Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Shared Ownership Property at £280.95
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal confirmed a fair a person of £280.95 per calendar month for a shared ownership property, including £3.81 for services, rejecting the landlord's objections and confirming the a person Officer's assessment.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair a person that reflects the value of services provided to the tenant, excluding costs that benefit the landlord.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal confirmed a fair a person of £280.95 per calendar month for a shared ownership property, including £3.81 for services.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal confirmed a fair rent of £280.95 per calendar month for a shared ownership property, including £3.81 for services, rejecting the landlord's objections and confirming the Rent Officer's assessment.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
FR24 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/29UH/F77/2019/0047
Notice of the Tribunal [NAME] 1977 Schedule 11
Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 4 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord Orbit
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The fair [NAME] is £280.95 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)
2. The effective date is 18 November 2019
3. The amount for services is £3.81 Per Calendar Month
4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for [NAME] allowance is
n/a Per n/a
not applicable
5. The [NAME] is not to be registered as variable.
6. The capping provisions of the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999 apply (please see calculation overleaf).
7. Details (other than [NAME]) where different from [NAME] entry
8. For information only:
(a) The fair [NAME] to be registered is not limited by the [NAME] ([NAME]) Order 1999, because it is below the maximum fair [NAME] of £291.00 per calendar month including £3.81 per calendar month for services prescribed by the Order.
[NAME] of decision 18 November 2019
FR24 [NAME] FIGURE X 291.0
PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE Y 275.3
X 291.0 Minus Y 275.3 = (A) 15.7
(A) 15.7 Divided by Y 275.3 = (B) 0.05703
First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999 NO
If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C)
If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.10703
Last registered [NAME]* £262.81 Multiplied by (C) = 290.94 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)
Rounded up to nearest 50p = £291.00
Variable service charge NO If YES add amount for services
[NAME] = £291.00 Per Calendar Month
Explanatory Note
1. The calculation of the maximum fair [NAME], in accordance with the formula contained in the Order, is set out above.
2. In summary, the formula provides for the maximum fair [NAME] to be calculated by:
(a) increasing the previous registered [NAME] by the percentage change in the retail price index (the RPI) since the date of that earlier registration and
(b) adding a further 7.5% (if the present application was the first since 1 February 1999) or 5% (if it is a second or subsequent application since that date).
A 7.5% increase is represented, in the calculation set out above, by the addition of 1.075 to (B) and an increase of 5% is represented by the addition of 1.05 to (B).
The result is rounded up to the nearest 50 pence.
3. For the purposes of the calculation the latest RPI figure (x) is that published in the calendar month immediately before the month in which the Tribunal’s fair [NAME] determination was made.
4. The process differs where the tenancy agreement contains a variable service charge and the [NAME] is to be registered as variable under section 71(4) of the [NAME] 1977. In such a case the variable service charge is removed before applying the formula. When the amount determined by the application of the formula is ascertained the service charge is then added to that sum in order to produce the maximum fair [NAME].
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CHI/29UH/F77/2019/0047 Property : 4 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Type of Application : Decision in relation to [NAME] 1977 Date of Decision : 18 November 2019
Reasons for the decision
Background
1. On 9 July 2019 the landlord made an application to register the [NAME] of the property at £309.89 per month inclusive of £12.94 per month for services.
2. The [NAME] currently being charged was indicated to be £232.19 per month.
3. On 10 September 2019 the [NAME] registered a [NAME] of £280.95 per calendar month inclusive of £3.81 per month for services. This being a shared ownership property the [NAME] was noted as £538.11 per calendar month (50% ownership)
4. The landlord objected and the matter was referred to the First Tier Tribunal, Property Chamber.
2 5. The Tribunal made standard directions on 15 October 2019 requiring the landlord to send to the tenant and to the tribunal a written statement as to their assessment of the [NAME] and for the tenant to respond.
6. The Tribunal received a copy of the landlord’s statement sent to the tenant which indicated that the [NAME] to be charged from 1 November 2019 would be £233.63 and that the reason for the appeal was that the [NAME] had registered the service charge significantly lower than had been applied for.
7. In support of their objection the landlord provided a Budget Statement for 2018/19 with the following amounts shown as the tenant’s contribution;
Grounds maintenance
£45.72
Building Insurance £68.16 Management fee £28.80 Sinking Funds
£12.60 Property specific
£109.56 Annual Service Charge
£155.28 Monthly Service Charge
£12.94
8. On receipt of these submissions a procedural judge reviewed the file and in view of the limited scope of the appeal decided that the matter could be determined without an inspection following which both parties were notified that the inspection would not now take place.
9. This determination is therefore made on the papers received from the [NAME] and the landlord’s submission.
10. As it was not clear how the [NAME] had calculated the shared equity proportion the Tribunal sought clarification from the [NAME] who provided the following calculation.
[NAME]
£680 per calendar month Less; Insurance £5.68 Management £2.40 Services
£3.81 Adjustments
£11.89 Less Repair liability
£130.00 [NAME]
£538.11 50% Equity
£269.06 Add back adjustments £11.89 [NAME] to be registered £280.95
3 The law
11. When determining a fair [NAME] the Tribunal, in accordance with the [NAME] 1977, section 70, must have regard to all the circumstances including the age, location and state of repair of the property. It must also disregard the effect of (a) any relevant tenant's improvements and (b) the effect of any disrepair or other defect attributable to the tenant or any predecessor in title under the regulated tenancy, on the rental value of the property. Section 72A requires the [NAME] to note their opinion of the amount of [NAME] (if any) attributable to the provision of services to the tenant “to assist authorities to give effect to the housing benefit scheme”
Decision
12. In determining this objection, the Tribunal have solely addressed the grounds of the objection namely the amount of service charge registered.
13. Whilst both the [NAME] and the Tribunal are required to provide a sum for “services”, as it is included in the overall [NAME] assessed and therefore not payable in addition to that [NAME] its level may be considered somewhat academic.
14. In this instance it is clear that the [NAME] has allowed the Grounds Maintenance Charge whereas the charges for Insurance, Management and Sinking Fund have been excluded.
15. The Tribunal agrees with this approach. The amount noted for services should reflect their value to the tenant which may or may not be the same as the cost to the landlord. In this case clearly the tenant receives the benefit of grounds maintenance and as such this charge may be properly noted as included in the [NAME]. However, the costs of insurance, management and sinking fund cannot be so classified as the benefit received is to the landlord not the tenant.
16. This “cost of ownership” will no doubt be reflected by the landlord when considering what [NAME] to charge to secure his required return on capital invested and may therefore be included in the overall [NAME].
17. The Tribunal therefore determines that the amount of service to be registered as included within the [NAME] is £3.81 per calendar month.
18. In the absence of a challenge to the [NAME]’s assessment of the overall [NAME] to be registered the Tribunal accepts that the calculation set out at paragraph 10 has been properly applied and confirms that the uncapped [NAME] is £280.95 per calendar month inclusive of £3.81 per calendar month for services.
4 19. As this amount is below the [NAME] calculated in accordance with the [NAME] details of which are shown on the rear of the Decision Notice no further adjustment is required and we determine that the sum of £280.95 per calendar month inclusive of £3.81 per calendar month for services is registered as the fair [NAME] with effect from today’s date.
D [NAME] 18 November 2019
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. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent Under Rent Act 1977
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Maximum Fair Rent Under Rent Act 1977
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Fair Rent Determination for Liverpool Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent for Property in London
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Fair Rent Below Maximum Limit Under Rent Act 1977
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Fair Rent at £241.50 Per Week
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal sets fair rent at £2678.40 per quarter for Ruislip prop…
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Maximum Fair Rent for Tenant Under Rent Act 1977
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Tenancy Agreement
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent for Rural Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Rent of £255 Per Week
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 fair rent was determined to be £280.95 per calendar month, including £3.81 for services.
- The amount for services should reflect their value to the tenant.
- Grounds maintenance charges were properly included in the service charge because the tenant benefits from them.
- The calculation of the overall rent by the Rent Officer was accepted as properly applied because it was not challenged.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It confirmed a fair rent of £280.95 per calendar month for a shared ownership property, including £3.81 for services.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the tenant, agreeing with the Rent Officer's assessment that the fair rent should be £280.95 per calendar month, including £3.81 for services.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Rent Act 1977, specifically sections 70 and 72A, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was whether the service charge should include costs that benefit the landlord.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that the service charge reflects the value of services provided to the tenant, excluding costs that benefit the landlord.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The Budget Statement provided by the landlord and the calculations made by the Rent Officer were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) within 28 days of receiving the written reasons for the decision.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving fair rents.
