VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £1080/month fair rent for assured tenancy in London

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal set a fair rent of £1080 per month for the tenant, excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges, under the Rent Act 1977.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent under the Rent Act 1977.

Topics

fair renttenancy agreement

Provisions

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a fair rent for the tenant under the Rent Act 1977.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal set a fair rent of £1080 per calendar month for the tenant, excluding water rates and council tax but including service charges, under the Rent Act 1977.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. JM/LON/00AY/F77/2021/0262

Notice of the Tribunal Decision

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 28 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tribunal Judge Aileen Hamilton-[COMPANY]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The fair rent is £1080.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 22 December 2021

3. The amount for services is £153.20 Per Calendar Month

4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for rent allowance is

£48.70 Per Calendar Month

5. The rent is not to be registered as variable.

6. The capping provisions of the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 do not apply because 1st registration.

7. Details (other than rent) where different from Rent Register entry

None.

Chairman Tribunal Judge Aileen Hamilton-Farey LLB FRICS Date of decision 22/12/2021

📊 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 rent as determined by the Rent Act 1977.
  • The fair rent is calculated according to the Rent Act 1977 and related orders.
  • The entitlement to a fair rent is clearly stated under the Rent Act 1977.
  • The court recognizes the tenant's right to a fair rent under the Rent Act 1977.
  • The fair rent determination process adheres strictly to the Rent Act 1977 guidelines.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • No specific losing factors identified in the provided similar cases.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The fair rent for the assured tenancy was set at £1080.00 per calendar month.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the fair rent amount for the assured tenancy.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the fair rent at £1080.00 per month, considering the relevant factors under the Rent Act 1977.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11 was applied to determine the fair rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered on the calculation of the fair rent based on the Rent Act 1977.

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

The decision was for the tenant, setting the fair rent at £1080.00 per month.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect their fair rent to be assessed according to the Rent Act 1977.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents used to determine the fair rent.

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.