VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent After Assessing Property Condition

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal reduced the proposed rent from £1,800 to £1,650 per month after assessing the condition of the property and the services provided. The adjustment was made due to outstanding repairs and maintenance issues.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on the condition of the property and the services provided.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent 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 and the services provided, considering the terms of the existing tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent based on the condition of the property and the services provided.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal adjusted the proposed rent from £1,800 to £1,650 per month after considering the property's condition and services provided, reducing the initial proposal due to outstanding repairs and maintenance issues.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/29UD/MNR/2024/0626

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 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord Ms [RESPONDENT] & Ms [RESPONDENT] c/o haart, 5 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1650.00 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 November 2024

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

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 2 July 2021

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises 3-bedroom inner terrace house.

[NAME] of Decision 17th March 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/29UD/MNR/2024/0626 Property : 19 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant Tenant : Ms [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlords : Ms [COUNSEL] and Ms [COUNSEL] : [COUNSEL] of Application :

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

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Application : 30th October 2024 Date of Decision :

17th March 2025

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,650 per calendar month with effect from 2nd November 2024.

HAV/29UD/MNR/2024/0626 2

SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 20th September 2024 the Landlords’ Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,800 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,400 per month to take effect from 2nd November 2024.

2. On 30th October 2024 under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlords’ notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The Tribunal issued Directions on 19th November 2024 requiring the Landlords to send a completed Statement to the Tenant, with an electronic copy to the Tribunal by 3rd December 2024. The Tenant should then send a copy of a completed Statement to the Tribunal by 17th December 2024. Copies of the Statements should be sent to the other party.

4. On 12th December 2024 the Landlords’ Agent sent a Statement to the Tribunal and on 17th December 2024 the Tenant sent a Statement to the Tribunal which she had copied to the Landlord.

5. On 2nd January 2025 the Tribunal considered the matter and decided that a new rent of £1,700 per month should take effect from 2nd November 2024.

6. On 3rd January 2025 the Tenant contacted the Tribunal office when she stated that she had not received a copy of the Landlords’ Statement. The Tribunal forwarded a copy of the Landlords’ Statement to the Tenant on 4th January 2025.

7. The Tenant responded with 2 emails on 4th January 2025. This was after the Tribunal had made its determination.

8. Following discussion with a procedural Judge the Landlords’ Agent was asked to submit a Case Management Application in respect of the late submission. This was submitted on 13th January 2025 requesting that the original late submission should be accepted but it does not refer to the fact that the original Statement had not been copied to the Tenant.

9. Although the Tribunal had determined a rent on 2nd January 2025 it was concerned that the Tenant has been disadvantaged by the failure of the Landlords to follow the original Directions. Whilst the Tenant had now received a copy of the Landlords’ submission from the Tribunal this was after the Tribunal had reached its decision.

10. The Tribunal accepted the Landlords’ Application for late submission of its original Statement but issued further Directions on 26th February 2025 to allow the Tenant to make a further submission, if she so wished, to be received by the

HAV/29UD/MNR/2024/0626 3 Tribunal by 12th March 2025, whereupon the Tribunal would reconsider its decision made on 2nd January 2025.

11. The Tenant made a further submission to the Tribunal by 2 emails sent on 12 March 2025. Inspection 12. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence

13. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlords’ Agent, including photographs sent to the Tribunal on 12th March 2025. Determination and Valuation 14. Having given consideration to the evidence provided by the parties and of its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal determines that the open market rent for the property in good tenable condition would be £1,750 per calendar month.

15. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets, curtains/blinds and associated fittings to all be provided by the Landlords.

16. In this case the property is let with white goods, carpets and curtains all supplied by the Landlords.

17. The Tenant refers to rodent infestation and advice from a [NAME] that some repairs are necessary to deal with this. The Tribunal considers that this work should be regarded as a repair to be dealt with by the Landlords and noted that this work has still not been completed by the Landlords.

Accordingly, the Tribunal considers that a reduction of £50 per month should be applied which equates to £600 in a full 12 months.

18. The Tribunal also noted the condition of the Bathroom and Kitchen, particularly some missing kick boards and unit doors within the kitchen which do not close properly, and decided that a further reduction of £50 per month should be made to reflect these general wants of repair.

19. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy was £1,650 per month.

20. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlords’ notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship.

21.

Accordingly, the Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,650 per month should take effect from 2nd November 2024, this being the date specified in the notice.

HAV/29UD/MNR/2024/0626 4

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 was entitled to a rent reduction because of a rodent infestation that the landlords had not yet fixed.
  • The tenant was entitled to a rent reduction due to the poor condition of the bathroom and kitchen.
  • The Tribunal accepted the landlord's late submission of their statement.
  • The Tribunal determined the open market rent for the property in good condition to be £1,750 per month.
  • The new rent was set to take effect from the date specified in the landlord's notice.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord's proposed new rent of £1,800 per month was not accepted 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 adjusted the proposed rent from £1,800 to £1,650 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlords were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the condition of the property and the services provided, reducing the rent due to outstanding repairs and maintenance issues.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1,988 section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the need for repairs.

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 fairer rent based on the condition of their property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and statements regarding the property's condition and services provided mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed, but the process and requirements 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.