VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets £235 Weekly Rent for Assured Tenancy in Newcastle

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. The rent was set at £235 per week, effective from 11th October 2021, following a determination under the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14, considering the specific circumstances of the property and the tenancy agreement.

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, except if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. The tribunal will then decide the open-market rent that a willing landlord would charge for a similar tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the weekly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £235.00, excluding certain charges.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £235 per week, effective from 11th October 2021.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AH/MNR/2021/0164

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 79 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] (First Floor), St. [ADDRESS], Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne And Wear, [POSTCODE]

Tenant Miss [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 235.00 Per Week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 11th October 2021

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable Not applicable Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced February 2009

6. Length of the term or rental period Weekly Periodic

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Section 11

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None supplied by Landlord

9. Description of premises Mid terraced two storey house with five rooms, kitchen, bathroom/WC with front and rear garden. The property has no central heating and suffers some dilapidation.

[NAME] of Decision 16th December 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 requests a rent determination under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
  • The request includes consideration of the property's condition and amenities.
  • The tribunal grants a fair market rent determination based on the provided information.
  • The tenant's entitlement to a rent determination is recognized by the tribunal.
  • The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 is cited as the legal basis for the claim.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • (No factors identified that went against the claimant in the provided 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 weekly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £235.00, excluding certain charges but including others as specified in the judgment.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about the amount of rent to be paid for an assured periodic tenancy, specifically whether the proposed rent of £235.00 per week was appropriate.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £235.00 per week, excluding water rates and council tax but including other specified charges, as required by the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, section 14 was applied to determine the rent for the assured periodic tenancy.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the application of the Housing Act 1988, section 14 to calculate the appropriate 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, as the rent was set according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, the decision means that the rent for an assured periodic tenancy can be set according to 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.