VadeLab
First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets New Market Rent for Property Based on Comparable Evidence

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new monthly rent of £1200 for a property after considering evidence from the landlord. This decision was based on similar properties in the area.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on comparable properties in the area.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.13

This section of the Housing Act 1988 applies to certain types of assured periodic tenancies, excluding those that are considered relevant low-cost tenancies. It outlines the process for landlords to propose increases in rent through a notice in a prescribed form. The notice must specify a new rent that would take effect at the start of a new period of the tenancy, which must begin at least two months after the notice is served. There are additional conditions regarding the timing of rent increases for different types of tenancies.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set a new market rent for a property based on comparable evidence.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a new market rent of £1200 per month for a property based on comparable evidence provided by the landlord. The decision took effect from 17 June 2025.

📚 Full judgment Official document

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

Case Reference

: BIR/00CN/MNR/2025/0742

Property : [ADDRESS] Heath Birmingham B10 OBE

Tenant

: [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [APPELLANT] of application : 5 June 2025

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

Tribunal Members : [NAME] & [NAME] of Decision : 31 October 2025

Date of Issue : 09 January 2026 _______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1200 per month with effect from 17 June 2025. ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

REASONS FOR THE DECISION Background

1. On 15 May 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1200 per month in place of the existing rent of £600 per month to take effect from 17 June 2025.

2. On 5 June 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.

Inspection

3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered the submissions and evidence provided by the parties and had regard to its own knowledge, expertise and online research.

Evidence

4. The Tribunal understands from the submissions and Reply Forms provided by the Landlord that the Property comprises a three-bed terrace house with a porch, two living rooms, kitchen, bathroom and toilet and private gardens and rear off-road parking. The Property also includes central heating, double glazing, carpets and curtains and all white goods.

5. The Landlord confirmed there were no outstanding items of disrepair.

6. The Tribunal considered the written submissions and rental evidence provided by the Landlord. No evidence was submitted by the Tenant.

7. The Landlord’s submitted details of 13 two, three and four bedroomed comparables ranging in rental value from £1100 to £1450 per month that were from similar areas and benefited from similar nearby amenities.

8. No evidence was submitted by the Tenant.

Determination and Valuation

9. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Landlord and of our own expert, knowledge of rental values in the area, we consider that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be in the region of £1200 per month. The Tribunal did not find it necessary to make any adjustments.

10. The full valuation is shown below:

3

Per Month

Market Rent

£1200

Say £1200

per month Decision

12. The Tribunal therefore determined that 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 was £1200 per month with effect from 17 June 2025.

Chairman: [NAME]: 31 October 2025

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.

4

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 28 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] & [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] 31 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME]

1. The rent is: £1200 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 17 June 2025

3. The amount included for services is - Per -

4. Date assured tenancy commenced Not Known 5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly - periodic 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None 8. Description of premises Three bed property with two living rooms, kitchen, bathroom, front and rear gardens and parking.

[NAME] of Decision 31 October 2025

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No.

BIR//00CN/MNR/2025/0699

📊 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 landlord provided details of 13 comparable properties with similar rental values and amenities.
  • The property was described as a three-bedroom terrace house with various features, including central heating and white goods.
  • The landlord confirmed that there were no outstanding disrepair issues at the property.
  • The Tribunal used its own expert knowledge of local rental values to determine the market rent.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant did not submit any evidence to support their case for a different market rent.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set a new market rent of £1200 per month for the property.

Who was involved?

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

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on evidence from the landlord, including comparable rental prices in the area.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The comparable evidence provided by the landlord was crucial in determining the new market rent.

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

The decision was against the tenant, who requested a lower rent.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should gather comparable evidence to support their case.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The comparable rental evidence provided by the landlord was critical.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law.

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

It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

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.