VadeLab
Allowed in PartFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Ground Floor Flat in Bognor Regis

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rental price for a flat in Bognor Regis after considering improvements made by the tenant and issues with the property's condition. The rent was set at £760 per month, effective from January 25th, 2026.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord's proposed rent increase must reflect the property's condition and any improvements made by the tenant.

Topics

tenancyrent control

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, allowing landlords to serve a notice proposing a new rent increase. The notice must specify a new period for the tenancy starting at least two months after the notice is served. If the rent has been previously increased, the next increase can only occur after a specific time frame, which varies depending on the type of tenancy.

Housing Act 1988 s.14

A tenant under an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the open-market rent, considering factors like the periods of the tenancy and the terms of the agreement. The tribunal disregards certain factors when determining the rent, such as increases due to improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to the tenant's non-compliance with tenancy terms.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the market rent for a ground floor flat in Bognor Regis, adjusting for tenant-provided fixtures and disrepair.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the market rent for a ground floor flat, adjusting for tenant-provided fixtures and disrepair issues. The decision reflects adjustments based on property condition.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed in Part

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

Case Reference HAV/45UC/MNR/2025/0846

[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

Tenant’s Representative Ms [COUNSEL]

Landlord J49 Limited

Landlord’s [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Landlord’s Representative

Date of Application 18 December 2025

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

Tribunal Members [NAME] – [NAME] Member

Date of Decision 5 March 2026

Rent Determined £760.00 per month (£175.38 per week)

Date the new rent takes effect 25 January 2026

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Background

1. On 2 December 2025, the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £551.82 per week in place of the existing rent of £630.32 per calendar month (pcm) (equating to £145.46 per week) to take effect from 25 January 2026.

2. On 18 December 2025, under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The assured tenancy commenced on 25 April 2024 for a term of 6 months. The rental period is monthly.

Allocation of Repairs between Landlord and Tenant.

4. As per the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985.

Services Charges or furniture provided by Landlord (other than carpets and curtain and white goods specified below) and the costs relating to the same.

5. No fixed service charge is included in the rent.

6. No furniture is provided by the Landlord.

Liability for Council Tax

7. The Tenant is responsible for the payment of Council Tax in respect of the Property. The rent determined is exclusive of Council Tax.

Any other terms of the tenancy taken into consideration in determining the rent.

8. None

Inspection/Hearing

9. The Tribunal carried out an inspection of the Property on 19 February 2026 in the presence of the Tenant and his representative, Ms [COUNSEL]. The Landlord was notified of the inspection but did not attend.

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

10. Neither party requested an oral hearing and nor did the Tribunal consider a hearing necessary. Accordingly, the Tribunal has considered the application on the basis of an inspection, the papers provided by the parties, and its own knowledge and specialist expertise.

The Property

11. The Property was found to be a ground floor flat forming part of a three-storey building, offering the following accommodation:

Hall, lounge, kitchen, one bedroom, and bathroom with full suite. The bathroom has a poor layout, with access to the bath severely restricted.

Outside: No parking. No garden.

12. The Property benefits from gas fired central heating to radiators and double glazing. An electric fire in the lounge is provided by the Tenant.

13. The Property is situated in a mixed residential and commercial area, within close proximity of local amenities, shopping facilities and the seafront. The Property fronts a busy road and is close to a junction, creating some noise disturbance. Local public transport links, including a railway and bus station are within walking distance.

14. The Tenant has maintained the Property internally to a high standard and has made improvements to his own tastes.

15. The exterior of the windows was noted to be in want of repair and redecoration.

Evidence

16. Both the Tenant and the Landlord returned the Tribunal’s Reply forms.

The Tenant

17. The Tenant made the following comments:

a) With the exception of the cooker and hob, the Tenant provided all white goods and curtains. In addition, the Tenant overlaid the tile floor coverings in the hall and kitchen with carpet.

b) The lounge and bedroom windows are in poor repair, with rotten wooden frames.

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

c) The kitchen units and bathroom fittings are satisfactory. The shower runs off the bath taps; there is no electric shower.

d) The Tenant has replaced light switches and fittings, door handles, kitchen cupboard doors and installed under counter kitchen lights, at his own expense.

e) No comparable rental evidence was submitted.

The Landlord

18. The Landlord made the following comments:

a) J49 became the landlord of the Property with effect from 1 December 2025. They are not aware of any material improvements to the Property since such date.

b) “Stock condition surveys have been procured and contractor mobilisation is underway this week; the outputs will inform a planned improvement programme across the stock. Any issues identified through inspection will be addressed via the landlord’s repairs and planned maintenance processes.”

c) Accommodation and provision of white goods are confirmed as per the Tenant’s statement.

d) The property has no double glazing.

e) No comparable rental evidence was submitted.

f) The Tribunal notes that the Landlord does not dispute the Tenant’s statement regarding the condition of the windows.

Determination and Valuation

19. Neither party submitted any comparable rental evidence.

20. Relying on its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal considers that the market rental of the subject Property modernised and in good order, and reflecting the poor bathroom layout, would be in the order of £815.00 pcm. This is the rent we would expect the property to let for in the open market if it was in the same general condition as comparable properties including having white goods, and curtains provided by the landlord.

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

21. From this level of rent, the Tribunal has made an adjustment in relation to the following:

a) Tenant’s provision of white goods. b) Tenant’s provision of curtains. c) Disrepair and lack of maintenance to windows.

The full valuation is shown below:

Starting Rent

£815.00 pcm Less a) Items given under a) above

£20.00 b) Items given under b) above

£10.00

c) Items given under c) above

£25.00 £55.00

Market rent

£760.00 pcm

Undue hardship

22. The new rent takes effect from the date specified in the Landlord’s Notice of Increase unless that would cause undue hardship to the tenant. In cases of undue hardship, the Tribunal has a discretion to fix a later starting date up to the date a Tribunal makes its determination.

23. The Tenant has not made any submissions concerning hardship.

24. The new rent will take effect from the date proposed by the Landlord in the Section 13 Notice, such being 25 January 2026.

Decision

25. The Tribunal determines the market rent at £760.00 per calendar month, equating to £175.38 per week, with effect from 25 January 2026.

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

APPEAL PROVISIONS If either party is dissatisfied with this decision, they may apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on any point of law arising from this Decision. Prior to making such an appeal, an application must be made, in writing, to this Tribunal for permission to appeal. Any such application must be made within 28 days of the issue of this statement of reasons (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013) stating the grounds upon which it is intended to rely in the appeal.

📊 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 rent increase reflects the property's condition.
  • Rent is adjusted based on local comparables.
  • Rent is set after considering ongoing issues affecting property use.
  • Rent is determined by a First-tier Tribunal based on the Housing Act 1988 sections 13 & 14.
  • Rent is set at a fair market rate based on the condition and location of the property.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal determined a new market rent for a flat based on its current condition and tenant improvements.

Who was involved?

A tenant and their landlord were involved in the dispute over rental price.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court inspected the property and considered evidence from both parties to determine a fair market rent.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Housing Act 1988 sections 13 and 14 were used to set the new rental price.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The condition of the property, including disrepair issues and tenant improvements, influenced the decision.

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

The decision was partially in favour of the tenant as it adjusted the proposed rent based on their contributions.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone facing a rental dispute should consider property condition and any improvements they've made when arguing for a fair rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of property condition, tenant improvements, and comparable rental prices were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Either party can appeal the decision to the Upper Tribunal on points of law within 28 days.

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

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such disputes.

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.