VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on a fair market rent of £1,400 per month for a property in Eastleigh after considering comparable evidence and local rental values.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy as determined by the Tribunal.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, Section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent for the property, considering the terms of the existing tenancy and disregarding certain factors such as improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to non-compliance.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a market rent for the property based on comparable evidence and local rental values.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined a market rent of £1,400 per calendar month for a property in Eastleigh, based on comparable evidence and local rental values.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/24UD/MNR/2024/0520

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 101 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [RESPONDENT]

Landlord Ms [RESPONDENT] c/o [NAME], 23 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

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

1. The rent is: £ 1400.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

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

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 2 June 2018

5. Length of the term or rental period Statutory Periodic Tenancy

6. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance agreement

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises A 1970’s built three bedroom semi detached house located in an established residential area. Accommodation comprises: three bedrooms, 2 reception rooms, kitchen, conservatory, cloakroom, bathroom, rear garden, garage with driveway.

[NAME] [NAME] of Decision 21 November 2024

1

Case Reference

: HAV/29UB/MNR/2024/0520

Property : [ADDRESS], Bishopstoke, Eastleigh, Hampshire,

Tenant

: [NAME] and Mrs [APPELLANT] and [APPELLANT]

Landlord : Ms [RESPONDENT] of Objection : Undated

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

Tribunal

: [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] [NAME] of Summary Reasons

: 22 October 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,400 per calendar month with effect from 2 October 2024. ____________________________________

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

SUMMARY REASONS

Background

1. On the 29 August 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,500 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,210 per month to take effect from 2 October 2024.

2. The Tenant’s application is undated and served 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

3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case on the basis of the papers provided by the parties.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal has consideration of the written submissions provided by the parties and the selection of comparable evidence provided by the Landlord’s agent.

Determination and Valuation

5. Firstly, having consideration of the parties’ comparable evidence together with our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the Eastleigh area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in its current condition would be £1,400 per month.

6. The Tribunal have not made an adjustment in relation to condition of the property based upon the evidence and the parties’ statements.

Decision

7. 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 governed by the relevant clause in the agreement was £1,400 per calendar month.

8. The Tribunal directs the new rent of £1,400 to take effect on the 2 October 2024. This being the date set out in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase The Tribunal was satisfied that a starting date of that specified in the Landlord’s notice would not cause the tenant undue hardship as no such evidence was provided.

3

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:

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 for their assured periodic tenancy as determined by the Tribunal.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided on a market rent of £1,400 per month for the property.

Who was involved?

The tenant and landlord were involved in the dispute over the rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on comparable evidence and local rental values, ensuring a fair market rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument about comparable evidence and local rental values was crucial.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant, setting a fair market rent.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect a fair market rent based on comparable evidence and local rental values.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence and local rental values were important in determining the market rent.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed through the appropriate channels.

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 disputes.

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.