VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Rent for Poorly Maintained Property

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on the rent for a poorly maintained property under an Assured Tenancy. They set the rent at £138.00 per week from 19 June 2024, taking into account the property's condition and market comparables.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair rent based on the property's condition and market comparables.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent assessment

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine the rent based on what a willing landlord might expect to receive for letting the property in the open market. The determination considers the property's condition and market comparables.

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

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined the rent for a poorly maintained property under an Assured Tenancy.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tribunal determined the rent for a poorly maintained property under an Assured Tenancy, setting the rent at £138.00 per week from 19 June 2024, based on the property's condition and market comparables.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

1

Case Reference : BIR/00CN/MNR/2024/0165

Property

: 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

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

Mr [NAME].[NAME] (Regional Surveyor)

Date and Venue of : No Hearing. Decision on submitted papers Hearing

Date of Decision : 11 March 2025

____________________________________________________________

DECISION

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST - TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY)

2

1 The rent is determined at £138.00 (One Hundred and Thirty Eight Pounds) per week from 19 June 2024.

REASONS

Introduction

2 The tenant, Mr [APPELLANT], holds a weekly Assured Tenancy of 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] that commenced 11 October 1993.

3 On 10 May 2024, the landlord served notice of increase under section 13(2) of The Housing Act 1988 proposing a new rent of £220.00 per week with effect from 19 June 2024. Neither the previous nor proposed rents included any Council Tax, water rates or fixed service charges.

4 The tenant applied for the rent to be determined by the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber but the landlord challenged the date of the tenant's application to the Tribunal. As a result, the Tribunal convened a Hearing on 26 September 2024 to determine the date of application as a preliminary point. The Tribunal issued Directions and found on 21 November 2024 that the application had been validly made on 17 June 2024. At the same time, it issued Directions to the parties relating to the substantive question of the rental value under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.

5 Following receipt of Submissions, the Tribunal inspected the property on 5 March 2025 in the presence of the tenant, Mr [APPELLANT] and his representative, Rev. [COUNSEL]. [COUNSEL]. The landlord, Mr [COUNSEL], attended the property with his agent but were denied access by the tenant.

6 As neither party requested a Hearing, the Tribunal considered the facts and found the rental value to be unchanged at £138.00 p.w. with effect from the date of the landlord's Notice, 19 June 2024.

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 ...

3

8 The jurisdiction of the Rent Assessment Committee was transferred to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) from 1 July 2013.

Facts Found

9 The Tribunal inspected the property on 5 March 2025 with the Tenant, Mr [APPELLANT], and his representative, Rev. [COUNSEL]. [COUNSEL]. The Landlord, Mr [COUNSEL], and his agent were refused access by the Tenant.

10 The property is a traditional inner terrace Victorian house on the east side of Moseley not far from the A34 [ADDRESS] between Sparkhill and [ADDRESS]. It is in an area of densely developed terraced housing within walking distance of local shops, schools and facilities about three miles south of Birmingham city centre.

11 The house is brick and slate construction with a two storey rear wing housing a kitchen and third bedroom with a single storey bathroom extension. There is a bay window to the ground floor front elevation.

12 The accommodation comprises a hall, two reception rooms, kitchen, lobby and bathroom on the ground floor with a landing, two bedrooms and third bedroom / box room in the wing accessed through the second bedroom. The property is set back from the pavement and has a small enclosed rear yard. There is no provision for off road parking but there is street parking.

13 There are radiators in the receptions, hall and back bedroom but no heating in the front bedroom or box room. The house is double glazed.

14 It is in basic condition and needs extensive renovation. For example:

a) the kitchen walls are unplastered, painted brick.

b) there used to be a suspended ceiling in the kitchen but the panels have fallen

off leaving the supporting brackets around the walls and original ceiling above.

The ceiling plaster is cracked and poorly decorated with visible electric cables. c) The kitchen floor slopes down to the rear. The floor is of mixed tiles and at least one tile is missing.

d) There is no provision for cooking. There is a freestanding microwave and oven

and camping stove that are believed to be disconnected but both belong to the

Tenant and disregarded from the valuation.

e) The only cupboard in the kitchen is a double unit under the sink. It has two ill fitting doors and the drawers are missing.

f) The kitchen window seals are sagging and need renewal.

g) A section of architrave is missing from the living room door frame.

h) The bathroom suite is old and needs refurbishment.

i) There is old, cracked plaster in the first floor bedrooms.

j) The whole house needs redecoration.

k) It was let unfurnished, without carpets, curtains or white goods.

l) At the time of our inspection, the ground floor lighting was not working.

In summary, the house needs significant investment to bring it to current standards.

cont./...

4

Submissions

15 The Tenant's Submission

Mr [APPELLANT] sent a written submission to the Tribunal in which he drew attention to the poor state of repair.

16 He said any rent increase would cause him hardship.

17 The Landlord's Submission

Mr [RESPONDENT] wrote to the Tribunal on 6 February 2025, disagreeing with its findings on the preliminary point. He said the neighbours were complaining about the state of the property and that the property was too large for a single person in receipt of housing benefit. He concluded by saying he would not communicate with the Tribunal any further on the subject of rent assessment.

Decision

18 The Tribunal took account of the location, condition, accommodation and appearance of the property together with the parties' submissions and its own general knowledge of rents in the area before arriving at its decision.

19 The Tribunal found it to be fairly compact and the third bedroom less than ideal as it could only be accessed through the second bedroom. It was effectively a box room but may have been used as a bedroom in the past.

20 The condition was very poor. This was partly due to the Tenant's lack of decoration but Mr [APPELLANT] had no written tenancy agreement and there was nothing requiring him to carry out repairs or decoration.

21 However, even disregarding decorations, the house was in poor condition with extensive work needed to bring it to present standards. There was no provision for cooking, no carpets, curtains or white goods which were all facilities expected by tenants in the market.

There was no electrical supply to the ground floor lighting at the time of our inspection. In our view it would be virtually unlettable in the open market, 'virtually' because Mr [APPELLANT] is in occupation and remains the Tenant and even if he were the only potential tenant if the house were advertised to let, a 'market of one' would nevertheless be a market and the actual tenant's bid cannot be disregarded.

22 Had it been refurbished, the Tribunal would have found its market rental value to have been around £925 p.c.m. but in present condition, lacking facilities, the Tribunal did not find any increase justified. Accordingly, the Tribunal found the rent under section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 to be £138.00 (One Hundred and Thirty Eight Pounds) per week with effect from 19 June 2024.

23 Mr [APPELLANT] submitted that any rent increase would cause hardship but this was not relevant as the rent was not being increased.

24 In summary, the Tribunal determined the rent under section 14 of The Housing Act 1988

at £138.00 (One Hundred and Thirty Eight pounds) per week with effect from 19 June 2024.

I.D. [NAME].(Est.Man.) FRICS Chairman

5

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, Property Chamber (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) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013).

6

First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. BIR/00CN/MNR/2024/0165

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 36 [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

I.D. [NAME].(Est.Man.)FRICS V Ward BSc Hons FRICS

Landlord [NAME] - P & [RESPONDENT]

Tenant [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £138.00 Per week (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 19 June 2024

3. The amount included for services is not applicable

Per

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 11 October 1993 5. Length of the term or rental period Weekly 6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord

8. Description of premises Terraced house

Chairman I D Humphries Date of Decision 11 March 2025

📊 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 tenant is entitled to a fair rent based on the property's condition.
  • The tenant is entitled to a fair rent based on market comparables.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent assessment based on the open market value of the property.
  • The tenant is entitled to have the value of their improvements to a property disregarded when determining the rent.
  • The tenant is entitled to a rent assessment reflecting the open market value, considering the property's condition and amenities.

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

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal set the rent for a poorly maintained property at £138.00 per week from 19 June 2024.

Who was involved?

The tenant and landlord were involved in a dispute over the rent for a poorly maintained property.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the property's condition and market comparables, setting the rent at £138.00 per week.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988 s.14 was applied to determine the fair rent.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the condition of the property and its comparability to similar properties in the market.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant, who argued that the rent should not be increased due to the poor condition of the property.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should consider the condition of their property and its comparability to similar properties in the market when disputing rent.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Evidence of the property's condition and market comparables were important in the decision.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, an application may be made to the Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law only.

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.

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.