Tribunal Determines Fair Rental Rate for Tenanted Property
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on a fair rental rate for a rented property, considering the landlord's request and the improvements made by the tenant. The rate was set at £680 per month, effective from July 16, 2019.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair rental rate that reflects the property's condition and market value.
📖 What the law says
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 rental rate based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal set a rental rate after considering the landlord's request and the tenant's improvements.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a rental rate of £680 per month for a property, taking into account the landlord's request, the tenant's improvements, and the property's market value.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed in Part
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CN/MNR/2019/0030
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 126 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME] (Hons) [NAME] 39 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £680.00 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 16 July 2019
3. The amount included for services is
not applicable --- Per ---
4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 16 July 1990
6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs L + T 1985
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord ---
9. Description of premises Three bedroom semi detached house
[NAME] (Hons) FRICS Date of Decision 30 July 2019
Page 1 of 4
Case Reference : BIR/00CN/MNR/2019/0030
Property : 126 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Landlord : Mr [APPELLANT]
Tenant : Mrs [APPELLANT] A [APPELLANT] of Application : An Application for a Determination under
Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
Tribunal Member : [NAME]
Date of Inspection : 30 July 2019
Date of Decision : 07 August 2019
_____________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF REASONS _____________________________________________________
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2019 FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
Page 2 of 4
BACKGROUND
1. By way of a notice dated 22 May 2019, Mr [RESPONDENT], the landlord, sought to increase the rental in respect of 126 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE], the property, to £700.00 per calendar month under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 with effect from 16 July 2019.
2. The tenancy commenced on 16 July 1990 and the rent payable at the time of the notice was £660.00 per calendar month.
3. On 17 June 2019, Mrs [APPELLANT], the tenant of the property, referred the notice of increase of rent served by the landlord to the Tribunal.
4. Neither party requested a hearing in which oral representations could be made. The Tribunal received written representations from the parties which were copied across accordingly.
5. The Tribunal inspected the property on 30 July 2019.
6. After consideration of the available evidence and the applicable law the Tribunal determined a rental of £680.00 per calendar month with effect from 16 July 2019.
THE PROPERTY
7. The property comprises a semi-detached house which benefits from gas fired heating, double glazing and the following accommodation:
Ground floor: hall, lounge, dining room and kitchen.
First floor: three bedrooms and bathroom.
Outside: gardens front and rear.
8. The tenant had made the following improvements:
a) The construction of a lean-to extension to the kitchen
b) The erection of a timber garage and brick store. The timber garage was approached via a right of way over a driveway from [ADDRESS].
c) The installation of some cupboards.
9. The Tribunal noted that the wiring installation did not appear to have been checked for a considerable period.
Page 3 of 4
THE LAW
10. In accordance with the terms of section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 the Tribunal must determine the rent at which it considers that the subject property might reasonably be expected to let on the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy.
11. In so doing the Tribunal, as required by section 14(1), must ignore the effect on the rental value of the property of any relevant tenant’s improvements as defined in section 14(2) 0f the Act.
REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PARTIES
12. The Tenant's submissions outlined the improvements she had made to the property, as detailed above, noted leaking guttering and concluded that the rent proposed was a considerable increase. The Landlord’s representations stated that the guttering had been attended to and a new window has been installed to the kitchen.
VALUATION
13. In the first instance the Tribunal determined what rent the landlord could reasonably be expected to obtain for the property if it were let today in the condition that is considered usual for such an open market letting. In the absence of any evidence from either of the parties, it did this by its own general knowledge of the market rent levels in the area of North Birmingham and concluded that the likely market rental would be in the order of £820 per calendar month.
14. To allow for the tenant's improvements, the age of the wiring and also to reflect the Tenant’s greater decorating liability in respect of the property when compared with an open market letting, the Tribunal considered that an allowance of £90 per calendar month should be made. A further deduction of £50 per calendar month was made for the Tenant’s fittings including floor coverings, curtains and white goods, which are usually provided in an open market letting.
15. Therefore, the Tribunal having regard to the information provided by the parties, their own inspection and their own general knowledge and experience of market rent levels in the area concluded that an appropriate market rent for the property would be £680.00 per calendar month.
16. The rent determined by the Tribunal for the purposes of Section 14 was, therefore, £680.00 per calendar month with effect from 16 July 2019.
Page 4 of 4
17. In reaching its determination, the Tribunal had regard to the evidence and submissions of the parties, the relevant law and their own knowledge and experience as an expert Tribunal but not any special or secret knowledge.
18. If either party is dissatisfied with this decision they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on a point of law only. 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 decision (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.
[NAME] (Hons) FRICS
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy Case
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Property Based on Market Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
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 Tribunal determined a rent of £680.00 per calendar month, taking into account all available evidence.
- The tenant's improvements, such as the lean-to extension and timber garage, reduced the market rental value.
- The age of the property's wiring installation contributed to a reduction in the determined rent.
- The tenant's greater responsibility for decorating compared to an open market letting led to a rent reduction.
- The tenant providing their own fittings, like floor coverings and white goods, resulted in a further deduction from the rent.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It set a rental rate of £680 per month for a rented property.
Who was involved?
The landlord requested a higher rental rate, while the tenant argued for a lower rate due to improvements made.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided on a fair rental rate by considering the property's condition, market value, and the tenant's improvements.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument regarding the tenant's improvements and their impact on the rental value was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partially in favour of the tenant, setting a lower rental rate than initially proposed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider the improvements they've made to their rented property when disputing rental rates.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Written representations from both parties and the Tribunal's inspection of the property were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rental disputes.
