Charity warns over increased reliance on guarantors under reforms

I fully agree we should not have to be worried about the financial risk – by why then Crisis did you support the bill despite the warnings from landlords?

a floored article from the start. Amazing how everyone has an opinion on what LL’s should do.

In a guest blog post for Crisis, published by the TDS Charitable Foundation, it said landlords should not have to choose between managing risk and being accessible.

We don’t have to choose at all.

So now another bonkers charity (CEO probably pulling in excess £100k pa) wants landlords to be some sort of charity or social services department.They must be out of their tiny minds.
Looking at the number of sold/for sale boards on flats in my town I would disagree there is not a mass exodus.

The poorest tenants will be frozen out of tge private rental sector because of campaigning by charities such as Shelter, Crisis and Generation Rent.

They need to own the problem.

Of course it wasn’t just a warning from landlords. The National Residential Landlords Association warned that the courts weren’t functioning correctly in 2025. Labour refused to publish the justice impact test of their Renters Rights Bill on the courts.

https://www.property118.com/government-refuses-to-reveal-renters-rights-bill-court-impact-assessment/

But Labour went ahead with the Labour Renters Rights Act BEFORE sorting out the problem in the courts. In April the Guardian reported a surge in no-fault evictions ahead of the implementation of the Labour Renters Rights Act.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/apr/08/landlords-no-fault-evictions-tenants-renters-rights-bill-law

This was entirely predictable and it was predicted. Previously landlords did not have to be so concerned about character references, guarantors, stringent credit-referencing or CRB checks (although affordability tests were still important). This was BECAUSE the existence of no-fault evictions provided a back-stop for landlords enabling them to take on some of the renters who didn’t have references or a perfect credit history.

But now landlords don’t just need more stringent referencing including identity checks, credit referencing and guarantors for some tenants, they just can’t afford to take on the risk of housing some tenants because they don’t know how well the courts are functioning. Because labour introduced anti-discrimination measures and also a requirement not to withhold information on availability of a property these enhanced measures need to be applied to all tenants. The effects of Labours Renters Rights Act were predictable and Labour were warned. You have to wonder about their refusal to publish the findings of their justice impact test on the courts.

Does any landlord have any current experience of how the courts are functioning now since Labour’s introduction of its Renters Rights Act?

Please can someone tell me which of 2 letting agents are correct?
1. You can have a guarantor for any tenant as long as you dont discriminate and do it for all your tenants
2. You can only have a guarantor for tenants who fail affordability checks

If you want to see just how delusional these people are have a look at their document on the subject.

https://www.crisis.org.uk/media/236937/factsheet_guarantors.pdf

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 04/06/2026 – 12:30
laughable! Crisis explaining to T’s why LL’s should not rely on g’tors.

Guess what, I will insist anyway, and if the T can’t provide one then that’s fine. I appreciate your deep concern for me on the matter.

Crisis 0
Tenant 0
LL 1

Reply to the comment left by JB at 04/06/2026 – 11:44
1. this is correct
2. If they fail affordability then they clearly can’t afford to pay the rent. Most applications then stop dead and get rejected. Remember the APT rent obligations are on the tenant no one else.
IF (big IF) you wanted to still wanted for some reason to progress with this failed affordability application you could request the use of a guarantor. Just be aware that the RRA implications means that the term ‘unlimited guarantor’ is now actually limited. You need to make sure you are happy with the limitations that now exist. When you actually read what you may pursue a G’tor for (and the difficulties/time and cost this may take to do so), you might feel the benefit of having one does not give you a warm cost feeling of security as you first thought.

Aside from this, the g;tor will also have to meet stricter referencing requirements than the tenant. Will they pass? If not, then you know the answer – application is a rejection.

I would suggest the best way (in current climate) if if T passes affordability then don’t bother with a g’tor but protect yourself with RGI/Legal assistance. (bake it into the rent amount). Only ask for a guarantor if they pass affordability, but for instance have no previous rental history (but credit history etc all good). Most cases this will be someone moving out from home and so a parent is a more likely option.

It really is a case of look at every application on an individual basis.

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 04/06/2026 – 12:58
Thank you Reluctant Landlord.
I don’t ever take anyone who fails affordability checks but would still like a guarantor for the reasonably hight earning prospective tenants I have lined up.
I’ve had high earning tenants before who have split up/lost their jobs etc so its always nice to have a back up home owning guarantor.
BUT am I allowed to? The 2 lettings agents have opposing views