VadeLab
Allowed in PartFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Coventry Apartment

Case No.

📌 In brief

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal set the fair market rent for a flat in Coventry at £880 pcm. The decision was based on evidence from the landlord about similar properties in the area.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set at a fair market rate based on comparable properties and local conditions.

Topics

tenancyrent determination

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 open-market rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for the property.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a modern two-bedroom apartment in Coventry, considering comparable rental information provided by the landlord.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent of a modern two-bedroom apartment in Coventry to be £880 per calendar month, considering comparable rental information provided by the landlord and its own knowledge of local conditions.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

Case Reference

: BIR/00CQ/MNR/2026/0043

Property : Flat 8, Hidcote House, [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Coventry. [POSTCODE].

Tenant

: [APPELLANT] & [NAME]

Landlord : [RESPONDENT]

Landlord’s agent : [NAME] of application : 11th February 2026

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

Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] of Decision : 20th May 2026

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £880 (Eight Hundred and Eighty Pounds) per calendar month with effect from 20th May 2026 ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION Background

1. On 13th January 2026 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £900 per calendar month in place of the existing rent of £850 pcm to take effect from 14th February 2026.

2. On 11th February 2026, 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 and having regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord. From the brief information provided it appears that the subject property is a modern 2-bedroom first floor apartment located in a residential area of similar such properties.

5. The property is let on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy incorporating standard repairing obligations. The Tenant refers to repairs undertaken by and paid for by him in his submission.

6. The Landlord, via his agent, submitted to the Tribunal details of comparable properties and letting information of similar modern 2-bedroom apartments in the locality with prices ranging from £900 to £950 per calendar month. No comparable letting information was submitted by the Tenant.

7. No submissions were made by either party regarding the condition of the property.

Determination and Valuation

8. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Landlord and of our own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £880 per calendar month.

9. The Tribunal consider that no adjustments should be made to the market rent.

3 Decision

12. 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 £880 per calendar month with effect from 14th February 2026.

Hardship

9. The Tenant raises hardship in their submissions. Accordingly, the Tribunal directs the new rent of £880 per calendar month to take effect from 20th May 2026 this being the date of the Tribunal.

Chairman:

Date: 20th May 2026

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.

4

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 Flat 8, Hidcote House, [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], Coventry. [POSTCODE].

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] c/o [APPELLANT], [ADDRESS], Coventry. [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT] & [NAME]

1. The rent is: £880 Per calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 20th May 2026

3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 14th January 2025

5. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises Modern 2-bedroom first floor apartment

Chairman

Date of Decision 20th May 2026

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.

BIR/00CQ/MNR/2026/0043

📊 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

  • Rent should be set based on comparable properties and local conditions.
  • Adjustments to proposed rent must consider property defects and conditions affecting habitability.
  • Landlord must provide evidence supporting the proposed rent increase from similar properties.
  • Rent should reflect the current state of repair and condition of the property.
  • Rent should be adjusted considering the property's condition and location.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tribunal decided that the fair market rent for the property is £880 per calendar month.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord were involved in setting the rental price of a flat.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court considered comparable rental information provided by the landlord to determine the fair market rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied in this case.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The comparable rental information provided by the landlord played a key role in setting the rent.

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

The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, as it delayed the effective date of the new rent.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rent increase can seek a fair market determination if they believe the proposed rent is too high.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable rental information and details about the property's condition were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party may appeal on a point of law to the Upper Tribunal 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 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.