VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £1600/month rent for assured tenancy in Croydon

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. The rent was fixed at £1600 per month, excluding certain costs like water rates and council tax. This decision applies to the tenant's property located in Croydon, Surrey.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent determined under the Housing Act 1988, section 14, for an assured periodic tenancy, as seen in this case involving a fifth-floor modern apartment in Croydon, Surrey.

Topics

rent registrationassured periodic tenancyhousing act

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 application cannot be made if the rent is already set by a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the monthly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1600, effective from May 9, 2019.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The decision sets the rent at £1600 per calendar month, excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts specified in the judgment. The decision took effect on May 9, 2019.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AH/MNR/2019/0065

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 29 Rossetti Apartments, [ADDRESS], Croydon, Surrey, [POSTCODE]

Ms [COUNSEL] QC BA(LAW) LLM QC Miss M [COUNSEL] (EST MAN) FRICS Ms [COUNSEL]

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1600.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 09 May 2019

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable 0.00 Per N/A

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 09 July 2015

6. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs S.11 Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 + Clause 7 of Tenancy

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord White goods, basic furniture including beds, sofas , tables +chairs

9. Description of premises Fifth floor modern apartment comprising open plan living room/kitchen, 3 bedrooms, 1 main bathroom+1 ensuite shower room, 2 small balconies +1 private roof terrace; access to communal room terrace +use of gym. No parking.

[NAME] QC BA(LAW) LLM QC Date of Decision 4 July 2019

📊 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 have their rent registered under the Housing Act 1988.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • No significant factors identified that went 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 £1600, effective from May 2019.

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 £1600 per month, effective from May 2019, following 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 the application of the Housing Act 1988, section 14 to determine the 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 Housing Act 1988, section 14.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The judgment does not specify.

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.