VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £1400/month rent for assured tenancy in London

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. The rent was set at £1400 per month, effective from 1 March 2023, following the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent determined according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14, which was applied in this case to set the rent at £1400 per month.

Topics

tenancy agreementsrent determination

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 the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The determination considers the periodic nature of the tenancy, the start date of the new tenancy, and the terms of the original tenancy, excluding certain factors like improvements made by the tenant.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the monthly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1400, effective from March 2023.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £1400 per month, effective from 1 March 2023.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00AL/MNR/2023/0085

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 13 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Mr [RESPONDENT] Mr [RESPONDENT] [NAME] [RESPONDENT] 9 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1400.00 Per Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 01 March 2023

*3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1st June 2017

6. Length of the term or rental period 6 Months

7. Allocation of liability for repairs In accordance with agreement

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

9. Description of premises A 2002 built second floor flat forming part of a three storey block with two bedrooms, box room,living room, kitchen, bathroom.

[NAME] of Decision 19th July 2023

📊 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's right to have rent set according to the Housing Act 1988 was recognized.
  • The court consistently allowed claims based on the Housing Act 1988.
  • There were no significant defenses presented by landlords in these cases.
  • The Housing Act 1988 provides clear entitlements for tenants regarding rent setting.
  • All cases except one were decided in favor of the tenant.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • Only one case resulted in an outcome labeled as "Other," deviating from the norm.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set a monthly rent of £1400 for an assured periodic tenancy.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about the amount of rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £1400 per month based on the applicable law and the circumstances of the tenancy.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, Section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the application of the Housing Act 1988, Section 14 to determine the appropriate rent.

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

The decision was for the person who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can expect their rent to be determined according to the applicable law and the specifics of their tenancy.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.

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.