Tribunal Sets Rent at £1175 Per Month Based on Property Condition
📌 In brief
The First-tier Tribunal decided on the rent for a property based on its condition and compared it to similar properties in the area. They set the rent at £1175 per month from May 1, 2025.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on the condition of the property and comparable rents in the area.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant with an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on the condition of the property and comparable rents in the area.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the rent for a property based on its condition and comparable properties in the area.
📜 Headnote Official document
The First-tier Tribunal determined the rent for a property based on its condition and comparable rents in the area, setting the rent at £1175 per month from 1 May 2025.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] No. FR/LON/OOBB/MNR/2025/0810
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 4 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
[NAME] C Piarroux JP
Landlord [RESPONDENT] [NAME]
4 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant [APPELLANT] [NAME]
1. The rent is: £ 1175.00 Per Calendar month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 May 2025
*3. The amount included for services is/is
negligible/not applicable n/a Per n/a
*4. Service charges are variable and are not included
5. Date assured tenancy commenced 1 May 2009
6. Length of the term or rental period
7. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord external structural
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Assorted furniture inc white goods
9. Description of premises Purpose built late Victorian or early Edwardian flat within two storey solid walled building 2beds living room/kitchen , bathroom, garden
[NAME] of Decision 22 October 2025
1
Case Reference
: FR/LON/OOBB/MNR/2025/0810
Property : 4 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
Tenant
: [APPELLANT] [NAME]
Landlord : [APPELLANT] [NAME] of Objection : 25 April 2025
Type of Application : Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988
Tribunal
: [NAME] C Piarroux JP
Date of Full Reasons : 22 October 2025
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025
_______________________________________________
DECISION
The Tribunal determines under section 13 Housing Act 1988 £1175 per month from 1 May 2025. ____________________________________
Full REASONS
FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)
2 Background
1. On 26 March 2025 the Landlord served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1600.00 per month in place of the existing rent of £1175.00 per month to take effect from 1 May 2025.
2. An application dated 25 April 2025 was 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.
3. Directions were issued to the parties on 28 July 2025.
Inspection
4. The Tribunal did inspect the property after the hearing and found the property is a purpose built flat within a 1900s terrace each flat in the terrace has its own front door. The two-storey red brick terrace is within an area comprising mainly blocks of flats.
5. The front door to the flat is wood and over the years, its fit with the door frame has deteriorated, and the door has gaps around it causing draughts; the door itself has cracking. The front door leads to a hallway that has laminate flooring, which is in a tired condition. Off the hallway on the right is the first room, this has a bay window which is draughty and there is evidence of leaking. The floor is carpeted with a thin carpet placed on wooden floorboards. The tenant has placed an additional carpet on the floor to reduce draughts. There is evidence of black mould in the room, which it is said means the room has restricted use. There is an old single radiator in the room.
6. Further along the hallway is a second bedroom, this contains bunk beds. The window in the room overlooks the outside passageway to the garden; the window is draughty. There is an old double radiator in this room. The hallway then opens to a room which is partially used as a living room, and at the back, there is a galley kitchen. The kitchen is rudimentary and in tired condition. There is black mould present on the ceiling. Through the door at the end of this room is the bathroom. There are several internal doors which are ill-fitting. The external door to the garden is particularly difficult to shut or open.
7. The guttering to the exterior appears incomplete, and there is evidence of water staining on the exterior of the property.
8. The garden is in very poor condition, There is a passageway which runs behind the terrace to the road beyond. There are no security measures to prevent access of intruders, and the fence between this and the neighbouring property was broken
Hearing
9. The Applicant [APPELLANT] [NAME] represented himself. There was no representation from the Respondent. The tribunal had reference to The Tribunal Procedure (First- tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013 and Practice Directions Rules in
3 particular Rule 34 which covers whether a hearing should continue in the absence of a party. The tribunal considered it was in the interests of justice to carry on the hearing and where satisfied the Respondent had been properly notified of the hearing.
Submissions
Applicant Tenant
10. The application was accompanied by a Notice of Increase and a copy of the tenancy. The tenancy commenced on 1 November 2017 at a rent of £1175.00 for 12 months.
11. The applicant tenant's submissions included a series of photographs showing black mould on the ceiling, door, black mould at floor /wall level, around windows.
12. A copy of a “Notice by Local Authority Requiring Execution of Works of Drainage etc in Existing Buildings” dated 22 May 2024.
13. A copy of a letter titled “Housing Act 2004, Section 12 Improvement Notice”, from London Borough of Newham which itemised issues of “excess cold” and “entry by intruders”.
14. A complete Reply Form detailing the size of the accommodation. That is a flat comprising one living room, one kitchen, two bedrooms, and a bathroom. The property is said to have double glazing, central heating, carpets/curtains and white goods supplied by the landlord.
15. The Reply Form states that the tenant painted the house in 2022, treated and cleaned the mould, and installed via “Government Energy Saving Improvement Plan” a boiler in 2016. Additionally, the tenant states they replaced the furniture and refrigerator and washing machine.
16. The tenant provided details of other properties in the road and their rents. The range was £1200 to £1300 to £1700 per month. No details on specification, condition or date the rent was set were given.
17. The tenant in response to the landlords works of June –July 2024, asserts they were only partially successful.
Respondent Landlord
18. An e mail dated 15 September 2025 from [RESPONDENT] stated that works in compliance with the Improvement Notice were undertaken by the landlord between June and July 2024 at a cost of “over £8000.00”. The landlord also reports difficulty in gaining contact from the tenant after communications.
19. The landlord provided a complete reply form the contents of which the tribunal carefully considered.
4
20. The landlord supplied a comparables report dated 16 August 2025, the report comprises copies of marketing details which range in rent from £1650 to £2150 per month. The details did state whether the quoted rents were achieved or not.
21. Additionally, within the submissions, is a letter to the tenant from [APPELLANT] giving guidance on how to reduce the risk of black mould and attributing it to the tenant’s “living and lifestyle.” This was provided with the initial tenancy documentation.
Analysis and valuation
22. The Notice of Increase dated 26 March 2025 proposes an increase to £1600 per month from £1175 per month from 1 May 2025.
23. The tribunal has considered the comparables presented by the parties and using its own expert knowledge, has determined the rent for the property in good tenantable order would be £ 1570.00 per month.
24. The property condition is taken as that at the date of the Notice; the inspection of 22 October 2025 suggested no material change in condition between the two dates.
25. The tribunal following its inspection finds the property falls short of the condition that would be expected for a property in good tenantable condition.
26. The tribunal therefore applies a reduction of 25% from the rental value of £1570.00 if it had been in good tenable condition.
27. Application of 25% reduction gives £1177.50 per month say £1175.00 per month.
Hardship
28. No application for hardship has been made.
Decision
29. The Tribunal determines under section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 a rent of £1175.00 from 1 May 2025.
Chairman: [NAME]: 22 October 2025
5
Appeal to the Upper Tribunal A person wishing to appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal ([NAME]) on a point of law must seek permission to do so by making a written application to the First-tier Tribunal at the Regional Office which has been dealing with the case which application must: a. be received by the said office within 28 days after the Tribunal sends to the person making the application written reasons for the decision. b. identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, state the grounds of appeal, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the application is not received within the 28 –day time limit, it must include a request for an extension of time and the reason for it not complying with the 28- day time limit; the Tribunal will then decide whether to extend time or not to allow the application for permission to appeal to proceed.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 11 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rental Value at £775 Monthly
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Reduces Proposed Rent to £595 Due to Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Adjusts Rent Based on Property Condition
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Fair Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Market Rent for Property
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Tenancy: First-tier Tribunal Decision
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Determines Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
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 determined a market rent of £1175.00 per month for the property.
- The property's poor condition, including draughts, cracking, and mould, justified a reduction in rent.
- The property's condition was assessed as falling short of what is expected for a good tenantable property.
- A 25% reduction was applied to the market rental value due to the property's condition.
- The tenant's photographs showed black mould on various parts of the property.
- A local authority notice indicated issues of "excess cold" and "entry by intruders" at the property.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's proposed new rent of £1600.00 per month was not accepted.
- The landlord's claim that works costing over £8000 were undertaken was noted but did not prevent a rent reduction.
- The landlord's suggestion that black mould was due to the tenant's "living and lifestyle" was not accepted as a reason to deny a rent reduction.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The rent for the property was set at £1175 per month from May 1, 2025.
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 inspected the property and compared it to similar properties in the area, considering the condition of the property and the proposed rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied in determining the rent.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The condition of the property and the comparability of the rent with similar properties in the area were the most important factors.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant, as the rent was set lower than what the landlord proposed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be able to challenge a proposed rent increase if the property is in poor condition or if the proposed rent is higher than comparable properties.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs of the property, improvement notices, and comparable rent data from similar properties were important pieces of evidence.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, a person can appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal (Property Chamber) on a point of law within 28 days of receiving the written reasons for the decision.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent disputes.
