Scottish landlords warned over new rules and fines of up to 36 months’ rent
1 month ago | 1 comments
Tribunal turns landlord’s £50 rent rise into a £200 cut
12:07 AM, 19th October 2026, 3 weeks ago
51
Categories:
A landlord seeking an extra £50 a month has instead had the existing rent cut by £200 by the First-tier Tribunal after a tenant challenged the increase.
A landlord’s proposed £50 monthly rent rise has ended with the First-tier Tribunal cutting the existing payment by £200.
The Manchester flat had two bathrooms and a balcony, and the tribunal considered the accommodation attractive.
However, it found that the market evidence did not support the amount being sought.
The landlord wanted to increase the rent from £1,650 to £1,700 but after the tenant challenged the increase, the tribunal settled on £1,450.
Now the landlord will receive £2,400 less per year and not the extra £600 they expected.
Comparable flats carried weight
Propertymark included the furnished two-bedroom flat at The Foundry in its review of four tribunal decisions.
The landlord pointed to the flat’s size and top-floor position, along with its light and views, to justify the proposed rent.
The tenant’s evidence told a different story with details of flats in the same building and nearby developments being advertised for between £1,400 and £1,500 a month.
The tribunal gave most weight to comparisons close by that were similar in age, character and specification.
There were no ongoing maintenance problems identified.
The accommodation was attractive, it found, while the furniture was basic but in good condition.
The ruling was made on 17 September, with the new rent payable from the following day.
Existing rent is also at risk
Property118 has previously reported a London case in which a landlord’s proposed increase resulted in a cut to the existing rent.
That article covered property lawyer David Smith’s review of 25 published decisions.
Half of the 24 cases where a rent was determined resulted in the full requested increase, underlining the mixed outcomes in that early sample.
Propertymark says the starting point for landlords and agents should be whether the rent itself matches the market.
Asking for only a little more does not settle that question.
Landlords and agents also need to look closely at the properties used as evidence, checking their size, layout and condition, as well as which services the rent covers.
Condition and layout matter
Propertymark also looked at a case in Leeds, where drainage problems prompted a £75 monthly deduction from the £1,000 assessed value of a house that was in good order.
The resulting £925 rent was below the £950 sought.
Meanwhile, a west London flat described as having two bedrooms measured just 39.6 sq m and lacked a conventional lounge.
The tribunal considered its size more consistent with a small one-bedroom home.
In Ashton-under-Lyne, evidence from other rooms in the same building helped determine a £700 monthly rent, halfway between the existing £675 and proposed £725.
Propertymark advises checking the applicable procedure and individual ruling before adjusting payments.
Tags:
comparable rent evidence, first-tier tribunal, landlord rent increase, propertymark, rent reduction, Section 13 Notice
51 comments on this article
Learn from your peers’ experience
A different perspective could help you spot an issue, avoid a mistake or find a better way forward. Read the comments and add your own views if you wish.
Previous Article
NRLA urges capital gains tax reformNext Article
Check your tenancy agreement before emailing Form 3ARelated Articles
New rent dispute system will be more proportionate claims government
2 months ago | 4 comments
Tribunal cuts landlord’s existing rent after rise challenge
2 months ago | 5 comments
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 463
10:49 AM, 20th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 20/10/2026 – 10:41
It’s all about risk v reward. Nowadays there is a lot of risk in being a landlord and increasingly lower reward.
A landlord may be willing to keep a property for a while if he/she can achieve what he/she believes to be market rent. However, if a tribunal actually cuts the existing rent then that may well trigger a decision to sell and use funds in other investments. That would be the scenario in my circumstances.
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 2095 - Articles: 21
10:55 AM, 20th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 20/10/2026 – 10:49
“However, if a tribunal actually cuts the existing rent then that may well trigger a decision to sell “. I agree.
My point is that serving a s8 notice as soon as the tenant applies to the tribunal is jumping the gun.
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 463
11:05 AM, 20th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 20/10/2026 – 10:55
Possibly. But if it is borderline whether to keep the property or not and there is a risk that rent could go down, not up, then may as well do a section 8. Why hang around for a tribunal date, which could be 6+ months in the future?
Member Since March 2023 - Comments: 5
11:12 AM, 20th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Very true,I thought I’ll pivot one of mine into social housing following RRA and now they come out with this, sounds like mortgage small print and I think when the coffers start swelling they’ll double down. £65 per property,was that a typo,650 and I might believe it to tell the council what they already know,but OT I know
Member Since August 2020 - Comments: 31
12:14 PM, 20th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Billy Gunn at 19/10/2026 – 19:49
It would be other way round ( bring London rents down to Manchester level) in the current anti landlord environment
Member Since October 2026 - Comments: 7
4:02 PM, 22nd October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
What gets me is the landlord opened the whole rent up over £50 a month. Before I put any of my terraces up I look at what the same sort of house is being advertised for a few streets over, and if I’m already at the top I just leave it. Not worth the lottery.
Member Since May 2021 - Comments: 426
7:05 PM, 22nd October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
I’m due to issue a rent increase of 3-4% which still means there’s not a comparable property in the area as low. If the tenant pushes back the next notice will be a S8 pronto. No skin off my nose either way.
Member Since March 2016 - Comments: 86
7:25 AM, 24th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
The far bigger concern is new tenants being able to challenge their agreed rent within 6 months of moving in. If they are successful, the decrease is backdated (whereas if a challenge to an increase fails, the increase is not backdated which just shows you the system is not designed to be fair). Have there been any cases of that yet?
Member Since November 2020 - Comments: 64
8:22 AM, 24th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by AP at 24/10/2026 – 07:25
Yes and increase still backdated
Member Since March 2023 - Comments: 5
8:33 AM, 24th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by AP at 24/10/2026 – 07:25
I’m also bothered about the whole move in , tenant knows they don’t want to pay AIRBNB prices and then gives notice a week later meaning they do get a short term let at long term rates and why wouldn’t they.System is becoming really badly stacked