Government boosts court capacity as Renters’ Rights Act drives court demand
2 weeks ago | 34 comments
Rent tribunals cut 73% of landlord increases
8:09 AM, 25th August 2026, 6 days ago
22
Categories:
Nearly three-quarters of challenged rent increases were set below the landlord’s proposed figure in a sample of tribunal decisions.
LonRes examined 200 market rent determinations, including 169 with published reasons and 108 that stated both the proposed and final rent.
Among those 108 cases, 73% ended with a lower figure, with a median reduction of 7.5% among those cut.
A further 18% confirmed the proposed rent, while 9% were set above it under rules that no longer apply.
Comparable evidence matters
The report said: “With evidence of achieved rents for genuinely comparable properties: what similar homes in the same market actually let for, when, and in what condition, with adjustments explained.
“Tribunals give little weight to asking prices.”
It added: “A landlord who arrives at the tribunal with weak evidence now runs a one-way risk: the rent can only be confirmed or reduced.
“The party that does bring credible market evidence is the only one still influencing the outcome.”
Evidence gaps exposed
Of the 169 decisions with published reasons, 47% disclosed missing or limited evidence, a party submitting nothing or the tribunal relying on its own market knowledge.
Panels drew on their knowledge and experience of the local market in 39% of those cases.
At least one party supplied no evidence or representations in 21%, while 13% contained phrases such as ‘no comparable evidence’, ‘limited market evidence’ or ‘insufficient evidence’.
In one North West case where neither party submitted evidence, the tribunal reduced a proposed £1,100 monthly rent to £900.
Landlords face delays
Since 1 May, landlords seeking to increase the rent on a periodic tenancy must use a Section 13 notice, giving at least two months’ notice and proposing no more than the open market rent.
A tenant can challenge the notice at the First-tier Tribunal for a £47 fee, while the resulting rent cannot exceed the landlord’s figure or be backdated.
The median wait between an application and decision was 96 days, rising to 142 days among the London cases examined.
A £200 monthly increase delayed for five months would leave the landlord unable to recover £1,000, while a quarter of sampled cases took more than 24 weeks.
Tags:
achieved rent comparables, first-tier tribunal, landlord rent evidence, rent tribunal decisions, Renters’ Rights Act, Section 13 rent increases
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Related Articles
Achieved rents help sway tribunal decision
3 weeks ago | 2 comments
Government pledges bailiff reforms as court delays persist
4 weeks ago | 30 comments
Member Since December 2013 - Comments: 181
4:25 PM, 25th August 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by MasterG at 25/08/2026 – 10:50
Excellent thought, I’d not considered that. It’s a ‘human behaviour’ type thing. And ultimately nothing to lose I suppose
Member Since August 2026 - Comments: 1
5:14 PM, 25th August 2026, About 6 days ago
We have a cost of living crisis. The biggest cost for most is rent or mortgage. There is also a huge increasing cost to Gov through housing benefit which should be used to build more social housing. Gov needs to reign in this madness. Hopefully this is just the start of it.
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 1656
9:17 PM, 25th August 2026, About 6 days ago
It is simply too soon to say what impact the Act has had on rent increases.
The only cases that have been published are the easy ones. The ones that could be dealt with without a hearing or property inspection.
We will be able to make valid comments in 6 months or so.
Member Since August 2026 - Comments: 1
9:56 PM, 25th August 2026, About 6 days ago
Author of this article did not specify the period this sample of 169 comes from. It is likely to be from before the Renters’ Rights legislation came into force. That makes a big difference as the process now has changed to a considerable extent. Furthermore, how does he know tribunal is disregarding asking prices as evidence. To my knowledge tribunals don’t disclose how the decision was made.
Member Since August 2026 - Comments: 12
9:12 AM, 26th August 2026, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Paul at 25/08/2026 – 15:54
Yes it can, Paul. The cap is on the way up, not the way down. New s.14ZB(5) of the Housing Act 1988, inserted by the Renters’ Rights Act, says the tribunal determines the open market rent if that’s lower than the figure you proposed, and otherwise your proposed figure. Nothing puts a floor under the rent already being paid.
Which is why MasterG’s plan of pitching high backfires. You can’t end up above market either way, so all an inflated figure buys you is a challenge, and under s.14ZB(3) the new rent then doesn’t start until the first rent period after the decision. At a 96 day median you’d have collected the old rent for three months to land on the same number.
Member Since February 2025 - Comments: 5
2:13 PM, 26th August 2026, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by David100 at 25/08/2026 – 15:38
Supermarkets are you joking they are corporates they will be allowed to raise prices as much as they want. Just like banks can raise interest rates we can’t challenge that in tribunal can we? Just pay up and shut up.
Member Since October 2023 - Comments: 249
3:00 PM, 26th August 2026, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Abhishek Swarup at 26/08/2026 – 14:13
Just look at what is happening in New York……….rent freeze AND the introduction of state run supermarkets. Prices set by (you guessed it) TRIBUNAL. I said price controls, I didn’t say they had to order Tesco etc to do it. They just have to undercut private supermarkets. How you may ask can they undercut them? By using tax payer money. Its already happening in one of the biggest cities in the world.
Member Since April 2018 - Comments: 585
3:46 PM, 26th August 2026, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by David100 at 26/08/2026 – 15:00
It’s the hypocrisy of all these politicians,over the pond and here, who claim to be making it fairer for the poor, to boost their careers, everyone to be equal regardless of the effort they put in, while robbing those with any money.Of course they will expect to be the new rich and elite., not living in a council flat on basic income.
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 510 - Articles: 1
3:50 PM, 26th August 2026, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by David at 26/08/2026 – 15:46
Corporatocracy. They hate the small traders.
Member Since June 2015 - Comments: 200
12:35 PM, 29th August 2026, About 2 days ago
Do tribunals publish their decisions? If so these can be used as evidence for similar rent increase proposals.