Flat 23 Wood Lane Handsworth Birmingham B20 2AJ/
Condition: Ground floor flat with recurring damp and mould issues, partially remediated by the landlord but with inherent damp problems continuing.
Evidence considered
- Landlord provided three comparable lettings in Handsworth/Lozells area with rents of £850, £850 and £795 pcm; the two Robert Road comparables were considered to command a premium over the subject property due to better location and off-street parking despite fewer bedrooms.
- Church Vale comparable (£795 pcm, 2-bed with parking) treated as broadly comparable but condition at letting unknown.
- Tenant provided photographic evidence of damp, mould and cracking, and a local authority letter to the landlord noting deficiencies in condition.
- Landlord provided a damp/condensation specialist's report and details of repair works including rising damp treatment and mould removal, which the Tribunal found did not fully resolve inherent damp issues.
- Landlord's argument that an improved EPC rating (D to C) justified a higher rent was rejected for lack of supporting evidence.
Tenant submitted evidence: yes. Landlord submitted evidence: yes.
Tribunal's reasoning
The Tribunal started from a market rent of £800 pcm for the property modernised and in good order, derived from its own expertise and the landlord's comparables (to the extent material). It then applied a £50 pcm deduction to reflect ongoing inherent damp issues that persisted despite remedial works, arriving at £750 pcm. The landlord's own comparables were considered superior in location/parking (Robert Road) or of uncertain condition (Church Vale), and the tribunal rejected the argument that an improved EPC rating justified a higher rent. The tribunal also deferred the start date of the new rent (rather than backdating to the notice date) to 28 March 2026 to mitigate undue hardship to the tenants from a lump sum of back rent, balancing this against fairness to the landlord.
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.