the rent by £85 per month from £295 and promised to undertake all necessary repairs.
b) The window to the bedroom is rotten with visible gaps between what remains of the frame and the glazing; which is visibly in danger of falling out.
c) The window in the lounge is rotten.
d) The property suffers from penetrating damp in the rear sloping roof. Black mould is evident but has been painted over with white emulsion paint by the landlord within the last few weeks. No attempt has been made by the landlord to fix the underlying fault.
4
e) There is sign of penetrating damp in the sloping roof in the living room. There is a large hole in this roof which the landlord has cosmetically fixed by screwing a piece of timber over.
f) The heating system which comprises only 2 wall mounted electric fires is inadequate. The property suffers from excess cold.
g) The tenant is unsure the communal fire alarm system is working. It has several red fault lights displayed and there is no evidence of any regular testing. That is of particular concern to the tenant as the Property is situated at the head of the only staircase with no other means of escape.
h) That there are high levels of crime and anti-social behaviour within the area.
13. The tenant provided no evidence of market rent levels in the area but he did assert that his rent should not increase, and indeed should not have increased in 2024, until / unless the landlord has completed all necessary repairs to put the property in good order.
The Landlord
14. No evidence was received from the Landlord who did not attend the hearing and did not respond to any of the Tribunal’s correspondence.
The inspection
15. During the inspection the Tribunal noted all the elements of disrepair highlighted by the tenant.
16. Although it is not for the Tribunal to undertake a housing, health and safety rating scheme assessment (that is for others), were such an assessment to be undertaken the Tribunal considers the property likely suffers from Category 1 or Category 2 hazards in respect of excess cold and black mould and damp. The heating system is inadequate, the single glazed windows are in very poor condition with visible gaps around the glazing which is in significant danger of falling out.
17. The Tribunal noted evidence of at least one slipped ridge tile to the front of the property and grass growth in the rear gutter. An inspection of the rear elevation / roof was not possible due to lack of access.
5
18. There were no signs of the communal fire safety system having been regularly tested. A testing schedule template was displayed on the notice board but that was in pristine condition, was totally blank and was in the name of the [NAME] (prior to October 2024). On the balance of probabilities, the Tribunal determines that the system is not currently working and has likely not been regularly tested.
Determination and Valuation
19. Having received no evidence of comparable lettings the Tribunal relied on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area. The property is situated within the Central Stockton Selective Licencing Area. That implies that the area suffers from one or more of: low demand, high levels of depravation, high levels of crime, significant problems caused by antisocial behaviour. Having regard to the location, the Tribunal considers that the market rental value of the subject Property modernised and in good order would be in the order of £400.00 pcm.
20. Having regard to the overall condition of the property and the tenant referencing requirements of the selective licencing scheme, the Tribunal considers that there would be a very limited market of potential tenants for the property in its [NAME] condition.
21. The Tribunal has, therefore, made adjustments to the above level of achievable for the following:
a) Requirement for refurbishment / general upgrade b) Inadequate heating system. c) Rotten window to living room d) Rotten window to bedroom e) Signs of penetrating damp f) Black mould g) Hole in sloping ceiling h) Ridge tile displaced at front of property i) Vegetation growth in rear gutter j) Fire safety system not working k) Lack of regular testing of communal fire safety system
The full valuation is shown below:
6
Starting Rent (per calendar month)
£400.00
Less
a) Items under a) to j) above @ £10.00 per item £100.00 b) Item k at £5.00
£ 5.00
Total deductions
£105.00
Market rent (per calendar month)
£295.00
Decision
12. The Tribunal determines the market rent at £295.00 per calendar month with effect from 1 January 2026 (the date in the Landlord’s notice).
APPEAL PROVISIONS
If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision. Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal sets fair rent for Redcar property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for HMO Room
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy in Kibworth
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent at £1,100 PCM for Birmingham Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £920 PCM
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Redcar Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Market Rent and Adjusts Start Date Due to Undu…
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
- Rent adjustments are considered based on the property's condition.
- Rent is assessed based on current market conditions.
- Rent is determined by the First-tier Tribunal under sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
- Rent is set at a fair market rate based on comparable properties in the area.
- Rent adjustments take into account environmental factors.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £450 to £295 per month.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord were involved in the dispute over rent adjustment.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on evidence of disrepair and non-compliance with local licensing requirements.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Housing Act 1988 s.13 and Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 s.11 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The tenant's argument about disrepair and safety issues was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone facing rent increases due to property disrepair may have grounds to challenge it.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of disrepair and non-compliance with local licensing requirements was important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, either party can appeal on points of law within 28 days.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor.
