VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Decision — Case 4164114

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. The rent was set at £1400 per month, excluding certain costs like water rates and council tax. This decision applies from April 7, 2023.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14, ensuring the landlord does not overcharge, as seen in this case involving a ground-floor flat in a late C19th terraced house.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their assured 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 applies to a periodic tenancy with the same terms as the original tenancy, starting on the date of the application or at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice.

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 April 7, 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 calendar month, excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts specified in the judgment. The decision took effect on April 7, 2023.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00BH/MNR/2023/0150

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 69A [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

N [NAME]

Landlord [NAME] [RESPONDENT] [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [APPELLANT]

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

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 07 April 2023

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable n/a Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included n/a

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 7 December 2015

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly Periodic

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Wardrobe Kitchen table sofa TV stand Washing machine Hob/ Oven No fridge

9. Description of premises Ground floor 1 bed living room kitchen bathroom, flat converted from 3 level late C19th terraced house. Garden, off road parking to front. FGFCH double glazing. Within walking distance of High St. retail, bus, tube, train links.

Note: The landlord is not obliged to charge this market rent but, may not charge more.

[NAME] of Decision 26 June 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 is entitled to a rent determination under the Housing Act 1988.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • No specific factors identified as leading to a decision against the claimant in these cases.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

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

What was the dispute about?

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

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £1400 per month, effective from April 2023, based on the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

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 that the landlord must not charge more than the market rent for the assured periodic tenancy.

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 set according to the market rate under the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify the 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.