The Renters' Rights Act – The Biggest Shake-Up in a Generation

Old school rent book

Dear Reader,

Some of you with very long memories (or very little else to do) may recall that a few years ago I wrote a blog called Landlords v Tenants. At the end of it I added a cheeky little PS about the proposed scrapping of Section 21 notices and promised to share my thoughts "when the changes are fully announced". Well, here we are. They have not just been announced; they are now the law of the land. The Renters' Rights Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 27 October 2025, and the bulk of its reforms came into force on 1 May 2026. A promise is a promise, so consider this me making good on it (only five years late, which by property timescales is practically punctual).

This is being billed as the biggest reform to the private rented sector since the late 1980s, and for once the hype is justified. It affects around 11 million renters and 2.3 million landlords in England. If you own so much as a single buy-to-let, this matters to you. So let me try to cut through the noise and tell you what has actually changed, and what I think it means for those of us who do this for a living.

Goodbye Section 21

Let's start with the big one. Section 21 "no-fault" evictions have been abolished. For years this was the landlord's emergency exit, the ability to regain possession without giving a reason, provided you served the right notice. It is gone.

Alongside it, the assured shorthold tenancy has been scrapped. Every tenancy is now a rolling, periodic assured tenancy with no fixed end date and no fixed term. Your existing six and twelve-month agreements automatically converted on 1 May. Tenants can now leave whenever they like by giving two months' notice. You, on the other hand, can only regain possession by using one of the expanded Section 8 grounds (selling the property, moving in a family member, persistent rent arrears, anti-social behaviour, and so on), and crucially, you will need evidence to back it up.

I will be honest with you, as I always try to be. My instinctive reaction, like that of a lot of landlords, was a groan. But the more I sit with it, the more I think the impact on good landlords is being wildly overstated. Cast your mind back to that earlier blog. My entire argument was that issuing a Section 21 was almost always a last resort, used only when the relationship had completely broken down. If you are running your portfolio properly, keeping tenants happy, fixing problems promptly, and avoiding voids (my favourite phrase, you will remember), you were rarely reaching for that particular button anyway.

The paperwork is no longer optional

Here is the part that should genuinely focus the mind. Because possession now depends on grounds and evidence rather than a no-questions-asked notice, your record-keeping has gone from "nice to have" to "absolutely essential". Sloppy paperwork, missing gas certificates, a deposit protected a day late: any of these could now scupper a legitimate possession claim and leave you with an occupied property you cannot regain. Add to this the eye-watering civil penalties of up to £40,000 for non-compliance, and you start to see where the real risk sits.

(Top tip: if you have been a bit relaxed about your filing, now is the moment to professionalise. Digitise everything. Date everything. Assume that one day you will have to prove it.)

The first hurdle: that Information Sheet

If you want a flavour of how seriously you now need to take the admin, look no further than the very first job the Act handed us. Every landlord with an existing tenancy was required to give each tenant a copy of the government's official "Renters' Rights Act Information Sheet 2026" by 31 May 2026, a deadline that, as I write this, has just sailed past. It is a short document (four pages) that simply explains to tenants how the new rules affect them: the end of fixed terms and Section 21, the once-a-year rent rule, the new right to request a pet, and so on.

A few things caught a lot of people out, so they are worth spelling out:

• It had to go to every named tenant, not just one per household, and could be sent digitally or on paper.

• You had to use the exact PDF from the government website: your own helpful summary, however beautifully worded, did not count.

• If a letting agent manages the property for you, the agent had to serve it too, even if you had already done so yourself.

• It applied to existing tenancies with a written agreement. Brand new tenancies signed on or after 1 May 2026 do not need it (the information goes into the agreement), and the rare wholly-verbal tenancy needed a written statement of terms instead.

  
  

The sting in the tail is a fine of up to £7,000 for getting it wrong. So if you somehow let this one slip by, do not simply shrug and move on. Serve it now, late is better than never, and (this is the bit people forget) keep proof that you served it. A dated email or a delivery record is worth its weight in gold if anyone ever asks. I would go further: even if you are fairly sure you sent it, re-serve it and file the evidence. It costs you nothing and removes a nagging risk.

Rent increases, bidding wars and money upfront

A cluster of changes targets how money moves at the start of and during a tenancy.

Rent can now only be increased once a year, via the formal Section 13 process, with two months' written notice. Those old rent-review clauses buried in tenancy agreements no longer apply. Tenants can challenge an increase at the First-tier Tribunal, and, importantly, they can no longer be evicted simply for doing so. The tribunal can only confirm the market rate or reduce it, not increase it above what you asked.

Rental bidding is banned. You must advertise a property at a fixed price and you cannot accept, encourage or invite offers above it. The days of sticking a flat on the market and letting desperate applicants fight it out are over. The flip side, of course, is that you need to price accurately from the start: pitch too low and you have left money on the table for a whole year.

Upfront rent is capped at one month. You can no longer ask a higher-risk applicant to smooth things over by paying six months in advance. In practice this pushes the emphasis onto referencing, guarantors and rent guarantee insurance. I would strongly encourage every landlord reading this to get comfortable with all three.

Pets, discrimination and treating people as individuals

Two further changes are, frankly, just about basic decency:

You can no longer refuse a tenant because they receive benefits or have children. "No DSS, no kids" adverts are now unlawful. You can, and absolutely should, still carry out proper affordability and referencing checks. What you cannot do is reject an entire category of human being before they have even applied.

Tenants now have the right to request a pet, and you must respond within 28 days and cannot refuse unreasonably. You can still say no where there is a genuine reason (a head lease that forbids pets, or a property that is plainly unsuitable), but you must justify it. You can also require pet insurance to cover potential damage, which seems an eminently sensible middle ground.

As a relatively new father (the "two under two" I mentioned in a previous blog are now slightly less under two, and just as chaotic), the discrimination point lands with me. The idea that having a young family should make it harder to find a secure home never sat right.

What's still coming

The 1 May date was what the government rather dramatically called the "big bang", but it is not the end of the story. Further phases are due later, including:

• A Private Rented Sector Database, where landlords and properties must be registered before they can be legally marketed or let.

• A Private Landlord Ombudsman, offering tenants a free route to resolve complaints without going to court.

• The extension of Awaab's Law and a Decent Homes Standard to the private sector, setting minimum condition requirements and strict timescales for dealing with hazards like damp and mould.

• 
  

Regular readers will know how strongly I feel about that last point: I wrote a whole blog on retrofitting and the shameful state of a chunk of our housing stock. Anything that forces the worst landlords to fix dangerous homes gets my vote, even if it means more work for the rest of us.

So, is the sky falling in?

You would think so, judging by some of the commentary. Every reform of this sort is met with predictions of a landlord exodus and the collapse of the rental market. I have heard it all before: I heard it when the 3% stamp duty surcharge came in, when mortgage interest relief was phased out, when EPC rules tightened. The sector did not die. It adapted, and the landlords who treated it as a proper business rather than a hobby came out the other side just fine.

I am not going to pretend the Act is cost-free for landlords. It is not. It removes flexibility, it raises the compliance burden, and it shifts the balance of power towards the tenant. Some smaller landlords will look at all this and decide it is not worth the hassle, and a few leaving the market will tighten supply, which is the law of unintended consequences doing its usual work.

But strip away the noise and the Act largely codifies how decent landlords already operate. Keep your properties in good order. Communicate well. Keep good records. Set a fair rent. Treat your tenants like the customers they are. Do those things and very little here should frighten you.

Or, to recycle the line I finished that blog with all those years ago: good tenants are hard to find, so when you do, make sure they are happy, it will save you in the long run. The Renters' Rights Act has simply turned my friendly advice into a legal requirement.

If you have got this far, thank you. I will leave you with one number to chew on: there are roughly 2.3 million private landlords in England, and the single biggest determinant of how this Act affects you is not the legislation itself: it is whether you were already doing it properly. Be in the half that was.

As ever, none of the above is legal advice: I am a property investor, not a solicitor. If you have a specific situation, speak to a qualified professional before acting.