1 Neylands Cottages, East Grinstead, West Sussex, RH19 4HP
HAV/45UG/MNR/2026/0176 · Mid Sussex · decided 10 Aug 2026
old rules| Rent before the notice | £650 |
|---|---|
| Rent the landlord proposed | £1,550 |
| Rent the tribunal decided | £975 +50.0% on the rent before |
| New rent takes effect | 1 Jun 2026 |
| Date of the landlord's notice | 30 Apr 2026 |
| Rules | Old rules (notice dated before 1 May 2026): the tribunal could also set a rent higher than the landlord's figure. |
| Property | house, 3 bedrooms |
Rents per calendar month as the tribunal recorded them (weekly rents × 52 ÷ 12). Read from the PDF automatically.
From the tribunal's valuation
Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988 requires the Tribunal to determine the rent at which it considers the Property might reasonably be expected to be let on the open market by a willing landlord under an assured tenancy, on the terms of the subject tenancy other than as to rent. In doing so the Tribunal must disregard the matters set out in section 14(2). Those disregards include any effect on the rent attributable to the fact that the Tenants are sitting tenants, and any increase in the value of the Property attributable to a relevant improvement carried out by the Tenants otherwise than in pursuance of an obligation to the Landlord. … The works listed above were carried out and paid for by the Tenants and, there being no written tenancy agreement obliging them to do so, they were not carried out in pursuance of any obligation to the Landlord. Any increase in value attributable to those works has accordingly been disregarded. The Tribunal has valued the Property as though the front door, the kitchen ceiling, the staircase wall, the bathroom, the carpets, the cooker, the shed and the fencing were in the condition in which the Landlord left them. … Neither party has provided any comparable rental evidence. …
An extract. To keep people's names out, any sentence that might contain one is left out (marked …). The full reasons are in the original decision.
The original
Past decisions are not a prediction. Each tribunal decides on the evidence in front of it.