Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on a new rent for a tenant's assured periodic tenancy. They set the rent at £2050 per calendar month after considering the property's condition and comparing it to similar properties in the area.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a rent determination that reflects the open market value of the property, adjusted for its condition and amenities.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. This determination takes into account the property's condition, amenities, and the terms of the existing tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal set a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market conditions and the condition of the property.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined a new rent of £2050 pcm for an assured periodic tenancy, taking into account the property's condition, amenities, and comparable properties in the area.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AG/MNR/2024/00697
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 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[NAME]
Landlord [RESPONDENT] 151 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]
[APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 2050 Per pcm
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 December 2024
*3. The amount included for services is negligible nil Per Calendar month
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included n/a
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1 December 2024
6. Length of the term or rental period Calendar monthly periodic
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Per tenancy
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None
9. Description of premises Former early Edwardian Semi-detached home converted into several self contained flats. Building accommodation on 3 levels plus roof and any basement. Property is second floor accommodation 4 rooms, kitchen, 1 bathroom wc. Fair faced brick, tiled main double pitched hipped roof. On road permit parking. Basic kitchen and bathroom, white goods carpets curtains (tenants) no double glazing, minor disrepair. The Landlord is not obliged but may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of the figure shown at box 1.
[NAME] of Decision 28 January 2025
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2013
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : LON/00AG/MNR/2024/0697 Property : [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant: [redacted] : None Respondent : [redacted] Representative : None Type of Application : Section 13(4) Housing Act 1988 Tribunal Members :
[NAME] and venue of Hearing : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of Decision : 28 January 2025
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
1 The First Tier Tribunal received an application dated 14 October 2024 from the [APPELLANT] of the Property, regarding a notice of increase of rent served by the landlord, under S.13 of the Housing Act 1988 (the Act).
2 The notice, dated 4 October 2024, proposed a new rent of £2050 per calendar month, with effect from and including 1 December 2024. The passing rent was said to be £1811.31 per calendar month.
2 3 The tenancy is an assured periodic monthly tenancy. A copy of the last tenancy agreement was not provided. The tenancy was acquired by the [APPELLANT] by succession.
4 Directions were issued 5 December 2024. Neither party requested a hearing. The Tribunal does not routinely carry out inspections.
5 The Tribunal received an initial application. The Tribunal sent out its standard Reply Form to both landlord and [APPELLANT].
6 The Tribunal carefully considered and noted such representations as it received from both parties regarding the location layout size and condition of the Property and other available and let comparable properties in the location.
Property
7 The Property is a converted self contained flat created from an original large Edwardian semi-detached house in an established residential area of South Hampstead, LB Camden. Accommodation appears to be on up to 5 levels, 3, plus any basement and roof. The Property is a second floor flat with 4 rooms, kitchen bathroom wc. The building has fair faced brick external walls and tiled slated double hipped main roof over. There is no double glazing. There is full central heating.
8 The flat was let without curtains, carpets or other floor finishes or white goods. The Property was assumed to have a functional but basic kitchen and one bathroom. The flat has a number of minor items of disrepair to wall finishes, from damp and to window cords and cill.
9 The Tribunal had regard to Google Streetview in the road. (data capture June 2022). The [APPELLANT] helpfully provided some 6No. photographs of the defects within the Property and details of a 3 room converted self contained flat nearby available around £2000 pcm. The landlord referred the Tribunal to details of similar flats with 4 rooms, some with 2 bathrooms ranging to let from £2847 pcm to £4745 pcm. There was quite a wide range in rents sought.
Law
10 In accordance with the terms of S14 of the Housing Act 1988 we are required to determine the rent at which we consider the property might reasonably be expected to let in the open market, by a willing landlord, under an assured tenancy, on the same terms as the actual tenancy; ignoring any increase in value attributable to [APPELLANT]’s improvements and any decrease in value due to the [APPELLANT]’s failure to comply with any terms of the tenancy. Thus the Property falls to be valued as it stands; but assuming that the Property to be in a reasonable internal decorative condition.
3 Decision
11 Based on the Tribunal’s own general knowledge of market rent levels in South Hampstead, LB Camden it determines that the subject Property would let on a normal Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) terms, for £3,000 per calendar month, fully fitted and in good order. However the Tribunal makes a substantial deduction of £950 pcm for the lack of provision by the landlord of curtains, carpets, white goods, double glazing, a second bathroom, with functional but basic kitchen and bathroom provision and a small amount of disrepair. The market rent is therefore determined at £2,050 pcm.
12 The new rent will take effect from and including 1 December 2024, the effective start date given in the landlord’s Notice. The Landlord is not obliged but, may charge a rent up to but, not in excess of, the figure shown at box 1 on the FORM, being £2050 pcm.
Name: N. [NAME]: 28 January 2025
Rights of appeal
By rule 36(2) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, the tribunal is required to notify the parties about any right of appeal they may have.
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 decision to the person making the application (regulation 52 (2) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rule 2013).
If the application is not made within the 28-day time limit, such application must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for not complying with the 28 day time limit; the tribunal will then look at such reason(s) and decide whether to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit.
The application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the tribunal to which it relates (i.e., give the date, the property, and the case number), state the grounds of appeal and state the result the party making the application is seeking.
4 If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further application for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tenant Wins Reduced Rent Adjustment Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Shorthold Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy - First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Open Market Rent for Assured Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Reduced for Tenant Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy Based on Market Conditions
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets New Rent for Property Based on Market Value
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 should reflect the open market value of the property.
- Adjustments should be made for the property's condition.
- Consideration of the property's amenities can influence the rent.
- Rent determinations should take into account the property's condition and market comparables.
- Lease terms and conditions should be considered in determining the 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 rent of £2050 per calendar month for an assured periodic tenancy.
Who was involved?
The tenant and the landlord were involved.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided based on the open market value of the property, adjusted for its condition and amenities.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the comparison of the property's condition and amenities with those of similar properties in the area.
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 consider the condition and amenities of their property when negotiating rent with their landlord.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs of the property and details of comparable properties were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, either party can apply for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination.
