Government claim landlords still have a choice over who they rent to
2 months ago | 5 comments
Government claims Renters’ Rights Act cracks down on rental discrimination
8:58 AM, 17th September 2026, 4 days ago
23
Categories:
The government claims the Renters’ Rights Act addresses overt discriminatory practices used by landlords and letting agents.
In a written parliamentary answer, housing minister Matthew Pennycook said the act gives councils strong enforcement powers to tackle rental discrimination.
Under the Renters’ Rights Act, it is illegal for landlords and letting agents to discriminate against prospective tenants who receive benefits or have children, with fines of up to £7,000 for those who break the rules.
Bear down on rental discrimination in PRS
In a written parliamentary question, Labour MP Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, asked: “What recent steps has the government taken to ensure compliance with the (a) Equality Act 2010 and (b) Renters’ Rights Act within the rented housing sector”.
Mr Pennycook said: “The Renters’ Rights Act provides local authorities with strong investigatory and enforcement powers to bear down on rental discrimination practices in the private rented sector.
“It addresses both overt discriminatory practices, such as ‘No DSS’ adverts, and situations where landlords or letting agents use other indirect practices in order to prevent someone entering into a tenancy.
“The government is increasing ring-fenced civil penalties to support a ‘polluter pays’ approach to enforcement of the new tenancy system.”
He added: “In accordance with the New Burdens Doctrine, we will ensure additional net costs on local authorities resulting from the Act are fully funded. To that end, my Department is providing £41.12 million to local housing authorities for this financial year to help them undertake their new enforcement responsibilities. This funding is in addition to the £18.2 million provided in 2025/26.
“Our aim over the long term is to establish a sustainable funding system for private rented sector enforcement based on future Private Rented Sector Database fee revenues.”
Certain circumstances of rental discrimination
Under the guidance, the government list certain circumstances of rental discrimination including:
Landlords will not be able to stop someone doing any of the following because they have children or get benefits (or you think they do):
- accessing information about the property
- viewing a property
- renting a property
Accessing information
Information could include:
- the availability of the property
- the date it becomes vacant
- details of the property, such as the size, location or number of bedrooms
Viewing a property
This will include refusing to let someone view the property or knowingly making it difficult for them to view it, such as by offering unreasonable times.
Renting a property
This will include poor treatment to make it less likely for someone to want to rent the property, for example, a rental agreement that puts the tenant at a disadvantage.
23 comments on this article
Learn from your peers’ experience
A different perspective could help you spot an issue, avoid a mistake or find a better way forward. Read the comments and add your own views if you wish.
Related Articles
Practical legal answers to 10 Renters’ Rights Act questions
4 months ago | 1 comments
Call to fine landlords who discriminate against young renters
7 months ago | 23 comments
Member Since June 2022 - Comments: 59
1:38 PM, 17th September 2026, About 4 days ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 17/09/2026 – 13:24
All agency advertising is as follows, once we receive all pre applications into us we forward to the property owner for instruction on who he/she wishes to offer a viewing/tenancy too. Should a viewing has been done and the person wishes to apply for a tenancy we then provide a full application form and the checks are then completed by an outsources company for all credit / employment and landlord referecing along with Right to rent and AMl checks.
EPC = C
Concil Tax Band = A
Rental £775 PCM.
Deposit £775 Secured within the DPS.
Pets will be considered by the property owner.
Smoking is not permitted within the property.
Full Credit / Referencing / AML checks will be conducted on applications received.
** WE REQUEST YOU EMAIL US FOR A PRE APPLICATION FORM TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PROPERT OWNER PRIOR TO ANY VIEWINGS **
Member Since October 2020 - Comments: 1354
2:42 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Sheralyne Stamp at 17/09/2026 – 13:38
You might want to get a legal opinion to be certain of your position. They would tell you if you have any culpabillity if, for example you fail to advise or even reject landlords who consistently or openly breach the discrimination rules. Agents have a duty of care and are expected to have more knowledge of the legislation than their landlords. I’m not convinced that simply passing liability to the landlord would wash in court.
Member Since June 2019 - Comments: 956
4:51 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Sheralyne Stamp at 17/09/2026 – 13:38
Credit referencing all applicants would be very expensive so this wording needs to be handled carefully as I assume that you only check a couple of applicants rather than the lot. I fear as criteria harden there will be a lot of ‘mystery shoppers ‘ out there trying to claim compensation for any perceived discrimination.
Member Since June 2022 - Comments: 59
5:26 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by DPT at 17/09/2026 – 14:42
I do have the knowledge as a certified practitioner and hold Level 3 within the NRLA on the new Renters Right Act qualification.
I advise the clients however ultimately it is their choice. Should they request to continue where I feel there would be discriminatory grounds I would advise then and reject the instruction. A solicitor has drafted our policies and procedures
Member Since October 2013 - Comments: 1739 - Articles: 3
5:28 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 17/09/2026 – 16:51
I hadn’t considered that. To minimise the new risks of the RRA, you need to do enhanced checks, but to avoid claims of discrimination, you need to check everyone who applies equally. Perhaps a 2-stage process to weed out those who definitely can’t afford the rent, and can’t produce 12 months ‘verifiable’ bank statements showing income and existing rent going out.
Member Since May 2017 - Comments: 827
5:40 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Requiring a home owning guarantor weeds out a lot of applicants
Member Since June 2019 - Comments: 956
8:19 PM, 17th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Another new issue caused by this made the papers a few weeks ago, landlords are now very reluctant to let existing HMO tenants choose a replacement tenant when someone leaves.
The financial side is bad enough but can you guarantee that the existing tenants won’t say anything discriminatory during the interview process. The newspaper was of course whinging about the evil landlords not giving existing tenants the choice.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3720 - Articles: 5
9:27 AM, 18th September 2026, About 3 days ago
LOL. The RRA effectively increases discrimination. It simply means taking on benefits tenants (especially) a lot more risky and so less change of them being offered a tenancy. At the end of the day if the LL doesn’t want to take on a particular tenant they wont, regardless of what the law says. All it means is the LL is more savvy when refusing…
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3720 - Articles: 5
9:33 AM, 18th September 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by JB at 17/09/2026 – 11:22
I don’t even offer viewings unless an application form is filled in and returned and shows affordability can be met and they have passed a right to rent (in other words I see ID). What’s the point of a viewing if they cant afford it from the get go and they can’t pass the R2R?
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3720 - Articles: 5
9:47 AM, 18th September 2026, About 3 days ago
The RRA allows a full deposit to be requested and paid before the APT is signed. A private payer will on the whole not have an issue with this if they want to secure the accommodation.
Benefits tenants are inevitably relying on the council providing a deposit and guess what, they wont pay this (along with the first months rent) until the APT is signed…..
A LL is not accountable for institutionalised discrimination.