Tribunal sets £1,600/month rent for assured tenancy in Peckham Rye
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the market rent for a property under an assured tenancy. They set the rent at £1,600 per month, effective from April 1st, 2022, considering comparable properties in the area.
⚖️ Legal holding
The market rent for a property under an assured tenancy should reflect what a willing landlord could obtain on the open market.
📖 What the law says
Under this rule, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under an assured tenancy. The tribunal will then decide on the rent that a willing landlord could reasonably expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The decision must consider the terms of the existing tenancy and any notices given under Grounds 1 to 5 of Schedule 2 to the Act.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal set a new market rent for a property under an assured tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for a property under an assured tenancy to be £1,600 per month, effective from April 1st, 2022, based on comparable properties in the area.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00BE/MNR/2022/0034 Property : 216 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : [NAME] [COUNSEL] [NAME] : Mr [COUNSEL] Landlord : Mr [COUNSEL] and [NAME] [COUNSEL] : [COUNSEL] LLP Type of Application : Determination under Housing Act 1988, section 14
Tribunal Members : Tribunal Judge H. Carr Mrs A Flynn MA MRICS Date of Determination :
19th April 2022
DETERMINATION
The determination
1. The market rent determined by the tribunal is £1,600 per calendar month. The effective date is 1st April 2022.
2 The application 2. On 22nd February 2022, the landlord by their representatives, [RESPONDENT] served a notice under Housing Act 1988, section 13(2) proposing a new rent from 1st April 2022 of £1,600 per month, in place of the existing rent of £1,100 per month. On 22nd March 2022, the tenant applied to the First Tier Tribunal (Property) for determination under Housing Act 1988 section 14.
3. The tribunal made its decision on 19th April 2022.
The property 4. The property is a three-bedroom terraced house in a mainly residential road, It is in close proximity to Peckham Rye British Rail Station.
The law 5. Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14, the Tribunal must determine the rent that would be obtained in respect of the same property on a new letting on the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, on otherwise similar terms (other than rent) to the existing tenancy. The rent so determined must, however, disregard the effect on the rent of the granting of the tenancy to a sitting tenant; any increase in the value of the property as a result of improvements carried out by the tenant during the tenancy (or a previous tenancy), otherwise than as a result of his or her obligations to the landlord under the lease; or any reduction attributable to a failure to comply with such an obligation. The rent does not include a service charge but does include sums payable for furniture or council tax.
Determination 6. The Tribunal first assessed the market price that would be achieved for a new letting, in a condition that would be expected of the property if it were to be marketed now.
7. The Tribunal considered that the realistic range of comparable properties, as let, was from £1500 to £2500 per month.
8. At the date of the notice no hardship was claimed by the applicant. Therefore, the rent of £1,600 per month is confirmed as a rent at which the property might reasonably be let.
Name: Judge H Carr Date:
19th April 2022
3 Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the Tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have. If a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written application for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the regional office which has been dealing with the case. The application for permission to appeal must arrive at the regional office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the person making the application. If the application is not made within the 28 day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the Tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates (i.e. give the date, the property and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £950 Monthly Rent for Assured Tenancy in Swindon
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Claimant Successfully Obtains Right to Manage Property Despite Procedural I…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Allows Urgent Asbestos Removal Without Consultation
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Flat Roof Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets £220/week Rent for Assured Tenancy in Shoreham
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Urgent Building Repairs
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Service Charges for Inadequate Maintenance
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Landlord Granted Dispensation for Roof Inspection Without Consultation
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 reductions in service charges if the landlord fails to maintain the property properly.
- An RTM company can acquire the right to manage premises if it follows the necessary legal steps.
- A tenant can challenge a defective notice of rent increase under specific housing laws.
- A landlord can be exempted from consultation requirements if the situation involves urgent health risks.
- A tenant can request a rent determination based on the property's condition and market comparables.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Applications for lease extensions must be submitted within six months of receiving a counter-notice.
- A tenant's challenge to a notice of rent increase was partially dismissed due to the parties' intentions regarding maintenance costs.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The First-tier Tribunal set the market rent for an assured tenancy at £1,600 per month.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over the proposed rent increase from £1,100 to £1,600 per month for an assured tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to confirm the proposed rent of £1,600 per month, as it reflected the open market value of the property.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, section 14 was applied to determine the market rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the need to reflect the open market value of the property, disregarding certain factors like improvements made by the tenant.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord, confirming the proposed rent increase.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, the decision means that the market rent for an assured tenancy should reflect the current market value of the property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.
