Landlords secure full rent rises in just 28% of tribunal cases

The onus being on a landlord to prove comparative rents charged when this information isn’t available when the previous reference was asking prices which was available, makes the job harder.

Perhaps rental prices should be in the public domain?

The biggest issue I can see is how can the market rent now rise in future if we cap all rises to today’s market rent which seems to be what these tribunals are actually doing. This is beginning to look a lot like a rent freeze.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 03/11/2026 – 09:05
Just a theory, but surely market rent will rise as properties are relet.
Even if a new tenant goes to a tribunal to object to the rent they have agreed to pay, the fact multiple other people were interested in the property at that price should carry some weight?
Also it was only a tiny percentage of tenants who went to a tribunal. There are 4.7 million PRS households in England. If 74 go to a tribunal every month that’s 888 per year. That’s around 0.02%. Market rent will increase because the vast majority of tenants are decent human beings who fully understand costs rise, just as their wages or benefits rise. Even Social Housing has a guaranteed rent increase of September’s CPI + 1% every April.

In any normal legal situation it is up to the applicant (Tenant) to prove his case. Why is it now up to the defendant (Landlord) to prove his innocence?

Reply to the comment left by Paul Smith at 03/11/2026 – 07:53
There is no onus of proof in these cases. The work of the FTT is to provide an independent assessment of the market rent for the property concerned. They will always consider evidence provided by the tenant and landlord but a recurring theme in the published cases is that they have come to their decision based on their own experience and knowledge of the local market. There are plenty of cases that have been decided without any evidence of comparable rents being provided by either party.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 03/11/2026 – 09:05
How can an average increase of 6.7% look like a rent freeze?

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 09:05
You’re right- by referencing existing comparables we are looking at what was agreed historically- not what a new let would or could rent for today. That is the inherent issue in this mechanism.
The only way rents will therefore increase is through new lets moving the reference rents to new levels. I think anecdotally this suggests that renewal rent increases will lag true market levels. Not quite a rent freeze but very sticky upwards.

A few points to make. First, as Jo points out, 74 is a very small sample size.
Second, that 6 cases were struck out suggests the landlord did not have his paperwork in order. Analysing the figures further shows:
Number Result % of Total
21 Full 28.38%
29 Partial 39.19%
12 Same 16.22%
6 Reduced 8.11%
6 Struck out 8.11%
74 Total 100%
Ignore the 6 struck out cases and the picture changes a bit:
Number Result % of Total
21 Full 30.88%
29 Partial 42.65%
12 Same 17.65%
6 Reduced 8.82%
68 Total 100%
In other words, in fewer than 9% of cases did the tenants obtain a reduction in rent. The headline might have read:
Landlords secure rent rises in over 73% of tribunal cases.
Even counting the 6 struck out cases, a rent rise was secured in over 2/3rds of cases.
With all due respect to the Property118.com Landlord News Team, there is no divine right for landlords to secure a full rent increase. Some of the claimed increases might have been on the high side because the tribunal can no longer increase the rent above the landlord’s figure.

Big caveat – it’s only 74 cases. When we have 7400 cases we will have a better idea of the way tribunals decide.

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 03/11/2026 – 11:31
It was reported elsewhere that the average increase proposed by landlords was just short of 14% so no wonder these cases were referred to the FTT.

How do Tribunals access current market rent figures? What time lag are they encompassing?

In many cases a tenancy agreement is a private arrangement between 2 parties. The landlord and the tenant. There is no letting agent or benefit claim involved.
If a deposit is taken the deposit protection company asks how much the rent is. Not all landlords take a deposit though.
A tax return has combined rental figures but they’re historic, not current.
So where do the figures come from and are they representative of today’s reality?