VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £725/month rent for assured tenancy in London

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the monthly rent at £725, excluding water rates and council tax. This decision was made under the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ 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

tenancy agreementrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, a tenant can also challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal allowed the claimant's request to set the monthly rent at £725 for an assured periodic tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £725 per month, excluding water rates and council tax, and the decision took effect on June 12, 2024.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CT/MNR/2024/0129

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 111 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] 580 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

1. The rent is: £725.00 Per pcm (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 12.06.2024

3. The amount included for services is not applicable N/A Per N/A

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 12.08.2013

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs S.11

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises Victorian 2 Bedroom [NAME] of Decision 17.09.2024

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

Allowed12 cases

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 determined according to 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 £725 per month, effective from June 12, 2024.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the amount of rent for an assured periodic tenancy in a Victorian property.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £725 per month, effective from June 12, 2024, based on the applicable statutory provisions.

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 statutory provisions under the Housing Act 1988, section 14.

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 statutory provisions 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.