Councils given power to penalise landlords for unenforceable tenancy clauses

I won’t be re-issuing tenancy agreements, all the existing ones will stand.

Quite simply, the tenant would need to formally surrender the old one, before a new one could be signed. I wouldn’t blame any tenant that refused to do that.

Conversely, I wouldn’t suggest any landlord signing and handing over a new tenancy, before the old one was surrendered!.

And TBH, I think I’m better off with a tenancy that predates the RRA, so that in the event the council comes after me over an unenforceable term, that I’ve not attempted to enforce, the defence is, “that term was voided by the RRA anyway”.

As for council issued unreasonable fines, I won’t be paying those outside of a court hearing either!

Council, “here’s a £5k fine for XYZ, pay up”
Landlord, “no”.
Council, “what do you mean, No, you’ve got to pay”
Landlord, “the answer is still, No”
Council, “we’ll take you to Court!”
Landlord “ok, for £5k, you are on, see you there!”

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 12/01/2026 – 16:35
Smiffy

Exactly. There will be millions of contracts with break clauses that are no longer valid but unless you try to use them no Council will ever know, let alone try to fine LLs for these – if they tried they would look v silly in court

I happen to have a contract specifying payment a few days before the rental period which I will change with a contract variation (easy to do with rocketlawyer) that I will agree with tenant. I could leave it and imply the tenant is paying early voluntarily but it’s easy enough to change and better for tenant – they get to pay rent a few days later. But no need for a completely new tenancy agreement

So it is still worth at least reviewing tenancy agreements (sorry if ridiculously obvious) but I agree with your approach.

Reply to the comment left by Wolfey at 09/01/2026 – 11:07
no court. The council will be given powers to be the judge and jury, even though we may not what they actually want us to do regarding what goes on the tenancy agreement.
All clauses they want us to add or remove need to be disclosed now.
Rather than the council will tell us during or after they tell us what the penalties are.
Why would some landlords repeat their offences? Are they told what they have done that needs to be put right?
There are a lot of unfair issues.
All landlords know that they need to provide all compliance certificates at the start of the tenancies and when fall due during the tenancies.
We have to provide the deposit certificate and prescribed information within 30 days of tenancy start date or receipt of deposit, whichever is earliest.
From 1st May, the tenancy should not say any due or termination or fixed date on the tenancy.
So a new agreement has to be given to all the existing tenants.
I understood the government is expected to disclose what goes in the agreement this month.
Solicitors and other financial or housing experts have stated that this does not give a lot of time to the landlords to make all the changes and pass it to their tenants.
Landlords will become very busy for the next 3 months, either giving S21 notice or changes to their tenancies.
Even with all the correct documentation and all the systematic work done to the houses to provide good homes to the tenants, any landlords can slip up. The fines are very heavy, especially if landlords have mortgages and continuous maintenance done.
The laws are unfair as they are illegal, unenforceable but councils have full authority to take whatever money they want from you.

Reply to the comment left by PH at 09/01/2026 – 12:42
As far as I understand the council has the power to walk into the tenanted property without the 24 hours notice and we have to let the tenants know that this will happen and to let the council as they have powers to do so.
I believe this clause will need to be in the revised tenancy agreement.
RRB is a joke against the landlord which will carry very prohibitive penalties. The government sounds like an evil joker as in old batman program on tv. Only issue, this government is aaw unto themselves to extricate illegal penalties from the landlords from tiny mistakes, no relation the safety or health reasons.
Compliance certification is for safety reasons and so is ensuring the properties are safe and healthy from mould, dampness etc. They have hot water and heating and possibility for ventilation of the property.

Most ASTs will have specified a fixed term, but will also have said that at the end of the fixed term it will become a rolling 2 month contract for the tenants to give notice. None of these will need to be changed as they will now default to 2 months notice for the tenant and 4 months notice for the landlord (to sell).

All that will be required is for this mystery letter to be sent out to all tenants, the contents of which are yet to be published by the government.

Reply to the comment left by Tiger at 12/01/2026 – 18:30
Councils will have to give the tennant a minimum 24 hours notice of a visit but do not need to tell the landlord until the visit has taken place but maybe that bit is optional to the council.