Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
📌 In brief
The Tribunal decided on the rent for a tenant's assured periodic tenancy. They considered the type of accommodation and the services provided by the landlord. This decision was made under the Housing Act 1988.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988.
📖 What the law says
Under the Housing Act 1988, a tenant can apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under their assured tenancy. The tribunal will then decide on the open-market rent, considering factors like the type of tenancy, the start date of the new tenancy, and the terms of the existing tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal determined the rent for an assured periodic tenancy under the Housing Act 1988, considering the description of the premises and the services provided.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Allowed
First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. LON/00AF/MNR/2020/0109
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]
[NAME]
Landlord [RESPONDENT] [APPELLANT], 220 The Vale, London, [POSTCODE]
Tenant Mr [APPELLANT]
1. The rent is: £ 750 Per month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)
2. The date the decision takes effect is: 13 July 2020
*3. The amount included for services is not applicable
Per
4. Date assured tenancy commenced 13 May 2019
5. Length of the term or rental period monthly
7. Allocation of liability for repairs As per agreement
8. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord Small double bed, wardrobe, chest of drawers, table and 2 chairs, small fridge
9. Description of premises Room in two storey house with own shower/wc and shared kitchen. Double glazed but no central heating
[NAME] of Decision 28 May 2021
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Set for Assured Periodic Tenancy Under Housing Act 1988
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) First-tier Tribunal Sets Rent for Assured Periodic Tenancy
- First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Rent Determination 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 tenant is entitled to have their rent set according to the Housing Act 1988.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- None of the similar cases were rejected.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
It set the monthly rent for an assured periodic tenancy.
Who was involved?
A tenant and a landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
They decided based on the Housing Act 1988, considering the nature of the accommodation and services provided.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Housing Act 1988 Section 14 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The description of the premises and the services provided were 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 should consider the same factors when disputing rent.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The description of the premises and the services provided were important.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions like this can often be appealed to a higher court.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.