How to Evidence a Market Rent Increase for the Tribunal

A tenant who receives a Section 13 notice can refer it to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber). The tribunal then determines the open market rent, and its determination binds both of you.

Most guidance on this stops at "research comparables". That is not enough to prepare a case, because the tribunal is applying a specific statutory test with specific statutory disregards, and because the procedural rules changed materially on 1 May 2026. This page sets out what the tribunal is actually deciding, what evidence carries weight, and what you should have in place before you serve — because almost everything useful here is a record you cannot create retrospectively.

Disclaimer: This guide is for information only and does not constitute legal advice. It describes the position in England as at 19 August 2026. Always consult a solicitor for your specific situation.

Get the Notice Right First

A tribunal challenge is not the first way a rent increase fails. A defective notice is. HMCTS's own checklist for whether a Section 13 notice is valid comes down to five things:

1. At least two months' notice has been given
2. The increase is not within 52 weeks of the last increase
3. The start date is correct — the beginning of a rental period
4. The landlord's details are correct
5. The correct form has been used, and it is signed

On the form: the prescribed form for a private assured tenancy is Form 4A, prescribed by regulation 3(1)(d) of the 2026 Regulations, in force from 1 May 2026. Regulation 4 revoked the 2015 Regulations "in relation to any private assured tenancy", which is why Form 4 is now a social-housing form.

One nuance worth knowing, because it is widely overstated: regulation 3(1) ends with the words "or a form substantially to the like effect". That does not mean the form is optional, and it is not an argument to run deliberately — but the position is not that only the exact PDF from GOV.UK will do. Our detailed page on how a Form 4A notice becomes invalid covers the defects that actually bite, and the step-by-step Section 13 process covers the sequence.

What the Tribunal Is Actually Deciding

Section 14(1) of the Housing Act 1988, as amended, asks a single question: the rent at which the dwelling "might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing landlord" under an assured tenancy with the same periods and the same terms as the tenancy in question.

Two things follow from that wording that landlords consistently miss.

"With the same terms" is doing real work. The tribunal is not valuing a hypothetical clean letting. It is valuing your tenancy, with your terms — including any restrictions or obligations in your agreement that a notional open-market tenant would price.

The old section 14(1)(d) has been omitted. If you are working from a pre-2026 textbook or a template submission, check the statutory test against the current text rather than assuming continuity.

The Three Statutory Disregards

Section 14(2) requires the tribunal to disregard three things. Getting these right is worth more than another five comparables.

(a) The sitting-tenant effect. Any effect on rent attributable to the fact that the tenancy is being granted to a sitting tenant is disregarded.

(b) Tenant improvements. Any increase in value attributable to a relevant improvement carried out by the tenant, otherwise than under an obligation in the tenancy, is disregarded. The italicised words matter: if the tenant was contractually obliged to do the work, the disregard does not apply.

(c) The narrow one. This is the disregard that is most often paraphrased into something it does not say. The statutory words are:

"any reduction in the value of the dwelling-house attributable to a failure by the tenant to comply with any terms of the tenancy"

That is not "disrepair caused by the tenant". It is a reduction in value attributable to a breach of the tenancy terms. Damage that does not breach a term is not caught.

And the corollary is the one landlords least want to hear: there is no disregard for the landlord's own disrepair. If the property is in poor condition and that is not the tenant's breach, the tribunal values the property as it finds it. A landlord seeking a market increase on a property with outstanding repair issues is asking a valuation body to price those issues in.

The Outcome Rule: Your Proposed Figure Is a Ceiling

Section 14ZB(5) sets out what the tenant actually pays:

"The new rent amount is— (a) the open-market rent, if lower than the proposed rent, and (b) otherwise, the proposed rent."

So the tribunal may well determine an open-market rent above the figure in your notice — but the tenant will not pay it. Your proposed figure operates as a cap on the outcome.

The practical reading: there is nothing to be gained from proposing a figure you cannot evidence, and something real to be lost by proposing a figure below what the property would achieve. The notice figure is a decision, not an opening bid.

Two Timing Rules That Cost Real Money

The determination date can eat the increase. Under section 14ZB(3)(a) and (b), if the tribunal decides the case after the start date in your notice, the new rent takes effect from the first new period beginning on or after the decision. The increase for the intervening periods is not backdated. It is simply gone. A long-running challenge therefore has a cost to you that has nothing to do with the outcome.

The tribunal can defer the start for hardship. Section 14ZB(3)(c) allows the tribunal to direct a different start date where applying the normal rule "would cause undue hardship to the tenant", and section 14ZB(4) caps that deferral: the directed date "must fall before the end of the period of two months beginning with the date of the determination."

Two points on this. First, it replaced the old section 14(7), which was repealed on 1 May 2026 — so any article describing an open-ended hardship power is out of date. Second, there is no statutory definition of "undue hardship". It is a matter for the tribunal on the facts.

The Evidence GOV.UK Asks For

This is the part landlords underprepare, and it is entirely within your control. GOV.UK's guidance on applying for a market rent determination asks for:

• Floor plans
• A photograph of each room, and a photograph of the outside of the property
• Room sizes
• Features — central heating, double glazing, carpets, curtains, appliances, furnishings — and, for each, who provided them
• Repairs and improvements — what was done, who carried them out, and who paid
• Local amenities

Read that list again with the section 14(2) disregards in mind. "Who provided them" and "who paid" are not administrative details. They are the facts that determine whether an improvement is disregarded under section 14(2)(b) or counted in your favour.

If you fitted the new kitchen, that is value the tribunal should price in. If the tenant fitted it voluntarily, it is disregarded. If the tenant fitted it under an obligation in the agreement, it is not disregarded. Three different answers, decided entirely by a record of who did what and who paid — a record that is trivial to keep at the time and close to impossible to reconstruct three years later.

Comparables: Agreed Lettings Beat Asking Prices

On market evidence, the guidance is unusually direct: evidence from actual agreed lettings — rental agreements — is stronger than listings on property portals.

That is a meaningful hierarchy, because portal asking prices are what most landlords bring:

1. Strongest — actual agreed lettings, evidenced by the rental agreement
2. Weaker — a portal listing marked "let agreed" (an asking price that found a taker, but not a confirmed figure)
3. Weakest — a live portal listing at an asking price, which is an aspiration

For each comparable, capture the address, the date, the rent, the number of bedrooms, the property type, the condition and specification, and what was included. And capture it dated, at the time — a screenshot taken today of a listing from March is not evidence of the March market.

Match on the things the tribunal is actually comparing: size, condition, specification, and the terms of the letting. A comparable at a higher rent that includes bills, or is furnished when yours is not, is not the comparable you think it is.

The evidence problem is a record-keeping problem. Floor plans, dated room-by-room photographs, and a log of who did each improvement and who paid for it are all things you either have or do not have on the day the tenant applies. LetSorted's inspection reports produce exactly this as a by-product of check-in and periodic inspections — dated, photographed, and acknowledged by the tenant. See how the evidence trail works →

The Procedure, and What It Costs

The £47 fee is set by the current Fees Order and there is no hearing fee. You should not rely on any published figure for how long a determination takes — timescales move, and several widely-circulated numbers are years out of date.

One thing the tribunal cannot do: grant possession. Section 7(1) of the Housing Act refers possession to "the court", and section 40(1) identifies the county court. If your real problem is arrears rather than rent level, you are in a different forum entirely — see Grounds 10 and 11 and the complete picture of the Section 8 grounds.

A Checklist to Run Before You Serve

• Confirm 52 weeks have passed since the last increase (or since the tenancy started)
• Confirm the start date is the first day of a rental period, at least two months out
• Use the current Form 4A from GOV.UK, completed and signed
• Gather dated comparables, prioritising agreed lettings over asking prices
• Assemble floor plan, room sizes, and a photograph of every room and the exterior
• List every fixture and furnishing, and record who provided it
• List every repair and improvement since the last rent was set, with who did it and who paid
• Deal honestly with outstanding disrepair — the tribunal will price it
• Set your figure knowing it caps the outcome
• Keep proof of service

Frequently Asked Questions

What evidence does the First-tier Tribunal want for a rent increase?

GOV.UK's guidance asks for floor plans, a photograph of each room and of the outside, room sizes, a list of features such as central heating, double glazing, carpets, curtains, appliances and furnishings with a note of who provided them, details of repairs and improvements including who carried them out and who paid, and information about local amenities. On comparables, the guidance is explicit that evidence from actual agreed lettings — rental agreements — is stronger than portal asking prices.

Can the tribunal set the rent higher than the amount I proposed?

It can determine a higher open-market rent, but that is not what the tenant ends up paying. Section 14ZB(5) provides that the new rent is the open-market rent if that is lower than the proposed rent, and otherwise the proposed rent. In practical terms the figure in your notice operates as a ceiling on the outcome, which is a reason to set it carefully rather than optimistically.

Can the tribunal delay when the new rent starts?

Yes. Section 14ZB(3)(c) allows the tribunal to direct a later start date where applying the normal rule would cause undue hardship to the tenant, and section 14ZB(4) caps that deferral at two months from the date of the determination. There is no statutory definition of undue hardship. This power replaced the old section 14(7), which was repealed on 1 May 2026.

Sources

• Housing Act 1988, section 14 — the market rent test and the statutory disregards
• Housing Act 1988, section 13 — the rent increase notice
• GOV.UK: apply for a market rent determination — the official evidence list and the MR1/MR2/MR3 procedure
• First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)
• Renters' Rights Act 2025