Government confirms agents can submit Database information on behalf of landlords

Reply to the comment left by CP at 31/07/2026 – 15:04
If either antisocial behaviour or other misdemeanours do become associated with the address of any given rental property then the association of that address with a tenant’s name will probably affect the tenants’ credit rating. After she left I received a lot of correspondence to one of my best ever tenants (a single mum on benefits) from various creditors from whom she had secured credit, in some cases I suspect fraudulently. Putting the details of your rental property on the internet without being able to determine which of the tenants the antisocial, fraudulent or other criminal behaviour is associated with will not necessarily help tenants. I.e the sins of the bad tenants will be visited on the good tenants.

I have to declare my income on the property pages of my tax return anyway. Criminals and bad actors aren’t necessarily going to do this, with or without the existence of a labour landlord database. I don’t see how this current labour proposal is going to benefit either landlords or tenants. I can see how it will put landlords at risk.

Reply to the comment left by Jack Jennings at 31/07/2026 – 13:36
Can’t say better….

Beaver – you’ve asked this four times in this thread and been talked past each time, so here’s an actual attempt at it.

What has been said: the public-facing side of the database is expected to let tenants confirm a landlord and property are registered, and to show property details and enforcement history. Landlord home addresses and National Insurance numbers are not expected to sit on the public view – councils get a fuller record for enforcement purposes. Tenant names, rent figures and bank details aren’t collected at all, so that side of it doesn’t arise.

What hasn’t been said is exactly your point. There is no published equivalent of the Companies House protected-address regime – no stated route for a landlord with a genuine safety reason to keep details off the public record, and no published position on where liability sits if registration data contributes to identity fraud or fraudulent borrowing. Property118 has covered the government promising to address privacy concerns, but a promise isn’t a mechanism.

So the honest answer to your question is that it doesn’t have a published answer yet. Which makes it worth putting in writing to your MP now, while the regulations are still being drafted, rather than after they’re laid – that’s the window where this sort of detail actually gets changed.

Reply to the comment left by at 31/07/2026 – 16:04
I have had a look online for more details of the beta landlord database. But I can’t see anything anywhere on gov.uk telling me whether my property details and my personal details would be available for the whole world to see, were I to register.

You are obliged to register with the electoral register if you want to vote:

https://www.gov.uk/electoral-register

But if you don’t want your personal details in public you are allowed to opt out of the open register. You can opt out of the open register as a company director because of course you are vulnerable to a variety of risks, including fraud.

I don’t think rogue landlords are going to register with this labour landlord register. It doesn’t make any difference to tax collection…..you have to declare that income anyway on the property pages of your tax return. The people not declaring their taxes….e.g. buying the council house they live in, letting a family member live there but not declaring the income…aren’t going to register with this labour landlord database anyway….they will just take cash or benefits in kind as usual.

So what is this labour landlord database actually going to do other than to expose small portfolio landlords to risk if they can’t always opt out, and to make lettings agents rich?

Reply to the comment left by at 31/07/2026 – 17:18
Noted: But I can’t see anything that this additional database is proposing to do that the Land Registry doesn’t already do, or could more easily do with minor amendments, without creating another massive government IT project that is probably going to go way over budget and not work. And Land Registry details are behind a paywall.

It seems to me that the money would be better spent speeding up the Land Registry and ensuring that the land registry has details of whom property is leased to. Councils can access those details anyway.

This looks like a big fat government red herring to me…..just another HS2 although on a smaller scale.

Labour just claimed that they were going to fund their cost-of-living-giveaway (a rebate on energy costs) by not funding the Digital ID system:

https://www.cityam.com/digital-id-cut-may-not-free-up-new-cash-for-burnhams-cost-of-living-plans/

But then of course they were told that the Digital ID system wasn’t funded anyway. It was a bit of a fib, something we’ve become used to with this government.

Given that this Labour Landlord Database isn’t going to do anything that the Land Registry does or should do, shouldn’t Labour fund its giveaway by cancelling the Labour Landlord Database?

That might go a little way towards the increase in rents that tenants are facing as a consequence of the introduction of the Labour Renters Rights Act.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 31/07/2026 – 17:54
A digital ID system is however still coming – why, well they promised that social media will be banned for the under 16s, which means digital ID for anyone wanting to use social media or even watch YouTube.

The BBC wants total control as well so are aiming to stop broadcasting in a few years, another digital ID
, once it is all moved online.