VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Rent at £800 for Semi-Detached House

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tribunal decided to set the rent at £800 per month for a semi-detached house in Wolverhampton. They took into account the property's condition, including its lack of gas heating and reliance on electric heating.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a rent assessment that reflects the open market value of the property, taking into account its condition and amenities.

Topics

rent assessmentproperty conditionelectric heating

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

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 the rent based on what a willing landlord would charge in the open market for a similar property, considering factors like the property's condition and amenities.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the rent at £800 per month for a semi-detached house in Wolverhampton, considering its condition and lack of gas heating.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for a semi-detached house at £800 per month, considering its condition, lack of gas heating, and location.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – [NAME] No. BIR/00CW/MNR/2023/0177

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 76 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

[NAME]. (Est. Man.) [NAME]. MRICS

Landlord [RESPONDENT] & [RESPONDENT] 23 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £800 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 11 October 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 23 July 2019

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs s.11 Landlord & Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Unfurnished.

8. Description of premises Three bedroom semi-detached house.

[NAME] of Decision 17 January 2024

1

Case Reference : BIR/00CW/MNR/2023/0177

Property

: [ADDRESS], Wolverhampton, WCV10 8DA

Applicant: [redacted]

Respondent: [redacted] : Appeal against a Notice proposing a new rent under an

Assured Periodic Tenancy under section 13(4) of the Housing

Act 1988.

Tribunal Members : [NAME]. [NAME] [NAME].(Est.Man.) [NAME]. MRICS

Date and Venue of : 17 January 2024 Hearing

Date of Decision : 17 January 2024

____________________________________________________________

REASONS

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2024

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL [NAME] (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1 The rent is determined at £800 (Eight Hundred Pounds) per calendar month from 23 August 2023.

REASONS

Introduction

2 The Applicant holds an Assured monthly tenancy that commenced 23 July 2019.

3 On 5 July 2023 the Respondents served notice of increase under section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 ('the Act') proposing a new rent of £850 per calendar month in place of the previous rent of £725 per calendar month, to take effect on 23 August 2023. The form stated the rent did not include Council Tax, water charges or service charges.

4 On 16 August 2023 the Applicant applied for the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal ([NAME]).

5 On 17 January 2024 the Tribunal determined the rent at £800 per calendar month with effect from 23 August 2023 which was relayed to the parties by email on 25 January 2024.

6 On 25 January 2024, the day the Decision was published, the Tribunal received a request from the Respondents for Reasons.

The Law

7 Section 14 of The Housing Act 1988 states:

'(1) Where, under subsection (4)(a) of section 13 above, a tenant refers to a rent assessment committee a notice under subsection (2) of that section, the committee shall determine the rent at which, subject to subsections (2) and (4) below, the committee

consider that the dwelling-house concerned might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy -

(a) which is a periodic tenancy having the same periods as those of the tenancy to

which the notice relates;

(b) which begins at the beginning of the new period specified in the notice;

(c) the terms of which (other than relating to the amount of the rent) are the same as

those of the tenancy to which the notice relates;...'

'(2) In making a determination under this section, there shall be disregarded -

(a) any effect on the rent attributable to the granting of a tenancy to a sitting tenant;

(b) any increase in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a relevant

improvement carried out by a person who at the time it was carried out was the

tenant, if the improvement-

(i) was carried out otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the

immediate landlord ...

(c) any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a failure by the

tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy.'

Facts Found

8 The Tribunal inspected the property on 17 January 2024 in the presence of Miss [APPELLANT], the Applicant tenant. Mr and Mrs [RESPONDENT], the Respondent landlords, did not attend.

3

9 The property comprised a semi-detached former Council house on a 1930s housing estate about 3 miles north of Wolverhampton city centre.

10 The accommodation comprised an entrance lobby, living room, kitchen and basic conservatory on the ground floor with a landing, three bedrooms and bathroom on the first floor. The property had a front garden and back garden with paved area and two panel garages used as stores, although there was no vehicular access to the back garden.

11 The property had no mains gas supply and was heated by electric panel heaters.

Type of Decision

12 Neither party requested a Hearing and the Decision was reached on the Submissions.

Submissions

13 Applicant

Miss [APPELLANT]'s main point was that there was no gas supply to the house and the heating was all electric which was expensive to run. Space heating was provided by electric panel heaters and night storage heaters and water heating by immersion heater.

14 She drew attention to the internal condition of the house with poorly painted doors and old tiling, the dated bathroom suite, the poor condition of the 'conservatory' and said that white goods were not included in the tenancy.

15 Respondents

[NAME] [RESPONDENT] provided details of a semi-detached house at [ADDRESS], Featherstone, a village 5 miles north of Wolverhampton centre advertised at £995 pcm, a semi-detached former Council house in [ADDRESS], Wednesfield advertised at £1,100 pcm and a three bedroom house at [ADDRESS], Oxley, Wolverhampton advertised at £1,095 pcm.

16 They also provided a copy email from Your Move estate agents dated 13 September 2023 where the Lettings Manager offered to advertise the house at between £800-950 pcm 'depending on its condition and size'.

17 In a letter to Miss [APPELLANT] dated 6 July 2023 copied to the Tribunal, Mr and Mrs [RESPONDENT] explained they had kept the rent at £725 for as long as possible but were proposing an increase as 'we are facing another incredible increase to the property's mortgage rate ...'

Decision

18 The Tribunal considered the location, condition, construction and accommodation and factors raised by the parties in assessing its decision. Had the property been fully refurbished with modern space heating and new kitchen and bathroom suites we would have increased the rental value to a higher level, but bearing in mind its condition we found £800 pcm to reflect the market value for the purposes of section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 at the effective date of the notice, 23 August 2023.

[NAME]. [NAME] [NAME].(Est.Man.) FRICS

Chairman

4

Appeal

If either party is dissatisfied with this decision an application may be made to this Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal, [NAME] (Residential Property) on a point of law only. Any such application must be received within 28 days after the decision and accompanying reasons have been sent to the parties (Rule 52 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) ([NAME]) Rules 2013).

📊 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 property's lack of a mains gas supply and reliance on expensive electric heating reduced its rental value.
  • The internal condition of the house, including poorly painted doors, old tiling, and a dated bathroom, lowered its market value.
  • The poor condition of the conservatory was a factor in determining the rent.
  • The absence of white goods included in the tenancy affected the property's rental value.
  • The Tribunal considered the property's location, construction, and accommodation when setting the rent.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The rent for a semi-detached house was set at £800 per month.

Who was involved?

The tenant and the landlord were involved.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition, including its lack of gas heating and reliance on electric heating.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and the cost of heating it with electricity.

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 of their property and the cost of utilities when arguing for a rent assessment.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the property's condition and comparable rents in the area mattered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an appeal can be made to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law only.

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.