Most Landlords Are Winning MRA Rent Cases – But Not Always at the Price They Ask

Analysis of the latest First-tier Tribunal decisions suggests rent increases are usually being approved under the new MRA process, but landlords who fail to support their figures with strong market evidence risk seeing their proposed rents reduced.

A review of the 15 MRA rent decisions currently published by the First-tier Tribunal reveals a consistent pattern. While tenants are rarely avoiding rent increases altogether, landlords are equally finding that the tribunal is willing to reduce proposed increases where they exceed the property's proven open-market rental value.

One important point is that the tribunal does not decide whether a landlord's increase is “fair”. Instead, its role is to determine the market rent the property could reasonably achieve, taking into account its condition and other relevant factors.

What do the figures show?

Of the 15 published cases reviewed:

• 14 resulted in a rent determination.
• 1 case was struck out because the landlord's notice was found to be invalid, meaning no new rent was determined.

Among the 14 determined cases:

• 6 cases (42.9%) approved the landlord's proposed rent in full.
• 8 cases (57.1%) resulted in the tribunal setting a lower rent than the landlord requested.
• Only one case refused the proposed increase entirely.
• No case resulted in a rent above the landlord's requested figure.

The overall direction is clear. Tribunals are generally allowing rents to increase, but they are scrutinising whether the proposed figure genuinely reflects current market conditions.

The financial picture

Across the 14 determined cases:

Overall, landlords sought an increase of approximately 8.52% across the sample.

The tribunal ultimately awarded an effective increase of approximately 6.39%, reducing proposed rents by a combined £471 per month.

Looking at each case individually produces a similar picture:

• Average landlord-requested increase: 11.83%
• Average tribunal-determined increase: 9.29%
• Median landlord request: 7.79%
• Median tribunal determination: 6.22%

The median figures arguably provide the better guide, as they are less affected by a handful of unusually large proposed increases.

Most tenants still saw their rent increase

Perhaps the most striking statistic is that 13 of the 14 determined cases resulted in a higher rent than the tenant had previously been paying.

This suggests the tribunal is not operating as a barrier to rent increases. Instead, it is acting as an independent check on whether the landlord's proposed figure reflects the open market.

Market evidence matters

One theme runs consistently through the published decisions: strong comparable evidence carries significant weight.

In one London case, the landlord relied on evidence of actual agreed lettings rather than advertised asking rents. The tribunal specifically stated that it placed greater weight on the landlord's evidence because it represented completed lettings rather than marketing prices.

In another case involving a block of flats, the tribunal relied heavily on the rent achieved by an almost identical flat within the same building when determining the new rent.

Conversely, several landlords saw their proposed increases reduced after the tribunal made deductions for issues such as:

• Property condition
• Wear and tear
• Drainage or maintenance defects
• Parking arrangements
• Tenant-funded improvements

These decisions demonstrate that the tribunal is assessing the property as it actually exists, rather than simply accepting headline market figures.

Don't underestimate the market either

Interestingly, several published decisions also show the opposite problem.

In more than one case, the tribunal concluded that the property's market rent was actually higher than the landlord had requested. However, because the tribunal could not determine a rent above the amount proposed in the landlord's notice, the landlord effectively limited the outcome by asking for too little.

That serves as a reminder that rent review notices should be based on robust market evidence rather than an arbitrary percentage increase.

What this means for landlords

Although this remains a relatively small sample of published decisions, several early trends are already emerging.

Landlords who can demonstrate their proposed rent using recent comparable evidence — particularly evidence of actual achieved rents — appear to place themselves in a much stronger position.

Equally, landlords who rely solely on percentage increases without supporting market evidence may find the tribunal reducing the proposed figure.

The emerging trend

Based solely on the 15 published MRA decisions currently available, the direction appears consistent:

• Rent increases are generally being approved.
• Tribunals are not simply rubber-stamping landlords' proposals.
• Most proposed increases are being moderated where they exceed demonstrated market rent.
• Strong comparable evidence is proving critical to success.

The headline figures summarise the position well:

• 93% of determined cases resulted in a rent increase.
• 57% of landlords did not receive the full increase they requested.
• The overall increase awarded was 6.39%, compared with 8.52% sought by landlords.

For both landlords and tenants, these early decisions suggest that the tribunal's focus is on establishing what the property would reasonably achieve in today's open market, rather than simply looking at the previous rent or applying a standard percentage increase.