Landlords face fines of £3,000 to £35,000 under new government guidance
4 months ago | 54 comments
Renters’ Rights Act and the 12 months relet ban?
12:01 AM, 7th April 2026, 3 days ago
13
Hi, I’ve just read through the details again…
If you evict a tenant post 1st May using ground 1 as a family member needs to move in, but then they find work elsewhere, for example, then move out, as it stands you still cant relet if this is within the banned period.
I wondered if in this case you could then lease the property to the council for temp accommodation instead.
Is the ban on ANY rental of the property by anyone at all carte blanche, or is it more specifically based on the type/category of let going forward and/or if it falls under the RRA remit or not? I can’t find the detail I am looking for.
1. If the lease to the council is not a let covered under the RRA going forward, for example, would the 12 month letting ban still apply?
2. If the penalties of a breach of the 12 month reletting ban are down to the councils to enforce and prosecute, would they themselves be able to issue a full exemption/statutory excuse from any breach if they agreed to take your property on within the 12 months (because they desperately need temp accommodation)?
Are we really looking at a situation where a LL is banned from even being able to offer up an empty property to the council to enable them to fulfil their own statutory housing obligations?
Thank you,
Reluctant Landlord
Tags:
letting to a council, relet ban, Renters Rights Act impact on landlords, section 8 relt ban, temporary accommodation
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Related Articles
Renters’ Rights Act enforcement split into breaches and offences
1 week ago | 30 comments
Landlords risk fines, bans and bankruptcy – The answer?
4 months ago | 25 comments
Member Since January 2015 - Comments: 1431 - Articles: 1
1:15 PM, 7th April 2026, About 2 days ago
Surely, if a close relative moved in, with or without a APT agreement but utility bills and Council Tax in their name(s), and then was offered a job elsewhere and had to relocate, you could offer the property for rent from the date the relative moved out as would have circumstantial evidence (letter of employment contract) that proved that their moving out was only as a result of being offered employment elsewhere and was therefore not a breach of the s8 Ground 1.
Member Since August 2023 - Comments: 44
4:30 PM, 7th April 2026, About 2 days ago
this relet ban..
if you relet it but included council tax in with the rent, so keeping it in your name,
no one would be the wiser lol
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1137
5:11 PM, 7th April 2026, About 2 days ago
The prohibition on re-letting is absolute. No direct lets, no rent to rent through the Council or otherwise and no Airbnb. This applies from the moment the notice is served, whether or not its used, so if the landlord withdraws the notice but the tenant subsequently moves on for a different reason, the 12 month restriction on re-letting still applies.
Member Since November 2020 - Comments: 51
5:17 PM, 7th April 2026, About 2 days ago
Reply to the comment left by graham mcauley at 07/04/2026 – 16:30
Other than Electoral roll, deposit scheme, gas , electric , water, landlord register you mean ? You’d soon be up for an RRO and large fine. Good luck.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
6:15 PM, 7th April 2026, About 2 days ago
I understand it’s a max £7000 fine for breach of the relet ban, and it’s not an offence that would give rise to an RRO. With mitigating circumstances, early payment discount, and the time it would take for the council to find out and make a case, it will be worth the risk in many parts of the country – depending on property size and rent level
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1137
5:26 PM, 8th April 2026, About 22 hours ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon F at 07/04/2026 – 18:15
If the re-let persists the penalty can be increased to £40k I believe.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
5:35 PM, 8th April 2026, About 21 hours ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 08/04/2026 – 17:26
So long as the tenant stays, the landlord would have lawful excuse for any subsequent attempt at enforcement action. Ground 6A re-possession to allow for compliance with enforcement action does not cover the scenario — check para 22 in schedule 1 of Renters Rights Act 2025.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
6:14 PM, 8th April 2026, About 21 hours ago
Reading Government Guidance rather than RRA wording directly shows up a nuance – Guidance says it’s £7000 fine for re-letting after serving a notice of possession on Ground 1A, but upto £40,000 for re-letting if it goes to court and possession is granted by the court on Ground 1 or 1A.
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 198
7:20 PM, 8th April 2026, About 20 hours ago
Reading through RRA provisions 12 to 17 more closely: Re-lettng is not the offence, it is marketing the property for let that is the offence.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3508 - Articles: 5
10:43 AM, 9th April 2026, About 4 hours ago
to add further confusion, I thought the whole point of this reletting ban was to stop evictions the the LL reletting at a higher rent.
If the LL relet at the same or lower rent, would the ban still apply? Or would the ban still apply but the council (who enforce) having no evidence to prove this was the case, then be unable to progress with enforcement?