VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £290 weekly rent for assured tenancy in London

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, ensuring it complies with the relevant statutory requirements.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14, which was applied in this case to determine the rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

Topics

rent registrationassured 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 application must meet certain conditions, such as not being made if the rent is already set by a previous determination 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 weekly rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £290, excluding certain charges but including others.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, considering the statutory requirements and the nature of the premises.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BF/MNR/2021/0082

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 31 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME]

Landlord St Mungo Community Housing Association Address 5th Floor, [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 290 Per week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 5 April 2021

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable

Per

*4. Service charges are variable and are not included

5. Date assured tenancy commenced 4 April 2018

6. Length of the term or rental period weekly

7. Allocation of liability for repairs Ss11 and 12 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Carpets but no curtains oven

9. Description of premises Ground floor purpose built maisonette 3 rooms kitchen bathroom/wc wit central heating and double glazing,

[NAME] of Decision 22 March 2022

📊 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 adjustment based on the property's condition.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent reduction due to the property's condition and their improvements.
  • The tenant is entitled to have their rent registered under the Housing Act 1988.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjusted for the condition of the property.
  • The tenant is entitled to have their rent set at the open market rate as determined by a tribunal under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent for an assured periodic tenancy was set at £290 per week, effective from 5 April 2021.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about the amount of rent for an assured periodic tenancy, which needed to be set according to the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £290 per week, effective from 5 April 2021, 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 the application of the Housing Act 1988, section 14 to set 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 set 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.