Reading time: six minutes

About a year ago, I wrote an article on the Renters' Rights Bill – which, at the time of writing, has now become the Renters’ Rights Act – and its proposed changes. The act is likely to come into effect in early 2026, with the changes introduced applicable to both new and previously existing tenancies. It's been described as the "most significant shake-up of the rental market in almost 40 years" – so, in this article, I'll be recapping the main changes it’ll introduce and cover its impacts in greater detail.

A recap of the main changes

1. Abolition of section 21 evictions

Previously, landlords could evict tenants without fault using what was called a section 21 notice, also known as a no-fault eviction. This refers to section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, the authority for this power.

The biggest and most radical change introduced by the Renters' Rights Act is the abolition of these types of evictions. Landlords now need a legal reason to evict tenants, for example the landlord wants to move into the property or is selling the property. For the eviction to be successful, they’ll require a section 8 notice, a written document that can only be used if certain criteria apply.

2. Rent in advance

Previously, a tenant could be asked to pay any amount of rent in advance. However, under the new act, landlords can only ask for a month's rent in advance. Additionally, councils will be able to fine landlords who demand more.

3. Rent increases

Before the new act, landlords could ask tenants to agree to a rent increase at any time, even multiple times a year. Now, landlords can only put up rent once a year, having given at least two months' notice. Also, increases must be according to the property’s market rate (the price the property would fetch if it was newly advertised to let). Tenancy clauses that state otherwise will no longer apply. Tenants may also be able to challenge a rent increase by taking it to a tribunal if they feel it’s too high.

4. Awaab's law

In 2023, a government report estimated that 3.6% of private rented properties had severe levels of damp and mould.

Another important new feature of the Renters' Rights Act is the extension of Awaab's Law, named after toddler Awaab Ishak who died due to living in a mould-infested home, from social housing to the private rental sector. This means that landlords now have new requirements to address hazards within a specific timeframe – with legal consequences if they fail to do so.

5. Periodic tenancies

Before the new act, there was a category of tenancies called 'Fixed-Term Assured Shorthold Tenancies'. These were a type of private rental agreement where a tenant and landlord would commit to a tenancy for a fixed period – hence the name 'fixed term'. The downside to this was that if a tenant wanted to leave early they couldn't, unless there was a break clause in the lease.

After the introduction of the act, most residential tenancies will no longer be able to be granted for a fixed term. Instead, they’ll become 'Periodic Assured Tenancies', meaning that instead of having a set end date they’ll be rolling on a monthly or weekly basis. This means that either party can end the tenancy at any time, so long as they've given at least two months' notice.

6. New ombudsman

A new ombudsman (an organisation to which members of the public may make complaints about a company) has been set up for the private rented sector. All private landlords are required by law to join, even those who use a managing agent. Tenants may use the service for free to complain about a landlords' actions or behaviour. The ombudsman then has the capacity to compel landlords to make an apology, take action to remedy the situation, or even pay compensation.

Last-minute amendments

While MPs were debating the details of the act, further amendments were made – which I’ll break down for you here.

1. Ensuring that housing for members of the British Armed Forces is held to the same standard as social and private housing

This amendment extends the ‘Decent Homes Standard’, a minimum quality standard already applicable to social housing and recently extended to the private rental sector, to Ministry of Defence housing. This ensures that armed forces members and their families can have access to good quality properties.

2. Allowing rent increases to be backdated by the government (ie, set to an earlier date than when they actually occurred)

Initially, there were no plans to backdate rent increases – meaning that any tenant who received a rent increase could delay it by challenging in court and waiting until the First-Tier Tribunal (FTT) made a ruling.

However, it was clarified during debates that the government is able to backdate rent increases if the tribunals become backlogged due to a surge in cases.

An alternative body to the FTT to handle cases and determinations is also being explored in order to take the pressure off the FTT.

3. Removal of pet insurance requirements

In my previous article on the Renters' Rights Bill, I briefly touched on the fact that, under the bill, landlords must now provide good justification for refusing a tenants' request for pets.

During the bill's amendments stage, there was some discussion around setting up a pet insurance – meaning tenants could take out a policy covering the cost of potential pet damage. However, the government decided against this requirement, so landlords aren’t able to insist that tenants purchase such insurance.

What are some potential issues with the act?

1. Increasing court workload – the Renters' Rights Act offloads many disputes, such as those over rent increases, to the courts, putting an already loaded court system under even more weight. The government is exploring setting up alternative organisations to deal with this influx, but until they do, it remains an extra burden on the courts.
2. Circumventing new laws – some of the issues addressed by the act may not be effectively dealt with as people may find loopholes. For instance, the act aims to end the practice of 'rental bidding', through which landlords can maximise the rent they receive, by ensuring that landlords are no longer allowed to accept more than the initial rent advertised. However, this can be circumvented in practice by landlords raising their initial asking rents – meaning that the core aim of this change, which was to lower unreasonably high prices faced by tenants, may not actually be achieved.
3. The landlord exodus – the increased cost of being a landlord, both financially and practically, has led to more landlords exiting the market – a fact that may upend the structure and composition of the rental market. The increased cost (and lowered income) of becoming a landlord may be passed onto tenants – worsening the very situation the act aimed to change. Alternatively, the state of the UK letting market may shift from predominantly ‘mom-and-pop’ landlords, who own and manage a small number of properties, to institutional investors (as seen in countries like the US). This could, in turn, result in higher rents as those larger forces are able to exert greater market influence and power.

Despite the radical changes introduced by the act, the results are still a long way ahead. It's likely that the government will prioritise implementing the most significant changes, such as the abolition of section 21 notices, rather than the more minor amendments. At the time of writing, the act has only just gained royal assent – so, as to the real impact and implementation of these changes on the sector, only time will tell.