VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Adjusts Rent for Property with Faulty Appliances

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for a property where the tenant complained about faulty appliances and lack of central heating. The Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £2,500 to £1,900 per month.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjusted for the condition of the property.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determinations

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 market rent based on the condition of the property, considering factors such as the state of the property, including the presence or absence of central heating and the condition of appliances.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for a property without central heating and with some faulty appliances.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a rent of £1,900 per month for a property without central heating and with some faulty appliances, adjusting the proposed rent of £2,500 per month.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AW/MNR/2024/0327

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 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Judge [NAME], MRICS

Landlord [NAME] 28 Sandilands, Croydon, [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1,900 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 15 June 2024

3. The amount included for services is not applicable Not Applicable Per Not Applicable

4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 15 November 2019

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord external repairs

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord See written decision.

9. Description of premises 2 bedroom second floor flat in purpose built block.

Chairman Judge Bernadette MacQueen Date of Decision 23 September 2024

1

Case Reference

: LON/00AW/MNR/2024/0327

Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT] [NAME] of Objection : 10 June 2024

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

Tribunal

: Judge [NAME], MRICS

Date of Decision : 23 September 2024

Date of Summary Reasons

: 30 September 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,900 per calendar month with effect from 15 June 2024. ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2 © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

SUMMARY REASONS

Background

1. On 4 May 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £2,500 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,900 per month to take effect from 15 June 2024.

2. By application received by the Tribunal on 10 June 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.

Inspection and Hearing

3. At the request of the Tenant, [NAME] [APPELLANT], the Tribunal held a short oral hearing and also carried out an inspection of the Property on 23 September 2024, accompanied by the Tenant.

4. The Landlord did not attend the hearing or inspection but did provide written submissions to the Tribunal.

Evidence

5. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant in their Reply Form. The Tribunal also considered the written submissions provided by the Landlord, which included their Reply Form as well as an inventory schedule of works and details of similar properties the Landlord asked the Tribunal to consider. Additionally, the Tribunal considered the oral submissions made at the hearing by [NAME], as well as its inspection of the Property.

Determination and Valuation

6. The Property was a two-bedroom second floor flat within a purpose built block of flats. The Property did not have central heating, but did have double glazing provided by the Landlord. Curtains, carpet and white goods were also provided by the Landlord, however the Tenant told the Tribunal that the dishwasher was not working and the curtains and carpet provided by the Landlord were old. The Property was furnished by the Landlord when the Tenant took up occupation in 1999. Over the following 25 years, the Tenant had replaced most of the furniture as the various items wore out.

3 7. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Landlord, and the Tribunal’s own expert knowledge and experience, the Tribunal considered that the open market value for a similar two-bedroom flat in reasonable condition in this location would be £2,500 per calendar month. The Tribunal then adjusted this to £1,900 to reflect that there was no central heating, the dishwasher and extractor fan did not work and rings on the hob did not work as they should. Additionally, a reduction was made for the general condition of the Property, in particular the bathrooms, double glazing, furniture and carpet.

Decision

8. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the Property, in a reasonable condition, might be expected to be let at by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy was £2,500 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £1,900 per calendar month to take effect from 15 June 2024.

Judge Bernadette MacQueen

Date: 30 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 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 tenant is entitled to a fair market rent.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided on the rent for a property, reducing it from £2,500 to £1,900 per month.

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 because the property lacked central heating and had some faulty appliances.

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, including the lack of central heating and faulty appliances.

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 has significant issues.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The condition of the property, including the lack of central heating and faulty appliances, was crucial evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed, but the process and grounds for appeal vary.

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.