VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets New Rent for Assured Tenancy Based on Market Comparables

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal decided on a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy by comparing similar properties and considering the condition of the property. The new rent includes a service charge.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent for their assured periodic tenancy, adjusted for the property's condition.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancymarket rent comparables

Provisions

📖 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 are paying. The tribunal will then decide a fair market rent for the property, considering factors like the property's condition and comparing it to similar properties in the open market. The decision will be for a periodic tenancy with the same terms as the original tenancy, except for the rent amount.

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 comparables and the property's condition.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal determined a new rent for an assured periodic tenancy based on market comparables and the property's condition, taking into account ongoing maintenance issues.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00BG/MNR/2023/0394

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 215, 122 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tribunal Judge H [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT] [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 1727.82 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 12 July 2023

*3. The amount included for services is/is

negligible/not applicable £68.53 Per month

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 12 July 2021

5. Length of the term or rental period 12 months

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord responsible as per section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Tenant responsible for minor repairs to the interior and keeping it clean and in good condition.

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord White goods only

8. Description of premises Second floor flat comprising open plan kitchen and living room, one double and two single bedrooms, a bathroom and a balcony.

Chairman Judge H Lumby Date of Decision 21 February 2024

© CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case reference : LON/00BG/MNR/2023/0394 Property : 215, 122 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] Tenant : Ms [APPELLANT] [NAME] Landlord : [COMPANY] of objection : 28 March 2023 Type of [NAME] : Determination of Market Rent under sections 13 and 14 of the Housing Act 1988 Tribunal members : Judge H. [NAME] : 10 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Date of decision : 21 February 2024

WRITTEN REASONS

2 Decisions of the tribunal The tribunal determines a rent of £1,727.82 per calendar month with effect from 12 July 2023, to include £68.53 per calendar month for services. Written reasons Background 1. On 31 May 2023 the Landlord served a notice under section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,727.82 per calendar month (including £68.53 per calendar month for services) in place of the existing rent of £1,659.29 per calendar month (including £60.60 per calendar month for services) to take effect from 12 July 2023. This notice took the place of an earlier notice, with the effect that the proposed increase was postponed.

2. On 28 March 2023 under section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s previous notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent.

3. The Tribunal did not inspect the Property as neither party requested an inspection and the Tribunal considered that it could make its determination without seeing the Property, based on the parties’ submissions.

4. The Tribunal has issued its notice of determination today. These are the reasons for its determination. Property 5. The Property comprises a second floor flat, comprising an open plan kitchen and living room, one double and two single bedrooms, a bathroom and a balcony. Central heating, double glazing and white goods are provided by the Landlord, together with carpets and some curtains. The Property does not come with parking or any external space other than the balcony.

6. The Tenant has raised some issues with the condition of the Property during her occupancy, citing for example issues with toilets, the oven, the patio door and a leaking boiler. She states that some issues remain unresolved. The Tribunal has taken account of the fact that there are issues with the condition ongoing in reaching its determination.

7. The Property has been let to the Tenant pursuant to an assured periodic tenancy. This began on 12 July 2021 and the Tenant pays an

3 Intermediate Rent, set at 80% of the open market rent. There is no mechanism in the lease for fixed or upward only rent increases.

8. The Landlord also provides services as part of the rent, with an identified element payable for this. The current rent is £1,659.29 per calendar month, of which £60.60 is in respect of those services.

9. The Landlord’s responsibility for repair largely reflects the duties imposed on landlords by section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The Tenant is responsible for minor repairs to the interior and keeping it clean and in good condition. Comparables 10. The Tenant provided a number of comparables as part of her submissions to the Tribunal. After deducting 20% to give Intermediate Rents, these show rents ranging from £1600 to £1680 per calendar month. None of these include a services element.

11. The Tribunal considered a number of comparables in the close vicinity of the Property. These had all been let with the information relied upon all freely available on the internet. The Tribunal had no private knowledge which it took into account in reaching its determination. These showed a higher market rent than the comparables provided by the Tenant. Determination and Valuation 12. The Tribunal accepts that the comparables offered by the Tenant provide a useful indication of market rent. A discount is required from the comparables found by the Tribunal to reflect the Property’s condition. Its conclusion is that the Intermediate Rent of the Property (ie after discounting the market rent by 20% and ignoring services) is around £1,660 per calendar month. Decision 13. 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 [NAME] under an assured tenancy was around £1,660 per calendar month. To this has to be added the services charge of £68.53 per calendar month. This gives a figure of £1728.53 per calendar month.

14. The Landlord has put forward a proposed rent of £1,727.82 per calendar month (comprising a rental figure of £1,659.29 and services of £68.53). Given that this reflects the Tribunal’s own assessment, it accepts the Landlord’s figure. The Tribunal therefore determines that the rent

4 should be set at £1,727.82 per calendar month (comprising a rental figure of £1,659.29 and services of £68.53).

15. The Tribunal directed that the new rent of £1,727.82 per calendar month to take effect on 12 July 2023. The Tribunal was satisfied that a starting date of that specified in the Landlord’s notice would not cause the Tenant undue hardship and therefore should be accepted. Name: Tribunal Judge Lumby Date: 21 February 2024

5

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 a party wishes to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), then a written [NAME] for permission must be made to the First-tier Tribunal at the [NAME] which has been dealing with the case. The [NAME] for permission to appeal must arrive at the [NAME] within 28 days after the tribunal sends written reasons for the decision to the [NAME]. If the [NAME] is not made within the 28-day time limit, such [NAME] 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 [NAME] for permission to appeal to proceed, despite not being within the time limit. The [NAME] 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 [NAME] the [NAME] is seeking. If the tribunal refuses to grant permission to appeal, a further [NAME] for permission may be made to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber).

📊 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 Tribunal accepted the landlord's proposed rent figure because it closely matched the Tribunal's own assessment of the market rent.
  • The Tribunal determined the market rent by considering comparables from the close vicinity of the property, which were freely available online.
  • The Tribunal applied a discount to the market rent comparables to account for ongoing issues with the property's condition.
  • The Tribunal found that the proposed new rent's effective date would not cause the tenant undue hardship.
  • The Tribunal determined the rent without an inspection because neither party requested one and the Tribunal felt it had enough information.

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 for an assured periodic tenancy based on market comparables and the property's condition.

Who was involved?

The decision involved a tenant and a landlord.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on market comparables and the property's condition, taking into account ongoing maintenance issues.

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 similar properties and the condition of the property.

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 market comparables and the condition of their property when disputing rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Market comparables and evidence of the property's condition mattered.

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 recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent 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.