Government fails to explain how landlord privacy will be protected under PRS Database

The government has reassured landlords it will safeguard their privacy in the PRS Database, but has provided no details on how. Property118 contacted the government after concerns were raised by landlords about privacy and how their data will be handled under the PRS Database. Under the PRS Database, landlords will be required to provide information about their properties, including the address, number of residents and bedrooms, as well as copies of gas, electricity and EPC documents. Safeguard the privacy of landlords The government told Property118 that data will be handled in line with data protection legislation, with further details to be announced in due course. A Ministry of Housing spokesperson told us: “The new database will help tenants make vital and informed decisions when entering into a tenancy agreement. “However, we will ensure we safeguard the privacy of landlords, and any data shared will be in line with data protection legislation.” The government adds that under future legislation, landlords will also be required to register any unoccupied properties before marketing them for let. Letting agents and landlords will need to include registration numbers on adverts. Transparency must be balanced with landlords’ privacy The PRS Database will launch regionally, with the first rollout set to begin in the West Midlands in December. Industry bodies have urged the government to clarify what information will be publicly available on the PRS Database ahead of its launch. Propertymark says a redacted version of a landlord’s address should be made available to help protect landlords’ privacy. Timothy Douglas, the head of policy and campaigns at Propertymark, told Property118: “We support the principle of a national PRS Database, but transparency must be balanced with landlords’ privacy and personal safety. “When it comes to databases, Propertymark has previously supported making a redacted version of a landlord’s address available, rather than publishing a full personal address. That distinction remains important as information may need to be held for regulatory and enforcement purposes without being made publicly searchable. “The UK government should therefore clarify exactly what information will be publicly accessible and what safeguards will protect landlords from unnecessary privacy and security risks. Effective enforcement and transparency should not come at the expense of personal safety.” Landlords need urgent clarity The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) also echoed Propertymark's stance and urged the government to give more clarity on the information accessible on the database. A spokesperson for the NRLA said: “At the moment it’s unclear exactly what the architecture underpinning the PRS database is set to look like and how the new system will work in practice. “Given that the roll-out of the PRS database is set to start from December, landlords urgently need clarity on these points. “When it comes to data privacy, we believe that all safeguarding processes must be followed rigorously considering the vast quantities of data the new system is likely to possess.” Cost the PRS £327 million a year The NRLA has also warned that England’s planned landlord database could cost the private rented sector at least £327 million a year, with tenants ultimately footing the bill. Landlords will have to pay a £65 annual fee per property to register on the PRS Database. The NRLA spokesperson added: “More broadly, the ‘year one’ cost implications per property for landlords across the sector are likely to be considerable. The position of those landlords already complying with local licensing schemes under the new regime isn’t clear either. “Landlords need to have sufficient time to make the transition to the new system, so the government must take all the steps it can to allay landlords’ concerns.” The database fee will be charged alongside licensing fees in areas where councils operate their own schemes - which can reach as much as £2,300 per property, as charged by Arun District Council. Raise rents to cover cost Landlords are already factoring in the additional costs, with some warning they may need to raise rents to cover them. One landlord has said he will need to charge an extra £6 a month to cover the new database fee. Mick Roberts, one of Nottingham’s largest landlords providing homes to benefit tenants, wrote in an article for Property118 that councils already hold much of the information required for the database through selective licensing schemes. He wrote: “The government has just brought in yet another charge, a £65-a-year fee for each property to be registered on the PRS Database. That means you’ll need a rent increase of around £6 per month just to cover it. “All the information needed for the property database, the council already has for selective licensing. The council already charges around £1,000 every five years for this, which works out at £200 per year, or another £20 per month in rent.” The government has also warned that landlords who let or advertise a property without first registering it on the database could face a civil penalty of up to £7,000. Those who provide fraudulent information to the database could face a fine of up to £40,000. More questions than answers With the first rollout of the PRS Database only weeks away, landlords are being asked to pay for a system while concerns remain over privacy, costs and how the database will work in practice. For now, many questions remain unanswered, and whether the government can deliver greater transparency for tenants while adequately protecting landlords’ privacy remains to be seen.

9:30 AM, 8th October 2026, 3 days ago 28

Categories:

Landlord News PRS Database

The government has reassured landlords it will safeguard their privacy in the PRS Database, but has provided no details on how.

Property118 contacted the government after concerns were raised by landlords about privacy and how their data will be handled under the PRS Database.

Under the PRS Database, landlords will be required to provide information about their properties, including the address, number of residents and bedrooms, as well as copies of gas, electricity and EPC documents.

Safeguard the privacy of landlords

The government told Property118 that data will be handled in line with data protection legislation, with further details to be announced in due course.

A Ministry of Housing spokesperson told us: “The new database will help tenants make vital and informed decisions when entering into a tenancy agreement.

“However, we will ensure we safeguard the privacy of landlords, and any data shared will be in line with data protection legislation.”

The government adds that under future legislation, landlords will also be required to register any unoccupied properties before marketing them for let. Letting agents and landlords will need to include registration numbers on adverts.

Transparency must be balanced with landlords’ privacy

The PRS Database will launch regionally, with the first rollout set to begin in the West Midlands in December.

Industry bodies have urged the government to clarify what information will be publicly available on the PRS Database ahead of its launch.

Propertymark says a redacted version of a landlord’s address should be made available to help protect landlords’ privacy.

Timothy Douglas, the head of policy and campaigns at Propertymark, told Property118: “We support the principle of a national PRS Database, but transparency must be balanced with landlords’ privacy and personal safety.

“When it comes to databases, Propertymark has previously supported making a redacted version of a landlord’s address available, rather than publishing a full personal address. That distinction remains important as information may need to be held for regulatory and enforcement purposes without being made publicly searchable.

“The UK government should therefore clarify exactly what information will be publicly accessible and what safeguards will protect landlords from unnecessary privacy and security risks. Effective enforcement and transparency should not come at the expense of personal safety.”

Landlords need urgent clarity

The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) also echoed Propertymark’s stance and urged the government to give more clarity on the information accessible on the database.

A spokesperson for the NRLA said: “At the moment it’s unclear exactly what the architecture underpinning the PRS database is set to look like and how the new system will work in practice.

“Given that the roll-out of the PRS database is set to start from December, landlords urgently need clarity on these points.

“When it comes to data privacy, we believe that all safeguarding processes must be followed rigorously considering the vast quantities of data the new system is likely to possess.”

Cost the PRS £327 million a year

The NRLA has also warned that England’s planned landlord database could cost the private rented sector at least £327 million a year, with tenants ultimately footing the bill.

Landlords will have to pay a £65 annual fee per property to register on the PRS Database.

The NRLA spokesperson added: “More broadly, the ‘year one’ cost implications per property for landlords across the sector are likely to be considerable. The position of those landlords already complying with local licensing schemes under the new regime isn’t clear either.

“Landlords need to have sufficient time to make the transition to the new system, so the government must take all the steps it can to allay landlords’ concerns.”

The database fee will be charged alongside licensing fees in areas where councils operate their own schemes – which can reach as much as £2,300 per property, as charged by Arun District Council.

Raise rents to cover cost

Landlords are already factoring in the additional costs, with some warning they may need to raise rents to cover them. One landlord has said he will need to charge an extra £6 a month to cover the new database fee.

Mick Roberts, one of Nottingham’s largest landlords providing homes to benefit tenants, wrote in an article for Property118 that councils already hold much of the information required for the database through selective licensing schemes.

He wrote: “The government has just brought in yet another charge, a £65-a-year fee for each property to be registered on the PRS Database. That means you’ll need a rent increase of around £6 per month just to cover it.

“All the information needed for the property database, the council already has for selective licensing. The council already charges around £1,000 every five years for this, which works out at £200 per year, or another £20 per month in rent.”

The government has also warned that landlords who let or advertise a property without first registering it on the database could face a civil penalty of up to £7,000. Those who provide fraudulent information to the database could face a fine of up to £40,000.

More questions than answers

With the first rollout of the PRS Database only weeks away, landlords are being asked to pay for a system while concerns remain over privacy, costs and how the database will work in practice.

For now, many questions remain unanswered, and whether the government can deliver greater transparency for tenants while adequately protecting landlords’ privacy remains to be seen.

Share This Article

Tags: fine PRS Database, mandatory PRS database, PRS database, PRS Database fee

james

Member Since October 2023 - Comments: 12

2:39 AM, 9th October 2026, About 3 days ago

Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 08/10/2026 – 16:24
Only today on the BBC is another report of a man killing a woman after he was released from prison. Previously he had a case involving attempted murder on his landlady. There are many such men around, many with mental health issues. If anyone thinks that a ‘partial address’ would protect a female landlady in such cases, then you are incorrect. If a person has the street address, they can easily find the actual address. This can be done just by going there and looking, or they can search the registry for the rental property anyway when that is all linked up and available online. And it is not just about protecting women, these safeguarding issues apply to everyone. I merely point out this case as it was reported on the BBC today
And there are so many people with mental heath issues these days. And landlords are targets in many cases.
A woman might have moved house while the stalker is in prison and started a new life. But many mentally ill people are obsessive and they will seek to find their victims once they are released from prison. It happens a lot. Prison does not stop them. The police cannot do anything either. So all these sort of criminals would need to do would be enter their victim’s name online in Google and then they have all the information they want.

Has the government even considered such safeguarding issues in all this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8040lwewkepo

3 Report Comment Reply
james

Member Since October 2023 - Comments: 12

3:11 AM, 9th October 2026, About 3 days ago

And in relation to safeguarding issues for the future: even those landlords who have nice tenants and are in a good relationship with a mentally healthy non-criminal person, these things can change. Tenants who are mentally healthy can become mentally ill in the future. Tenants can leave and new tenants move in, tenants who might be criminal and might be mentally unwell. A couple who are great tenants might break up and a new partner moves in, perhaps he is mentally unwell or a criminal, All the landlord’s data will be available online for such criminals and such people suffering from mental health issues.

And a landlord might think they are a big strong man and can look after themself just fine. But can you look after your wife and children when you are not even home? Can you protect your home and possessions when you are not home?

Whether one is male or female, married or single, one can not guarantee that any present or future partner might not suffer mental health issues and cause problems for you in the future. A woman might be with a nice husband, but he could become violent and could suffer mental health problems in the future. She might have to move home to escape him.

There are so many safeguarding issues that are relevant here. This is why everyone is advised to not put their name address, date of birth online on social media. This is why when advertising properties the actual address of the rental is never published (so it is not made a target for criminals etc) All these things are common sense in the modern age. Why has the government not considered these issues?

I seriously recommend that people do not give any data about themselves nor about their rental properties unless full assurances are given from the government that no data will be made public. Once you have given the data, it is too late. You will be putting your tenants, your rental properties, your families, yourselves and your own homes at risk.

I know of cases where things have gone very badly for people due to criminals. Guard your private data.

And privacy in itself is a right. Do all tenants want the world to know how much rent they pay? That they live in a rental? How many bedrooms they have? Does every landlord want the world to know their date of birth? How many rentals they have? What rents they charge?

Such a data base would also enable criminals to link rental properties in cases where a landlord had more than 1 rental. So if a tenant at 1 property became mentally unwell, they could link their property to other rentals with the same landlord and cause problems for the other tenants perhaps as means to cause harassment to the landlord.

You have the right to privacy, as do your tenants. You have many data protection rights under the law. These privacy rights stand irrespective of all the safeguarding issues.

1 Report Comment Reply
Mick Roberts Read Full Bio

Member Since June 2013 - Comments: 3347 - Articles: 83

9:16 AM, 9th October 2026, About 2 days ago

Reply to the comment left by PropertyLL at 08/10/2026 – 18:36
Please find out about tenants wanting to refuse their details being on the database, ie. their home, rent etc. It’s their home. I have dozens of tenants waiting ready to email in.

Report Comment Reply
Mick Roberts Read Full Bio

Member Since June 2013 - Comments: 3347 - Articles: 83

9:21 AM, 9th October 2026, About 2 days ago

Reply to the comment left by james at 09/10/2026 – 01:14
Please push this too then. Be nice if they have to withdraw lots of questions.

Report Comment Reply
Panda Man

Member Since January 2026 - Comments: 15

9:52 AM, 9th October 2026, About 2 days ago

Reply to the comment left by Panda Man at 08/10/2026 – 10:01
PRS is a money making machine which benefits Govt and provides access to anyone requiring private information, isn’t this breaching UK GDRP laws. I cannot get an address of a non paying tenant from the Council yet a tenant can get mine from PRS?. Tenants can get a house from Govt or the charities responsible for this mess. My house withdrawn from market-enough is enough.

1 Report Comment Reply
Will H

Member Since October 2026 - Comments: 3

11:08 AM, 9th October 2026, About 2 days ago

Reply to the comment left by james at 09/10/2026 – 01:35
Since Brexit, the UK operates under its own UK GDPR rather than the original EU version. While it mirrors many original EU principles, it is an independent domestic law. The UK government holds the authority to amend and interpret the regulations. So GDPR is rather moot now in the UK.

Report Comment Reply
Ryan Stevens

Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 426

12:27 PM, 9th October 2026, About 2 days ago

On Companies House you can have service addresses and certain directors/officers/PSCs can claim exemption from having to disclose their details. Landlords should be afforded the same protections. If not, why not????

Report Comment Reply
stephen buck

Member Since April 2017 - Comments: 8

12:46 PM, 10th October 2026, About 1 day ago

I’m allowed to opt out of having my personal details shown on the electoral register and in the phone book, so why can I not elect to have my details not shown on the PRS database?

Report Comment Reply

Previous 1 2 3

28 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.