Lords cut re-letting ban from 12 to six months in narrow vote

A close call of just four votes saw members of the House of Lords vote through an amendment slashing the re-letting ban from 12 to six months.

Under the Renters’ Rights Bill, if a landlord evicts a tenant to sell but the sale falls through, they are currently barred from re-letting the property for 12 months.

However, Lord Peers voted 213 to 209 in favour of Lord Cromwell’s amendment, which reduces that period to six months.

Unjustifiably penal provision of the bill

Under the Renters’ Rights Bill, landlords must give tenants at least four months’ notice if they intend to sell the property. A 12-month “protected interval” at the start of a tenancy also prevents landlords from evicting tenants for the purpose of selling during that time.

If a landlord evicts a tenant in order to sell, but the sale falls through, the rules currently bar them from re-letting the property for 12 months.

Lord Cromwell’s amendment focuses only on cases where a landlord evicts to sell but the sale falls through, arguing the 12-month re-letting ban in such cases is financially damaging.

He said: “I remind the House that the bill says that, if a landlord asks a tenant to leave on the grounds that the landlord is selling the property but the property then fails to sell, which happens in about one-third of cases, the landlord will then, in all such cases, be prohibited from renting out the property for another 12 months.

“Amendment 58 seeks to reduce that period to six months, which would mitigate what is an unjustifiably penal provision of the bill, which damages both landlords and prospective tenants.”

Lord Cromwell adds that when he and other Lords suggested 12 months was too long, he was told this “was to stop prevent evil landlords from claiming they were selling simply as a means to eject a tenant and then re-letting the property at a higher rent.”

However, Lord Cromwell dismissed the accusations and said this was simply not true for many landlords.

He told the debate: “If the landlord has a valid claim to increase the rent, the bill already provides for that. A landlord would simply seek a normal rent increase rather than going to the dramatic and expensive process and risk of requiring a tenant to leave and then hoping to re-let at a much higher rent.”

Financial burden and barrier

Lord Cromwell also warns the 12-month ban would force landlords to push up rents.

He said: “The numbers demonstrated clearly that the supposedly avaricious landlord, even if having the property empty for only six months, as I propose, rather than 12, would have to put the rent up by a very substantial amount, in excess of 200% or even 300%, to recoup their rental losses.

“I say nothing of the other costs, including the council tax surcharge bills and the risks of leaving a building empty.

“Such a huge rent hike would be impossible. The rent asked would be completely uncompetitive against other properties not carrying such an inflated rent level. In short, being obliged to leave a property empty for six months is more than enough of a financial burden and barrier so as to make the strategy so feared by the Minister simply untenable.”

Tenant group slams amendment change

Despite Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, urging Lord Cromwell to withdraw the amendment, the Lords approved it by a narrow vote of 213 to 209.

Industry body Propertymark hailed the victory but warned evidence will still be needed to show genuine efforts to sell.

Propertymark said: “An amendment has been passed to reduce the re-letting ban from 12 months to six months where a landlord serves notice to sell, but the sale does not go through.

“Although evidence must be given to prove fair marketing, and that no suitable offers were refused. This reduction will help landlords avoid long void periods, prevent unnecessary financial penalties, and keep more properties available to rent.”

However, the Renters’ Reform Coalition have slammed the Lords for voting through the amendment and urged them to rethink.

On X, formerly Twitter the tenant group claims: “The Lords vote to cut the ban on re-letting after evicting tenants under the sales ground from a year to six months.

“But many landlords will be able to bear a six-month empty period, nearly half own their property outright so have no costs. The government must take this change out.”

However, the tenant group fails to mention that many landlords have mortgages and do not own their properties outright and often earn only modest incomes.

As revealed in the English Housing Survey, the median gross income for landlords is around £25,000 before expenses, with 41% earning less than £20,000.