VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal sets £825/month rent for assured tenancy in Andover

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on a market rent of £825 per month for an assured tenancy after a tenant challenged a landlord's proposed rent increase. The decision was based on the Housing Act 1988.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant may refer a landlord's notice of rent increase to the First-tier Tribunal for determination.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to the appropriate tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent, considering factors such as the type of tenancy, the start date of the new tenancy, and the terms of the original tenancy. Additionally, certain factors like improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to non-compliance are disregarded when determining the rent.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a property in Andover.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a market rent of £825 per month for an assured tenancy, following a tenant's referral of the landlord's notice of rent increase under the Housing Act 1988.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101

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 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mrs [RESPONDENT] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [NAME] c/o [NAME], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Dr [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 825.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 18 September 2022

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 18 September 2021

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises First floor flat with 2 bedrooms.

[NAME] of Decision 17 November 2022

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2022

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Landlord : Mr and Mrs [COUNSEL] : [NAME]

Tenant : Dr [COUNSEL] : None Type of Application :

Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] R [NAME] Mrs [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Inspection : None, paper determination Date of Decision :

17th November 2022

DECISION

CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101

2

Summary of Decision

1. On 17th November 2022 the Tribunal determined a market rent of £825 per month to take effect from 18th September 2022. Background 2. The case concerned the determination of a market rent for the subject property following a referral of the Landlord’s notice of increase of rent by the Tenant pursuant to sections 13 and 14 Housing Act 1988.

3. On 18th July 2022 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £825 per month in place of the existing rent of £775 per month to take effect from 18th September 2022. The notice complied with the legal requirements.

4. On 22nd August 2022 the Tenant applied to the Tribunal under Section 13(4) (a) of the Housing Act 1988.

5. The Coronavirus pandemic and considerations of health have caused a suspension of inspections and Tribunal hearings in person until further notice.

6. The Tribunal issued directions on 14th September 2022 informing the parties that, unless either party objected, the Tribunal intended to determine the rent based on written representations. The parties were invited to make submissions which could include photographs or videos.

7. Both parties submitted detailed papers by the specified dates which were also copied to the other party.

8. Neither party objected to the matter being determined without an oral hearing, so the Tribunal determined the case on 17th November 2022 based on the written representations received. The Property 9. From the information given in the papers and available on the internet the property comprises a first floor flat within a character property itself set within a village about 2 ½ miles west of Andover.

10. There are some local shopping facilities nearby supplying day to day requirements with other main services available in Andover.

11. The flat has oil-fired central heating and double-glazed windows to accommodation which includes a Living Room, Kitchen, two Bedrooms and a Bathroom. There is a single nominated car space.

CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101

3 Submissions 12. The initial tenancy began on 18th September 2021 at a rent of £775 per month. No fridge or washing machine were provided. Internal photographs show the property to be in good order.

13. The Tenant says that the heating is expensive, that the tenancy was limited to single occupancy only and that she is unable to afford the new rent. She has now left the property but supplied the Tribunal with a schedule of comparable rents from £575 to £750 per month for one bedroomed flats and £650-£800 per month for two bedroomed flats.

14. The Landlord says that the property was refurbished shortly before [NAME] took occupation and that the property has now been relet at £825 per month.

15. The Landlord also provides evidence of other properties to let in the area at asking rents of £795-£900 per month. The Law

S14 Determination of Rent by First-tier Tribunal

(1) Where, under subsection (4) (a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a First-tier Tribunal a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the Tribunal shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the Tribunal consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy-

(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the tenancy to which the notice relates; (b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice; (c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the same as those of the tenancy to which the notice relates; and (d) in respect of which the same notices, if any, have been given under any of Grounds 1 to 5 of Schedule 2 to this Act, as have been given (or have effect as if given) in relation to the tenancy to which the notice relates.

(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded-

(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a [NAME]; (b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the tenant, if the improvement- (i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to his immediate landlord, or (ii) was carried out pursuant to an obligation to his immediate landlord being an obligation which did not relate to the specific improvement

CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101

4 concerned but arose by reference to consent given to the carrying out of that improvement; and (c) any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a failure by the tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, in relation to a notice which is referred by a tenant as mentioned in subsection (1) above, an improvement is a relevant improvement if either it was carried out during the tenancy to which the notice relates, or the following conditions are satisfied, namely-

(a) that it was carried out not more than twenty-one years before the date of service of the notice; and (b) that, at all times during the period beginning when the improvement was carried out and ending on the date of service of the notice, the dwelling- house has been let under an assured tenancy; and (c) that, on the coming to an end of an assured tenancy at any time during that period, the tenant (or, in the case of [NAME], at least one of them) did not quit.

(4) In this section "rent" does not include any service charge, within the meaning of section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, but, subject to that, includes any sums payable by the tenant to the landlord on account of the use of furniture, in respect of council tax or for any of the matters referred to in subsection (1) (a) of that section, whether or not those sums are separate from the sums payable for the occupation.

Consideration and Valuation

16. The Tribunal first considered whether it felt able to reasonably and fairly decide this case based on the papers submitted only with no oral hearing. Having read and considered the papers it decided that it could do so.

17. The Tribunal is required to determine the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under an assured tenancy. The personal circumstances of the Landlord or Tenant is not relevant to this issue.

18. Having carefully considered the representations from the parties and associated correspondence and using its own judgement and knowledge of rental values in the area around Andover the Tribunal decided that the market rent for the subject property if let today in a condition that was usual for such an open market letting would be £825 per month. This figure included an adjustment to reflect the lack of a fridge or washing machine.

19. The Tenant stated that she had now vacated the property and made no representation that the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship.

CHI/24UN/MNR/2022/0101

5

Determination 20. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy was £825 per month. 21. The Tribunal directed that the new rent of £825 per month should take effect from 18th September 2022 this being the date specified in the notice.

RIGHTS OF APPEAL

1. A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) must seek permission to do so by making written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional office which has been dealing with the case. Where possible you should send your application for permission to appeal by email to [EMAIL] as this will enable the First-tier Tribunal Regional office to deal with it more efficiently.

2. The application must arrive at the Tribunal within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision.

3. If the person wishing to appeal does not comply with the 28-day time limit, the person shall include with the application for permission to appeal a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28-day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.

4. The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

📊 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 fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment reflecting the property's condition.
  • The tenant can refer a landlord's rent increase notice to the Tribunal for a fair market rent determination.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment based on the property's condition and amenities.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment reflecting the need for repairs in the property.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The Tribunal dismissed the case where the requested rent adjustment was not supported by evidence of the property's condition or improvements.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the rent for an assured tenancy at £825 per month, rejecting the tenant's objection to the proposed increase.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was over the proposed rent increase from £775 to £825 per month for an assured tenancy in Andover.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided to set the rent at £825 per month, based on evidence of comparable properties in the area and the landlord's successful reletting of the property at the proposed rate.

Which laws or rules were applied?

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

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the evidence presented by the landlord showing that the property had been successfully relet at the proposed rent of £825 per month.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the tenant who brought the case, setting the rent at £825 per month as requested by the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, it means that they can challenge a proposed rent increase under the Housing Act 1988, but the Tribunal may still set a higher rent if supported by evidence of comparable properties in the area.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence of comparable properties in the area and the landlord's successful reletting of the property at the proposed rate mattered in this decision.

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.