Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

New renter rights act is a bloody good thing!

596 replies

Pineapplewhip · 30/04/2026 06:24

Naturally landlords have some justifiable concerns/questions but those that are up in arms about the whole thing are completely bloody immoral. The slum landlords have spoilt it for the good ones and the decent landlords should blame them and not the government for protecting people.

If you arent aware of the actual points of the bill - I've listed them below. I cant see how any reasonable person can disagree that it's just enforcing the most basic human decency and regulation.

  • End to no fault evictions: landlords can only evict renters if they want to sell, move in themselves, move their family into the property or there are serious rent arrears. They have to prove they are selling too - they cant just say they are!
  • Rent can only rise once a year, any rise above market rate can be disputed fairly and 2 months notice is given.
  • Landlords can't refuse you for having children or being on benefits (if you prove that benefits/finances make the property affordable). This isnt about being on full benefits either. Many single parents need benefits to top up income.
  • Landlord ombudsman - tennants can raise fair disputes and repair issues for free online and landlords cannot just ignore it/grey rock. Repeat offenders will be visable in the database. Landlords legally must act on the complaints.
  • Faster action must be taken on damp and mould. Basic human rights! No more shitty emails from a middle man letting agent just blaming the tennant for not opening a window - when actually (for example) a house needs its brickwork repointing.

The only legitimate thing I have empathy for is the concern that it will be more of a process to evict non paying tennants as it will need to go through a court. However - this is why landlord insurance exists!!

Please ask yourself - if your child was renting - wouldn't you want them protected like this?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
SapphOhNo · 30/04/2026 08:09

I'm so glad that thanks to this new bill I can hand my notice in on my god awful rental. Damp, mould, leaking roof that hasnt been sorted in six months.

One thing they still need to fix is unregulated letting agents.

Greenfaces · 30/04/2026 08:07

I’d never take anyone offering 6 months rent upfront. Have had guarantors in the past who actually don’t have the funds to pay the rent they have guaranteed so not interested in a tenant with a guarantor either. These days our tenants have to pass the insurance guarantee company’s checks. And as our properties have so many applications when they become available it’s never a problem to find a solvent tenant.

but as I said earlier up thread, the family house we own will be sold when the current tenants leave. And they have been tenants there for over ten years now, but will be leaving sometime soon as the kids have grown up and gone.

1apenny2apenny · 30/04/2026 08:07

There is now going to be an even greater backlog in the courts of getting people out after the massive section 21 orders. Tenants will be told to sit tight, as they have been previously, by councils. It’s unfair on landlords that it takes so long to get a tenant to move out.

There are many good landlords and it will be those who are exiting the market. One month’s rent as deposit is not enough imo when there’s a risk of damage to consider, even the smallest thing is ££&& now. I don’t think it’s acceptable to say landlords have to accept dogs either.

If I were a landlord I would be selling or looking at corporate lets or Airbnb.

Upstartled · 30/04/2026 08:07

Poppingby · 30/04/2026 08:02

Sorry landlords, but you don't get damp problems that cause you thousands of pounds to fix because your tenants don't open the windows. The fact anyone claims this makes them look like one of the terrible landlords this act is about. I own a Victorian house.

The best landlord I ever had was a faceless corporation type landlord who had staff and procedures for repairs, carried them out quickly, put systems in like permanent air vents and integral hair catchers and didn't try to guilt you into doing anything because it was a business transaction not a personal one. Of course they did not take any shit and did 6 monthly inspections and liked a solicitors letter, but it was much fairer than any other type of landlord I had in my many years of renting. Hopefully these types of company will buy up all the cheap properties that come in the market from "accidental" landlords who actually can't invest in the process of renting out homes to people.

Rentals supply is still 23% lower than pre-pandemic levels. The idea that corporations will swoop in and save renters from the inevitable spike that will result from lack of supply is quite naive.

puddingwisdom · 30/04/2026 08:07

Sorry landlords, but you don't get damp problems that cause you thousands of pounds to fix because your tenants don't open the windows. The fact anyone claims this makes them look like one of the terrible landlords this act is about. I own a Victorian house.

I am not a landlord any more but this simply isnt true. If you constantly hang washing up to dry in unventilated rooms you will get mould forming due to the high humidity conditions. It doesnt mean the house has a structural damp issue.

BlackRedGold · 30/04/2026 08:06

We rented out our family home when we relocated overseas temporarily for work.

We only owned that property, so we paid rent on one in our new location and were renters ourselves.

We didn’t have “nightmare” tenants, but still the ongoing repairs, maintenance, cleaning at the end of each tenancy, plus the percentage we paid to our letting agency meant we just about broke even over 5 years - and that’s not taking into account the mortgage which we still paid on the property.

When we came back, we gave our tenants notice, they moved out, we sold the property and bought somewhere bigger, no problems.

If we were in the same situation now, it would be much easier and safer just to leave the property vacant for several years - we know we would want it back at some point because it’s our family home. Having to go through a long winded court process to get it back could mean we were the ones ending up homeless!

If it’s not worth it to small landlords, who aren’t even attempting to make a profit, then presumably the only way it will be worth it to big corporations who do want a profit will be much higher rental prices across the board.

puddingwisdom · 30/04/2026 08:04

disappearingme · 30/04/2026 07:47

So basically no change then and I am certain the infrastructure to challenge won't be in place anyway...

Landlords are not forced to accept every tenant but they cant blanket refuse groups.

If there isnt enough social housing to meet the demand then thats really on the government to fix, not private LLs.

Poppingby · 30/04/2026 08:02

Sorry landlords, but you don't get damp problems that cause you thousands of pounds to fix because your tenants don't open the windows. The fact anyone claims this makes them look like one of the terrible landlords this act is about. I own a Victorian house.

The best landlord I ever had was a faceless corporation type landlord who had staff and procedures for repairs, carried them out quickly, put systems in like permanent air vents and integral hair catchers and didn't try to guilt you into doing anything because it was a business transaction not a personal one. Of course they did not take any shit and did 6 monthly inspections and liked a solicitors letter, but it was much fairer than any other type of landlord I had in my many years of renting. Hopefully these types of company will buy up all the cheap properties that come in the market from "accidental" landlords who actually can't invest in the process of renting out homes to people.

randomchap · 30/04/2026 08:00

Dolphinnoises · 30/04/2026 07:48

I agree there is a lot of stuff in there that is necessary. Under this law though, if a tenant is trashing the property and upsetting the neighbours, what redress is there?

You can still evict someone for antisocial behaviour or damaging the property.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act

Where a tenant is at fault, landlords can give notice using the relevant grounds at any point in the tenancy. This includes where a tenant commits antisocial behaviour, is damaging the property, or falls into significant arrears.

Guide to the Renters’ Rights Act

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act

ProudAmberTurtle · 30/04/2026 08:00

Dolphinnoises · 30/04/2026 07:48

I agree there is a lot of stuff in there that is necessary. Under this law though, if a tenant is trashing the property and upsetting the neighbours, what redress is there?

The landlord would have to serve a Section 8 notice and then hope the tenant leaves, and if they don't, apply to court for a possession order, which would take months.

This is one of the main reasons why flat prices have fallen recently - landlords selling up because they do not want to deal with this process.

Upstartled · 30/04/2026 07:57

We'll just sell up when our current tenant moves out. They've been there 10 years so hopefully they'll be happy there for more years to come and then we'll call it a day.

The unintended consequences of this legislation will land on those who are most risky to let a home to - particularly the young who have already been locked out of jobs to 'progressive' employment rights.

There are going to be a whole lot of jobless young adults stuck living at home thanks to all these shiny new Labour policies.

WheretheFishesareFrightening · 30/04/2026 07:52

What about the fact that renters will need to now pay stamp duty when moving into a new rental?

KatiePricesKnickers · 30/04/2026 07:49

There are strict laws across Europe for renting and it all works ok.
The actual commodity, the property, still exists regardless of who owns it.

Dolphinnoises · 30/04/2026 07:48

I agree there is a lot of stuff in there that is necessary. Under this law though, if a tenant is trashing the property and upsetting the neighbours, what redress is there?

thinktoomuchtoooften · 30/04/2026 07:48

I’ve been an accidental landlord. As executor of a relatives will I became responsible for selling a property and distributing the proceeds according to the will ( I wasn’t a beneficiary). It was hell.
Shortly after I inherited myself and could have made a lot of money renting out a property. I didn’t even hesitate. Straight on the market.

ByNimbleGreenFinch · 30/04/2026 07:47

TeenagersAngst · 30/04/2026 06:31

There was already plenty of regulation of the PRS that is woefully enforced meaning good landlords who comply have a harder time and bad landlords carry on regardless.

Bad landlords will carry on regardless of the RRA as well.

If the government really wanted to help tenants, they would leave the private sector alone and focus on building social housing. The private sector would then operate on its own merits and either fail or succeed.

The worst of all worlds is the system we have - an over-regulated private sector.

Edited

This

disappearingme · 30/04/2026 07:47

puddingwisdom · 30/04/2026 07:45

Genuine question but as pretty much every house up for rent has multiple people applying for it, how would anyone ever be able to prove that the landlord chose to rent it to the person with a full time job and not the person on benefits

You cant. As long as everyone is being treated the same then it's not discrimination. Eg you could ask that income must be at least 2.5 times the rent, they provide a guarantor and they have excellent credit checks. As long as everyone is judged on the same criteria you can still choose which tenant you want.

You can refuse someone on benefits with bad credit but only if it's based on financial criteria that you've applied to everyone equally. It doesnt mean you MUST rent to someone on benefits.

So basically no change then and I am certain the infrastructure to challenge won't be in place anyway...

CraftandGlamour · 30/04/2026 07:46

ProudAmberTurtle · 30/04/2026 06:44

I'm afraid it's another simplistic law by Labour that appeals to a certain type of voter but is actually bad for the economy.

Turning everything into rolling periodic tenancies sounds great on paper for "tenant security," but in reality:

  • Landlords can no longer easily get their property back when they need to sell or move family in. The new Section 8 grounds are supposed to help, but we all know how slow and clogged the courts already are. Good landlords are already talking about selling up or just leaving properties empty rather than risk being stuck with a nightmare tenant for months (or years).
  • Fewer properties coming onto the market means even less choice and higher rents for everyone. We're already seeing this in searches – decent family homes are like gold dust.
  • Tenants can give two months' notice and walk away whenever, but landlords have to jump through hoops. What about landlords who end up with rent arrears, damage, or anti-social behaviour? Sorting that through the courts will be a nightmare.

This is a classic virtue-signalling "rights for renters" while completely ignoring basic economics and the fact that the private rental sector relies on willing landlords. Many accidental landlords (people with one inherited or buy-to-let property) are going to exit, shrinking supply when we already have a massive shortage.

Agree. I'm not a landlord myself but did rent out my flat for two years, a decade ago, when I relocated with work. I'm glad I'm not in that position now. I am currently looking at the rental market as we're looking to sell and move location. Rightmove is currently offering up half a dozen properties across three counties that could suit us. I find that quite shocking.

Twinandatwoyearold · 30/04/2026 07:46

MikeRafone · 30/04/2026 07:22

If you’ve got 6 months rent up front in cash, it’s doubtful you’re facing homelessness

There Is a shortage of property. Landlords can’t take money in advance. If 4 people want the property you offer cash in advance - some dodgy landlords will take it as they can avoid paying tax.

A family could have cash (or access to cash either via family or crime) yet would not pass a letting agent’s employment and income and credit checks.

Many people have cash and a default or ccj or are an ex bankrupt.

The government want corporate landlords and as a previous poster said that means tenant can say goodbye to landlords who keep the rent at the same level for a few years.

To a corporate landlord you are tenant number 791 who needs a rent review every May. The AI system will check multiple databases to provide evidence of market rent. A local landlord will have no idea what tenants down the street are paying (unless s/he owns another house on the street or sees a house on rightmove- the agent will likely use rightmove plus for comparables ). A corporate owning 20 houses in a 0.25 mile radius will have much more data to access. And a bank account that can buy in data from surveyors etc to prove a higher rent is justified. The rent will be in line with market rents and reviewed without fail.

puddingwisdom · 30/04/2026 07:45

Genuine question but as pretty much every house up for rent has multiple people applying for it, how would anyone ever be able to prove that the landlord chose to rent it to the person with a full time job and not the person on benefits

You cant. As long as everyone is being treated the same then it's not discrimination. Eg you could ask that income must be at least 2.5 times the rent, they provide a guarantor and they have excellent credit checks. As long as everyone is judged on the same criteria you can still choose which tenant you want.

You can refuse someone on benefits with bad credit but only if it's based on financial criteria that you've applied to everyone equally. It doesnt mean you MUST rent to someone on benefits.

AmethystDeceiver · 30/04/2026 07:43

For all those saying that 'corporate landlords' will be far worse... I've lived in a country where it is far more normal to rent long term (as in decades) than the UK. Most of the apartments are owned by corporations. It works precisely because they are big and faceless and invested in diverse ways. So they won't be bankrupt by 1 tenant letting hair build up in the drain as mentioned up thread. They can keep the properties habitable in the longer term as an investment. It works well and is nothing to fear. When I rented in the UK it seemed far more precarious. I was aware that if my landlord had any change in circumstances (or mood even) I could be turfed out.

Maybe the end of non professional or insecure landlords (or accidental as they liked to be called here, as if they have no agency) would be no bad thing

disappearingme · 30/04/2026 07:39

Genuine question but as pretty much every house up for rent has multiple people applying for it, how would anyone ever be able to prove that the landlord chose to rent it to the person with a full time job and not the person on benefits? Surely when people go to viewings they will talk about what they do for work. I don't think the bill is going to stop that from happening. I'm a tenant who gets UC though very lucky to have come into some inheritance so I can buy a house. I don't think the bill is as strong as people think.

Enterthewolves · 30/04/2026 07:35

The concept of reforming renters' rights began with the Conservative government under Theresa May in 2019, which led to the Renters (Reform) Bill introduced by Michael Gove in May 2023.

OldGothNowadays · 30/04/2026 07:34

greenappletasty · 30/04/2026 07:01

Short sighted OP and naive. Unless you’re been a landlord you have no idea what reality is like. I’ve rented privately for 15 years before I bought and I’ve been a landlord too.

I was a landlord. I bought a house and the market crashed. If I had sold I would have lost money so I rented it out. I had over a decade of the most horrendous tenants and it showed me the very worst in people. Every single tenant trashed the house. Every single tenant disputed the deposit after trashing the house. Here’s just a small sample: left dog regularly overnight alone so it pissed, howled and barked. It took 6 months to get rid of the smell of piss and I had to take up an entire hard floor costing me over £5k in damages. Used a saw to cut off half a kitchen cupboard. Left so much shit in that house at end of tenancy that I had to order a skip. Ignored my repeat warnings not to remove the hair blocker from the shower, then flooded the entire lounge ceiling bringing it down and lied trying to pin it on the neighbouring house. The drain man I was made to pay for confirmed the pipes were blocked with copious amounts of hair yet tenant still demanded I pay it. Set fire to lounge carpet but refused to replace. Drilled 40 plus bolts into brand new painted bedroom walls and attached fitted cupboards. Cost me £1000s to repair. One tenancy change over I opened the oven door to find I was looking at the foundations of my house. They’d refused to clean the oven once and it was that bad the bottom of it had fallen out - when I said I needed to keep some of the deposit they screamed and shouted claiming it was fair wear and tear. Ripped out bathroom ceiling lights, smashed toilet pan, never ever weeded gardens, never ever handed back the house in the same pristine and clean state they got it, refused to pay for professional cleans at changeover despite it being in the contract, smashed ceiling light shades, defaulted on rent many times.

I had 5 tenants over a decade and they were all horrendous and entitled.

And as for mould and damp. I spent thousands because of their refusal and thick as mince attitude to old Victorian houses. I told each and every one repeatedly, “This is a Victorian house. It is designed to BREATHE. That means you must open windows every single day, no matter the season. You must not dry clothes on radiators. You must open the window every single time you shower.”

But no. Every single tenant refused to do this then complained repeatedly about the damp and mould spores forming on the walls everywhere. I even paid £900 for a specialist damp surveyor who presented them with a report saying this is not rising damp, or atmy other kind of damp. It is condensation caused by the inhabitants who are not treating the house as it needs to be treated. But they never listened. I’d lived in the house for nine years before I rented it out and never had any damp at all because I opened windows every day. It’s not rocket science. The damp inspector said most of his work was due to stupid tenants.

I could go on. I never made any profit and made a loss every year for a decade. Tenants have NO IDEA the costs of being responsible for the upkeep of a house. They have no idea that stress and time lost putting right their abuse of the property.

I did not increase rent once in ten years.

selling that house was the best thing I ever did. And it was in an area crying out for rental properties. Of which now there are hardly any and the demand is greater than ever.

The new bill has driven thousands of great landlords out and you will all be even more stuffed than you already are.

This type of issue is the real problem.

I'm a professional but have always rented for a few reasons that were beyond my control and one year just rolled into the next.

I was in my last house for over a decade. Rent increases were modest and the landlord said when I moved in that I was to treat the place as my own. So I did. I redecorated as and when I wanted to, kept the garden beautifully and, when I moved out, they bought me a card and a gift thanking me for looking after the house so well.

I've been in my current place for 5 years and, at the inspection, the LL literally gushed at how beautiful I'd made the place, how lovely it was and how well kept it was. The garden was a bit of an overgrown mess and is now a lovely garden with borders.

I've never caused any damage to a house and treat it as my home.

But then I've always had LLs who did things properly and then left me to get on with it.

Eg I book my own gas inspections directly with the gas man so no having to fit around someone else's schedule. In the last place, I'd message the LL with any issues (very, very few over the years) but I had the numbers of the tradespeople they used and contacted them directly to arrange repairs. There haven't been any issues in this place.

The problem isn't landlords or tenants per se. It's always some people.

ETA I spent a.weekend with a friend of mine in her house that had been rented out and tbh, it was shocking. It was absolutely filthy, it stank, there had been damage done. It cost her thousands to repair. More than anything, I was shocked that anyone had allowed themselves and their childen to live in such conditions!

previouslyknownas · 30/04/2026 07:34

Twinandatwoyearold · 30/04/2026 07:20

Shitty landlords will take it cash with no audit trail. If you are faced with this or being homeless people will take the risk.

The Tennant can offer an upfront payment

the landlord isn’t allowed to adl
or make it a condition of the tenancy

Swipe left for the next trending thread