10 months ago | 8 comments
Housing Minister again denies the Renters’ Rights Bill will have a “destabilising effect on the rental market”.
In response to a written question, by the Shadow Housing Secretary, Kevin Hollinrake, on the impact of the Renters’ Rights Bill on the Build-to-Rent sector (BTR), Matthew Pennycook claims the bill will NOT have a bad effect on the rental market or BTR sector.
Despite, Mr Pennycook’s assumptions, many private landlords are worried about the harm the bill will do to the sector.
Mr Hollinrake asked the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government: “What assessment has the government made of the potential impact of the Renters’ Rights Bill on the (a) popularity and (b) take-up of Build to Rent new build.”
In response, Mr Pennycook claims the government has engaged with landlords and property investors and will not undermine confidence in the market.
He said: “My Department has engaged with a range of organisations, including Build to Rent operators, to understand their interests in the development of the Renters’ Rights Bill.
“We do not expect the bill to have a destabilising effect on the rental market or the Build to Rent sector.
“We will continue to work with good landlords and their representative associations to ensure a smooth transition to the new tenancy system.”
Mr Pennycook’s claim that the bill will not affect the Build to Rent sector, may be correct, as many of the new rules appear not to apply to it.
As previously reported by Property118, in what many see as an unfair loophole, purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) providers will be exempt from the Decent Homes Standard, while smaller landlords will still have to comply with the new rules.
At the same time, many smaller landlords are leaving the market in an ongoing exodus, while large corporate landlords are taking over, often with higher rents.
For example, one Build to Rent developer in London is charging £2,600 per month for a one-bedroom flat, and £4,600 for a three-bedroom.
Despite Mr Pennycook’s assurances, it appears that the bill may still have destabilising consequences for the private rented sector as many smaller landlords continue to sell.
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
10 months ago | 8 comments
12 months ago | 1 comments
1 year ago | 27 comments
Sorry. You must be logged in to view this form.
Member Since October 2013 - Comments: 1640 - Articles: 3
12:44 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
How can Pennycook be right when all the facts say he’s wrong?
Member Since June 2013 - Comments: 3246 - Articles: 81
12:54 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Just like banning pet deposits didn’t hurt pet owners and we told em it would.
And now 6+ years later they want to bring pet deposits back as pet owners can’t get homes.
Proper thick this Govt any UK Govt.
Member Since January 2017 - Comments: 110
2:15 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
What landlords and organisations representing landlords has he been talking with?
Obviously when it all goes badly wrong he will have moved on to another position in government (maybe minister for education!), so will claim if questioned “it’s nothing to do with me”.
Member Since May 2014 - Comments: 620
2:18 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Pennycook is in denial.
During a debate on the RRB he said that he was not worried about housing providers leaving the PRS because BTR was coming along nicely and that they would fill the gap.
Of course Angela will also be there waiting in the wings with her 1.5 million houses.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3515 - Articles: 5
2:43 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 14/07/2025 – 12:54
lol, One min they say you can have pet insurance. Then the insurance companies tell them the issues with this idea, then its a full U turn.
The Lords then back this up saying a 3 week pet deposit is possible as a replacement idea…but that looks to get thrown out anyway..
The result.
Landlords will now have the perfect ‘reasonable’ excuse as to why permission for pets can be refused – because once again there is no way the cost of damage can be mitigated against with the existing deposit legislation and TFA in place.
Nice one Labour!
Member Since May 2021 - Comments: 392
7:31 PM, 14th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Stella at 14/07/2025 – 14:18
Replace ‘worried’ with ‘ concerned ‘ , Penny crook could not care less about the PRS just as the this whole shocking government couldn’t care less about the country as a whole.
Member Since May 2024 - Comments: 204
4:30 AM, 15th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Hugh Baily at 14/07/2025 – 12:35
Hugh, I’ve never seen so many houses for sale with a tenant in situ as I’ve seen over the last couple of months.
I’m currently reluctantly trying to buy a house for my grand niece.
I’m looking at the lower end of the market as I really don’t want to buy another rental house but anything will be better than where she is living now.
There are really some bad houses out there
2 kids and a 3rd on on the way living in a 2 bed house with another family and the council seem to think that its OK and won’t help her.
I guess that if your an Illegal immigrant they will find a house for you?
Yes, she should keep her legs closed and is too young to be a single mum with 3 kids that she can not afford to feed.
But it’s family so I have to try to help. I’m really mad with her. I can buy contraceptives but not brain cells.
Member Since September 2015 - Comments: 1013
8:18 AM, 15th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Matthew Pettycrook like all housing ministers before him are complete f**kwits who arrogantly think they know best.
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2197 - Articles: 2
9:35 AM, 19th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 14/07/2025 – 12:26
Now now Gromit, we all know politicians NEVER lie.
Member Since February 2016 - Comments: 977 - Articles: 1
11:21 AM, 19th July 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Ray Guselli at 14/07/2025 – 10:32
I think “smashing the landlords” is the only objective the previous and this government have been achieving and suceeding.