Gov’t rejection of Renters’ Rights Bill amendments will backfire
Following the Commons debate last night, which saw the rejection of nearly all non-Government amendments to the Renters’ Rights Bill, Greg Tsuman, Managing Director for Lettings, Martyn Gerrard Estate Agents, comments:
“As expected, the amendments that were not government-backed have not been passed – over 300 of them. This is unfortunate, as they were some injections of common sense into the Bill, which as it stands reveals the Government’s fundamental misunderstanding of the Private Rented Sector. A more consultative approach would have yielded a much better piece of legislation.”
On the pet deposit amendment…
“Rejecting the pet deposit amendment doesn’t empower tenants. If landlords can’t require a deposit or insurance to cover pet-related damage, many will simply price in the risk by raising rents across the board. That doesn’t help tenants – it drives defensive pricing, reduces affordability and choice, and unfairly penalises those without pets for rules meant to protect those with them.”
On the re-let restriction amendment…
“Keeping the 12-month relet restriction ignores the unpredictable nature of the housing market. A landlord who can’t sell shouldn’t be forced to keep a property empty for a full year. It’s yet another example of how rigidity in legislation can backfire on both landlords and renters.
“Looking at the recent Rushanara Ali case, sometimes a property needs to return to the market sooner, whether due to failed sales, financial pressure, or changing circumstances. Locking perfectly good homes out of circulation for 12 months punishes both tenants and landlords and deprives the Treasury of taxable rental income. Why should a willing tenant be barred from reoccupying a perfectly good home? Surely the government hasn’t got that much money to throw away, when six months of rental income tax could be generated.
“In honest cases, this rigidity serves no one – not renters, not landlords, and certainly not the taxpayer.”
On the Renters’ Rights Bill more broadly…
“Tenants’ rights are vitally important, and key to success will be effective communication to stakeholders. Failing this, the legislation risks doing more harm than good. Whilst the Bill as it stands does not pose a problem for the majority of landlords, perception can often matter more than reality. If landlords feel neglected or pushed out, we will not have a fairly balanced rental sector. Renters, now more than ever, need professional landlords who are willing to stay in the market and invest further so rents don’t continue to climb.
“Many provisions reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the Private Rented Sector and ultimately don’t empower tenants – instead, they force landlords to raise rents defensively, undermining both affordability and choice. We are now facing a very real risk of unintended consequences. The added costs and compliance burdens will likely prompt many landlords to leave the market altogether, reducing supply, inflating rents, and potentially recreating the crisis conditions of 2022, when renters vastly outnumbered available homes. Worse still, recent loopholes could allow local authorities to sidestep their rehousing responsibilities, leaving vulnerable tenants without a safety net.
“It looks like the Government may already be aware of this – otherwise, why introduce a provision to cope with first-tier tribunals being overwhelmed? We need legislation that protects renters without undermining the very sector they rely on. I don’t anticipate any significant changes to the Bill before it receives Royal Assent. So, we better start preparing for the consequences, unintended or otherwise.
“It seems the Government is fixated on meeting a manifesto pledge, regardless of the long-term consequences. The cost will be lasting damage to both landlords and tenants – but ultimately, tenants will bear the brunt.”
You May Also Enjoy
Clarity on energy efficiency rules for commercial property needed
English Housing Survey 2024 to 2025
Propertymark responds to latest HMRC property transactions report
Mortgage activity dips in December
£19.9bn of PRS refurbishment required
