VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on the rent for an assured periodic tenancy. They set the monthly rent at £750, which took effect on November 3, 2023.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to have the rent for their assured periodic tenancy determined by the Tribunal.

Topics

rent determinationassured periodic tenancy

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant with an assured tenancy can apply to the appropriate tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their tenancy. 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 apply to challenge a new rent proposed in a notice under sections 13(2) or 13A(2). The tribunal will then determine the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord under similar conditions.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988. The rent was set at £750 per calendar month, effective from November 3, 2023.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. MAN/30UM/MNR/2023/0403

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 6 Belvedere Fold Waterfoot Rossendale [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME]

Landlord [RESPONDENT], [ADDRESS], Bury, [POSTCODE]

Tenant [NAME] [APPELLANT] & [NAME]

1. The rent is: £ 750.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 03 November 2023

3. The amount included for services is not applicable Not Applicable Per Not Applicable

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 3 February 2017

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs As per Landlord & Tenant Sct 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Nil

8. Description of premises

MR22 A stone built, detached house approximately 20 years old. Ground floor accommodation comprises comprises hall and L-shaped lounge / dining area / kitchen. On the first floor there are two small double bedrooms, a box room and bathroom / w.c. The tenancy includes white goods and floor coverings. The subject property forms part of a development of identical houses and has the following deficiencies:

1. It is built on a steeply sloping hillside with retaining walls to front and rear and access to the front is from a communal walkway accessed by 15 steps.

2. The rear garden has a small patio area but the remaining area is unusable due to the steep slope.

3. The first floor box room has a reduced floor area caused by the head of the stairs which results in it not being big enough to accommodate a single bed at floor level.

4. There is water penetration thought the front door.

5. There is limited on-street car-parking

[NAME] of Decision 12 February 2024

📊 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 determined the rent for the assured periodic tenancy.
  • The property is a stone-built, detached house about 20 years old.
  • The property has two small double bedrooms, a box room, and a bathroom/toilet on the first floor.
  • The tenancy includes white goods and floor coverings.
  • The property has deficiencies including being built on a steeply sloping hillside with 15 steps to access the front.
  • The rear garden is mostly unusable due to a steep slope.
  • The first-floor box room is too small for a single bed at floor level due to the stairs.
  • There is water penetration through the front door.
  • On-street car parking is limited.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

It set the rent for an assured periodic tenancy at £750 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 Housing Act 1988, setting the rent according to the terms of the tenancy agreement.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument centered around the appropriate rent amount for the assured periodic tenancy.

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 can seek a rent determination through the First-tier Tribunal if they cannot agree with their landlord.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The tenancy agreement and relevant statutory provisions were considered.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed to a higher court.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to seek legal 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.