126 Coles Lane, Sutton Coldfield, B72 1NP
Condition: Semi-detached house with central heating and double glazing; tenant had provided carpets, curtains and some white goods, and a garage had deteriorated and was no longer accessible.
Evidence considered
- Neither party submitted comparable evidence
- Tribunal relied on its own expert knowledge of local rental values
- Starting rent of £850 pcm reduced by £50 to reflect tenant-provided carpets, curtains, white goods and improvements
Tenant submitted evidence: no. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
With no comparable evidence from either party, the Tribunal used its own expert knowledge of local rental values to assess the market rent for the property in modernised, good order at £850 pcm. It then deducted £50 to account for carpets, curtains, white goods and other improvements provided by the tenant, arriving at a determined rent of £800 pcm, matching the landlord's proposed figure. The new rent took effect from the date in the landlord's notice as no undue hardship application was made.
Read the original decision (PDF, GOV.UK)
Want the evidence, not just the decision?
Around half of the decisions in this database cite a problem with the evidence submitted — comparable tribunal outcomes are usually what decides these cases, for both sides. We're testing a paid evidence pack and a guided walkthrough of the application, built from this database.
Landlord evidence pack — from £15
Nearby tribunal outcomes, a rent level likely to survive a challenge, and an evidence pack in the format the tribunal expects — timed for when you serve a section 13 notice.
Register interest in the landlord packTenant pack — from £19
Whether challenging your rent increase is worth it, plus the comparable decisions to include with your MR1 application to the tribunal.
Register interest in the tenant packNot built yet — register your interest by email and we'll let you know when it's ready. This isn't legal advice; see the law and free advice options.