VadeLab
DismissedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £1,000 for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided to set the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1,000 per month, effective from May 1, 2023, after reviewing the landlord's notice of rent increase and the tenant's appeal.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy as determined by the Tribunal.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. If a landlord gives notice of a rent increase, the tenant can also apply to the tribunal to challenge the proposed new rent. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent for the property, considering the terms of the existing tenancy and disregarding certain factors such as improvements made by the tenant.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1,000 per month.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined the market rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £1,000 per month, effective from May 1, 2023, after considering the landlord's notice of rent increase and the tenant's appeal.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116

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 3 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME] Mr [RESPONDENT] Mr [RESPONDENT]

Landlord Ms [RESPONDENT] 8 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1000.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 01 May 2023

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

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 01 May 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

8. Description of premises 1 bedroom ground floor flat.

[NAME] of Decision 27 June 2023

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2023

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116 Property : [ADDRESS] BS3 4 BD

Applicant Tenant : Mr [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlord : [COUNSEL] : [NAME] of Application :

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

Tribunal Members : Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] Mr [NAME] of Inspection : None. Paper determination Date of Decision :

27th June 2023

DECISION

CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116

2 Summary of Decision 1. On 27th June 2023 the Tribunal determined a market rent of £1,000 per month to take effect from 1st May 2023.

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 3rd February 2023 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,000 per month in place of the existing rent of £910 per month to take effect from 1st May 2023. The notice complied with the legal requirements.

4. On 7th April 2023 the Tenant appealed to the Tribunal under Section 13(4) (a) of the Housing Act 1988.

5. The Tribunal does not consider it necessary and proportionate in cases of this nature to undertake inspections or hold Tribunal hearings unless either are specifically requested by either party or a particular point arises which merits such an inspection and/or hearing.

6. The Tribunal issued directions on 19th May 2023 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. The Tenant submitted papers by the specified date setting out his respective case. The papers 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 27th June 2023 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 ground floor flat within a modern purpose-built block of similar flats in an area of mixed-use properties within the centre of Bristol.

10. The accommodation includes a Hall, Living Room/Kitchen, Bathroom with WC and Bedroom. There is a designated parking space.

11. The Energy Performance Rating is ‘C’ and refers to double glazed windows and electric controlled heating. Submissions 12. The initial tenancy began on 1st May 2021 at a rent of £885 which was increased 12 months later to £910.

CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116

3 13. The Tenant’s submission states that there are partial blinds but no curtains, and that the floorings are carpet to the Bedroom with lino in the Bathroom and laminate flooring elsewhere. All white goods are provided.

14. The Tenant also refers to some black mould around the bath, minor issues relating to a sink plug and waste pipes which block from time to time requiring maintenance.

15. The Tenant also states that the bathroom does not have good ventilation and he provided helpful photographs which show the property to be in good order. One photograph shows clothes drying in the main living room which will likely cause condensation issues.

16. The Tenant provided details of similar properties for rent with asking rents between £850-£950 per month and suggests that the rent for the property should be between £850 and £910 per month. He has paid £910 per month for the last 12 months. 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 sitting tenant; (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 [NAME], or (ii) was carried out pursuant to an obligation to his [NAME] being an obligation which did not relate to the specific improvement

CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116

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 joint tenants, 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 17. 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.

18. 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 Tenant are not relevant to this issue.

19. Having carefully considered the representations from the parties and associated correspondence and using its own judgement and knowledge of rental values in Bristol the Tribunal decided that the market rent for the subject property, with a parking space, if let today in a condition that was usual for such an open market letting would be £1,000 per month.

20. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship. Determination 21. 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 £1,000 per month.

CHI/00HB/MNR/2023/0116

5 22. The Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,000 per month should take effect from 1st May 2023, 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 condition of the property is taken into account when determining the fair market rent.
  • Improvements made by the tenant are considered in setting the fair market rent.
  • The First-tier Tribunal determines the fair market rent based on written representations without a hearing.
  • Local rental trends are considered in setting the fair market rent.
  • Similar properties' conditions and open market values are used to determine the fair market rent.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The case was dismissed without considering additional factors such as property condition or improvements made by the tenant.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The market rent for an assured periodic tenancy was set at £1,000 per month.

Who was involved?

The landlord and the tenant were involved in the dispute over the rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the written representations and the legal requirements under the Housing Act 1988.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The tenant argued that the rent should be lower based on comparable properties in the area.

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

The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation may face a similar process to determine the market rent for their assured periodic tenancy.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs and details of similar properties for rent were important in the decision.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, a decision like this can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

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

It is always recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for a case like this.

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.