2 days ago | 1 comments
The government’s own housing data has raised questions about the political case used to justify sweeping reform of the private rented sector.
The latest English Housing Survey covers the period before the Renters’ Rights Act’s main tenancy changes came into force on 1 May 2026.
It is now the official pre-Act benchmark for the sector.
However, the figures do not entirely fit the narrative that has dominated the rent reform debate.
Among private tenancies that ended in the previous year, 63% of renters said they left because they wanted to move.
Only 14% said their tenancy ended because the landlord or agent asked them to leave, while just 3% pointed to a landlord-imposed rent increase.
The figures do show rising rents, affordability pressure, unresolved complaints and barriers for some tenants.
They also show that most tenancy endings were not landlord-led and arrears remained relatively low.
The sector’s biggest pressure was cost and supply rather than simply landlords using Section 21.
The survey was produced by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to capture the sector before assured shorthold tenancies were replaced by the new assured periodic system and Section 21 was scrapped.
The Act was sold on the abolition of so-called Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions, but the survey suggests landlord-led endings were a minority of all tenancy endings before the reforms took effect.
Among private renters whose tenancy had ended in the previous three years and who said they had been asked to leave, 45% said a Section 21 notice had been used, 37% were asked to leave informally and 19% through another method.
Separately, when asked why their landlord wanted them to leave, 57% said it was to sell the property or use it themselves, with 38% citing another reason.
The average private rent in London reached £393 a week in 2024-25, compared with £207 a week across the rest of England.
Private renters spent an average of 34% of household income on rent when housing support was included.
Without housing support, the figure rose to 39%.
Just 2% of private renters were in current arrears, while another 3% had fallen behind at some point in the previous year.
That combined 5% figure was roughly level with 2023-24 and well below the 8% recorded in 2019-20.
Two-thirds of private renters (66%) were satisfied with their tenure, though this was down from 70% five years earlier.
Half of private renters who complained were unhappy with how their complaint was handled.
Of those left unhappy, 94% did not pursue the matter further.
Over half a million private rented households (626,000) paid rent in advance in addition to a deposit, while 22% of private renters were asked to provide a guarantor before moving in.
Nearly one in 10 private renters said they had been refused a property because they had pets, something the Act now restricts to reasonable grounds only.
The private rented sector remained at 19% of households in England, equivalent to around 4.7 million homes.
However, the share of Londoners renting privately fell from 32% to 28% in just one year.
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
Previous Article
Most renters are unaware of the Renters' Rights ActNext Article
It's me again getting in a state about MTD?
2 days ago | 1 comments
3 days ago | 16 comments
3 days ago | 4 comments
Member Since October 2022 - Comments: 233
4:19 AM, 11th July 2026, About 1 day ago
Reply to the comment left by Simon Kinzley at 10/07/2026 – 16:04
It began under Theresa May who became prime minister just as the war on landlords was being implemented, the purpose of which was to disenfranchise landlords and drive them out of the market in favour of owner-occupiers. So there was a wave of selling and landlords often used Section 21 to get vacant possession prior to selling.
When stories began to emerge of people being asked to leave their homes, often after many years, the stupid politicians including May didn’t bother to ask why and just assumed that landlords were dreadful people for turfing tenants out of their homes for no good reason. They then lazily assumed that section 21 was the problem rather than just the symptom of what was going on and deemed that abolishing it would fix the problem of “no-fault evictions”.
Now we have such a mess, but at least with such an imbalance of supply and demand we can afford to be ultra-picky about who we let into our properties. But good luck to subprime tenants and those not on enhanced benefits like PIP, as they will have no chance of getting anywhere to rent other than social housing..
Member Since June 2019 - Comments: 886
11:07 AM, 11th July 2026, About 1 day ago
Reply to the comment left by Peter Merrick at 11/07/2026 – 04:19
The government seems to be about to dramatically reduce PIP, tenants relying on PIP payments for anything other than medical need are in for a nasty surprise.
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2256 - Articles: 2
12:51 PM, 11th July 2026, About 23 hours ago
Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 11/07/2026 – 11:07
So are the landlords who house these individuals.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2206
3:53 PM, 11th July 2026, About 20 hours ago
Reply to the comment left by Peter Merrick at 11/07/2026 – 04:19
If there was a wave of landlords using section 21 prior to selling their properties then the Renters Rights Act makes no difference in this area because wanting to sell is grounds for getting your property back under the Renters Rights Act.
Whilst that change will have made no difference, what the Labour Renters Rights act has done by getting rid of no fault evictions is to remove any powers landlords had to deal with antisocial behaviour.
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2256 - Articles: 2
7:15 AM, 12th July 2026, About 4 hours ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 11/07/2026 – 15:53
You can then fine landlords for failing to address antisocial behaviour, a win for all local authorities.