Greenwich (Parliament Politics Magazine) – A Thamesmead tenant secured a £100 monthly rent reduction after challenging their landlord’s hike at a property tribunal in Greenwich over excessive demands.
As reported by South London Press, although a hike was reasonable, a first-tier property tribunal decided that it should be lowered because the tenant had made improvements to the property and there was some normal wear and tear.
The cost will increase by £250 per month, yet the tenant will still be required to pay an additional £3,000 in rent annually. Landlords Toyin and Mobolanle Sodunke attempted to increase the monthly rent at the Greenhaven Drive house from £1,400 to £1,750 on November 13, 2024.
A month later, on December 4, Anthonia Iyio, the renter of the Greenwich borough home, requested that a residential property tribunal determine the market rent.
The terraced house was described in the report:
“The property is a mid-terrace modern estate house built around 2001 with allocated parking and a rear garden. On the ground floor is a living room and a kitchen. The first floor comprises two bedrooms and a bathroom/WC.
The property is in a condition consistent with its age and form of construction. During the tenancy, the tenant has undertaken various improvements such as replacement door and window handles, smoke detector and towel rail. The landlord provided carpets, and white goods, with the exception of fridge and curtains.”
Using its “expert, general knowledge of rental values in the Thamesmead area,” the tribunal determined that the home would fetch £1,700 a month on the open market if it were in “good marketable condition,” with all the utilities and current furniture.
This strategy is in line with the law, which states that unless the landlord has expressly accepted and included the upgrades in the tenancy agreement, the rent shall be determined by the owner’s property as it would be without tenant modifications. In order to maintain equity between the landlord and the tenant, the tribunal further modified the rent by taking ordinary wear and tear into consideration.
The tribunal lowered this amount to £1,650 in order to account for Miss Iyio’s enhancements as well as the typical “wear and tear” on fixtures and decorations.
The new rent for the residence was established at £1,650 per month, retroactive to December 29, 2024, after the tribunal’s ruling on April 14, 2025. This indicates that Miss Iyio’s rent has increased from £16,800 to £19,800 annually.
How did the tenant’s improvement to the property influence the tribunal’s decision in Greenwich?
By requiring the tribunal to determine the market rate based on the property’s state before the tenant’s upgrades, the tribunal’s ruling was impacted by the tenant’s improvements. Tenant-made improvements are usually ignored in the valuation process when establishing a fair rent increase, as per tribunal practice and case law.
This is because the landlord usually does not have the right to profit from improvements done by the tenant without the landlord’s approval.
In this instance, the tribunal acknowledged that Anthonia Iyio, the renter, had made upgrades that improved the property’s state above and beyond typical wear and tear.
In order to ensure that the landlord’s rent increase was reasonable, the tribunal tempered the proposed rent increase to reflect the property’s value prior to those tenant renovations.