57 Liner House, Royal Wharf, London E16 2SJ
Condition: Unfurnished first floor flat with two bedrooms, two bathrooms, living room and kitchen.
Evidence considered
- No comparable evidence was considered; the decision turned on contractual and jurisdictional issues rather than market rent evidence.
Tenant submitted evidence: no. Landlord submitted evidence: no.
Tribunal's reasoning
The tribunal found it had no jurisdiction to determine a new rent. The property was let on a two-year fixed term at £2,700 pcm, and although the Renters' Rights Act 2026 converted the tenancy to periodic from 1 May 2026, the tribunal held this did not override the contractual agreement to pay £2,700 for the full 24-month term. The landlord's first notice of increase was invalid as it was served during the fixed term, and the second notice was also invalid as it sought to increase rent before the end of the 24-month contractual period. The rent therefore remained unchanged at £2,700 pcm, and the tenant's request for a reduction could not be considered as they were equally bound by the agreement.
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.