VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Fair Rent of £1,025 for Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on a fair rent of £1,025 per month for a property, taking into account the property's condition and the tenant's responsibilities.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent determination that reflects the open market rent adjusted for specific conditions of the tenancy.

Topics

tenancy disputesfair rent determination

Provisions

Rent Act 1977Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a fair rent of £1,025 per calendar month for a property, effective from 8th October 2024.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a fair rent of £1,025 per calendar month for a property, effective from 8th October 2024, after considering comparable evidence and the property's condition.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

FR27 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/23UC/F77/2024/0502

Notice of the Tribunal Decision

Rent Act 1977 Schedule 11

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 51 Down Ampney Cirencester Gloucestershire [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord [NAME] ([COMPANY]) [APPELLANT]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The fair rent is £1025.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3&4)

2. The effective date is 8 October 2024

3. The amount for services is n/a Per n/a

not applicable

4. The amount for fuel charges (excluding heating and lighting of common parts) not counting for rent allowance is

n/a Per n/a

not applicable

5. The rent is not to be registered as variable.

6. The capping provisions of the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 apply (please see calculation overleaf).

7. Details (other than rent) where different from Rent Register entry

8. For information only:

The fair rent to be registered is not limited by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999, because it is the same below the maximum fair rent of £1121.00 per Calendar Month prescribed by the Order.

[NAME] of decision 8 October 2024

FR27 MAXIMUM FAIR RENT CALCULATION

LATEST RPI FIGURE X 389.90

PREVIOUS RPI FIGURE July 2022 Y 343.20

X 389.90 Minus Y 343.20 = (A) 46.70

(A) 46.70 Divided by Y 343.20 = (B) 0.1361

First application for re-registration since 1 February 1999? NO

If yes (B) plus 1.075 = (C) n/a

If no (B) plus 1.05 = (C) 1.1861

Last registered rent* £945.00 Multiplied by (C) = £1120.86 *(exclusive of any variable service charge)

Rounded up to nearest 50p = £1121.00

Variable service charge? NO If YES add amount for services n/a

MAXIMUM FAIR RENT = £1121.00 Per Calendar Month

Explanatory Note

1. The calculation of the maximum fair rent, in accordance with the formula contained in the Order, is set out above.

2. In summary, the formula provides for the maximum fair rent to be calculated by:

(a) increasing the previous registered rent 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 rent determination was made.

4. The process differs where the tenancy agreement contains a variable service charge and the rent is to be registered as variable under section 71(4) of the Rent Act 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 rent.

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/23UC/F77/2024/0502 Property : 51 Down Ampney Cirencester Gloucestershire [POSTCODE] Tenant : [NAME] [COUNSEL] :

None

Landlord : [COMPANY] : [COMPANY] of Application :

Section 70 Rent Act 1977 (“the Act”) Determination by the First-Tier Tribunal of the fair rent of a property following an objection to the rent registered by the Rent Officer.

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] J [NAME] of Objection : 17th July 2024 Date of Summary Reasons :

8th October 2024

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,025 per calendar month with effect from 8th October 2024

HAV/23UC/F77/2024/0502

2 SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 10th May 2024 the Landlord’s Agent applied to the Rent Officer for the registration of a new rent for the property in accordance with Section 70 of the Rent Act 1977.

2. The rent was previously registered at £945 per calendar month on 8th July 2022 following a determination by the Rent Officer.

3. On 27th June 2024 the Rent Officer registered a new rent of £985.50 per calendar month for the property to take effect from the 4th August 2024.

4. On 17th July 2024 the Landlord’s Agent objected to this new rent and the matter was referred to the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber (Residential Property), formerly a Rent Assessment Committee. Inspection 5. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence

6. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant and the Landlord’s Agent. Determination and Valuation 7. Having consideration to the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of our own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenable condition would be £1,600 per calendar month.

8. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets and curtains/blinds to all be provided by the Landlord.

9. In this case the property is not let in such condition or with white goods, carpets and curtains all supplied, so some adjustments to the ‘open market rent’ are necessary. In addition, some further adjustments are made to reflect the age of the kitchen and bathroom fittings, tenant’s liability for internal repair and general needs of repair.

10. The full valuation is shown below: Full open market rent in good condition £1,600 Less deductions for:-

HAV/23UC/F77/2024/0502

3 Tenant’s responsibility for internal repair

£60 Tenant’s provision of white goods

£30 Tenant’s provision of carpets

£40 Tenant’s provision of curtains

£20 Dated, although serviceable kitchen

£75 Dated bathroom and detached cistern

£50 General wants of repair including external woodwork, internal damp and ingress of rain

£300

____

Total deduction per month

£575 TOTAL RENT PAYABLE PER MONTH

£1,025

11. Having made the adjustments indicated above the Fair Rent determined by the Tribunal for the purpose of section 70 of the Rent Act 1977 was accordingly £1,025 per calendar month.

12. The Section 70 Fair Rent determined by the Tribunal is below or equal to the maximum fair rent of £1,121 per month permitted by the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 details of which are shown on the rear of the Decision Notice and accordingly we determine that the limit set by the Order does not apply in this case.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Ay request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

📊 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 tribunal determined the fair rent to be £1,025 per calendar month.
  • The open market rent for the property in good condition was assessed at £1,600 per month.
  • A deduction of £60 was made for the tenant's responsibility for internal repairs.
  • A deduction of £30 was made because the tenant provided white goods.
  • A deduction of £300 was made for general wants of repair, including external woodwork and damp.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It decided on a fair rent of £1,025 per month for a property.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court considered comparable evidence and the property's condition to determine the fair rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Rent Act 1977 and the Rent Acts (Maximum Fair Rent) Order 1999 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the adjustment of the open market rent based on the property's condition and the tenant's responsibilities.

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 can expect their fair rent to be determined based on comparable evidence and the specific conditions of their tenancy.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence and information about the property's condition were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed through the appropriate legal channels.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

Yes, it is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving fair rent determinations.

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.