AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·02 December 2024

Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy, setting the monthly rent at £1,096 after considering the property's condition and comparable evidence.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent that reflects the open market value adjusted for the property's deficiencies.

Topics

tenancy disputesmarket rent determinations

Provisions

Housing Act 1988 s.14

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under this rule, a tenant with an assured tenancy can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent they pay. However, the application cannot be made if the rent is based on a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy. Additionally, a tenant can also challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). When determining the rent, the tribunal considers what a willing landlord would charge for the property in the open market, taking into account the periodic nature of the tenancy and excluding certain factors like improvements made by the tenant or reductions due to non-compliance.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on comparable evidence and the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a new rent of £1,096 per month for an assured periodic tenancy, adjusting the open market value for the property's deficiencies.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. TR/LON/00AG/MDR/2024/0007

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]

Judge Bernadette MacQueen Kevin Ridgeway, MRICS

Landlord [COMPANY] 45 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 1,096 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 5 April 2024

3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 5 March 2021

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord External Repairs and as per tenancy agreement.

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord See Summary Reasons

8. Description of premises See Summary Reasons

Chairman Judge Bernadette MacQueen Date of Decision 6 September 2024

Case Reference

: LON/00AG/MDR/2024/0007

Property : [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant

: [APPELLANT]

Landlord : [COMPANY] of Objection : 8 April 2024

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

Tribunal

: Judge Bernadette MacQueen

Kevin Ridgeway, MRICS

Date of Decision : 6 September 2024

Date of Summary Reasons

: 9 September 2024

_______________________________________________

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £1,096 per calendar month with effect from 5 April 2024. ____________________________________

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

SUMMARY REASONS

Background

1. On 27 February 2024 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,136 per month in place of the existing rent of £1,081 per month to take effect from 5 April 2024.

2. By application received by the Tribunal on 8 April 2024, made 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 and Hearing

3. At the request of the Tenant, [APPELLANT], the Tribunal held a short oral hearing and also carried out an inspection of the Property on 6 September 2024, accompanied by the Tenant, [APPELLANT].

4. The Landlord did not provide any written submissions to the Tribunal or attend the hearing or inspection.

Evidence

5. The Tribunal considered the written submissions provided by the Tenant, [APPELLANT]. This included the completed Reply form, as well as details of similar properties [NAME] asked the Tribunal to consider. Additionally, the Tribunal considered the oral submissions made at the hearing, as well as its inspection of the Property.

Determination and Valuation

6. The Property was a one-bedroom flat in a purpose built four storey block of flats. The Property did not have central hearing but did have double glazing, provided by the Landlord. White goods were also provided by the Landlord.

7. Having considered the comparable evidence provided by the Tenant, [APPELLANT] and the Tribunal’s own expert knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal considered that the Open Market Value (OMV) for a one-bedroom flat in this location would be £1,700 per calendar month. The Tribunal then adjusted this to £1,370 to reflect the following:

• Lack of storage, • no proper central heating, • poor bathroom and problems with the water pressure.

8. In their letter dated 27 February 2024, [COMPANY] specified that they assessed rent by using the lower of three different assessments namely:

i. Maximum Rent (relevant percentage of current market rent (80%)) ii. A maximum percentage increase (set at 9.4%) iii. The London Living Rent (£1,136)

9. As one of their three rent criteria set their rent at 80% of the OMV, this reduced the rent to £1,096. This was the lowest of the three criteria.

Decision

1o. The Tribunal therefore determined that the rent at which the Property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy as £1,700 per calendar month.

12. The Tribunal directed the new rent of £1,096 per calendar month to take effect from 5 April 2024.

Judge Bernadette MacQueen

Date: 9 September 2024

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. Any 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:

Allowed11 cases

Allowed in Part1 case

First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent at £2,125 Monthly

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 tenant is entitled to a rent that reflects the open market value.
The tenant is entitled to a reduced rent if the property's condition significantly affects its market value.
The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment if the property is not in good tenantable condition.
The tenant is entitled to a rent adjustment based on the condition of the property and their repair obligations under the tenancy agreement.
The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent adjustment based on the condition and amenities 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 set a new rent of £1,096 per month for an assured periodic tenancy.

Who was involved?

The tenant requested a review of the landlord's proposed rent increase.

How did the court decide, and why?

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

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that the property's deficiencies should reduce the open market value was crucial.

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 might be able to challenge a proposed rent increase based on the property's condition.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Written submissions, oral statements, and an inspection of the property were important.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed according to the appeal provisions outlined in the judgment.

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.