Government issues examples of rent in advance breaches under new rules

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 11:39
Where does it say that in either the legislation or the guidance?

The guidance says:

Before the tenancy starts (the pre-tenancy period)
The period of time after the tenancy agreement has been signed and before the tenancy starts is known as the pre-tenancy period. During this period, your landlord or letting agent can ask you to pay some rent before you move in.

If you will be paying rent monthly, the maximum amount the landlord can usually ask for is one month’s rent.

If you will be paying rent weekly, the maximum amount the landlord can usually ask for is 28 days’ rent.

Where does it say that you have to give them the keys BEFORE they move in?

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/05/2026 – 13:41
Perhaps you’re looking in the wrong place.
“After the tenancy has been entered into [ie signed] you cannot refuse to hand over the keys even if the tenant never pays the first month’s rent, because that amounts to preventing occupation, which is equivalent to unlawful eviction or unlawful exclusion. That is an offence under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and now carries civil penalties of up to £40,000 under section 58 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 as an alternative to prosecution”
Section 58 imposes a DUTY on local authorities to prosecute, rather than an ability to.
Feel free to be the first test case.

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/05/2026 – 14:15
I could be looking in the wrong place. I didn’t remember the wording that you were obliged to include the amount of the rent in an advertisement in the early versions of the legislation, although it looks as though that’s now in there:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/26/section/56

That’s in 56. (2) (a) and (b) although 56. (5) says that subsection (2) does not apply to “…a sign displayed at the dwelling, or at premises in which the dwelling is situated, which merely advertises that the dwelling is to let.”

I.e. you can put up a TO LET sign at the property with contact details and not specify the PCM rent, or tell your agent to do that and subject the prospective tenants to right-to-rent checks and credit-referencing. Agents don’t like advertising anyway if they have lots of prospective tenants on their books, it just costs them money.

But I cannot see anything anywhere in the Renters Rights Act or the guidance on the RRA that says either I or my agent has to give a tenant the keys before they’ve paid some rent.

Where is that in the legislation? What section is it?

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/05/2026 – 14:28
As I said, it is in the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.
Up until this month, if the tenant didn’t pay the first month’s rent, you could rip up the tenancy agreement, refuse to give them the keys and they would have little recourse.
Now if you did that you would be liable for a £40k fine.
However it begs the question: why are you even considering renting to anyone without a guarantor?

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/05/2026 – 14:54
And where does it say anywhere in the Renters Rights Act that the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 applies in the pre-tenancy period?

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/05/2026 – 15:01
You don’t hand over the keys in the pre-tenancy period, so we’re only talking about the tenancy period.
Why no guarantor?

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/05/2026 – 15:15
If we’re only talking about the pre-tenancy period then as far as I can see the protection of eviction act 1977 does not apply. So if your standard rental agreement states a start date that is conditional upon either one month or 28 days of rent clearing either your account or your agents account before the tenancy commences (which is permitted by the RRA), with keys only being handed over at the commencement of the tenancy, then the tenancy won’t start if the tenant doesn’t pay during the pre-tenancy period.

In answer to your question I’m not aware of anything stopping you from having a guarantor under the Renters Rights Act (even though if I remember correctly either the Green Party or Shelter may have tried to propose a ban on guarantors). So I think a guarantor is still possible and may be sensible.

However, because there is a requirement not to discriminate it seems to me that at the same time that either you or your agent carry out right-to-rent checks it makes sense to carry out credit-referencing checks to ensure that a prospective tenant can afford the rent. Some retired people can’t pass credit-referencing as they have a low income, even though they have cash, and used to get around this by paying in advance; now they can’t do this as you can’t accept it as a landlord even if they offer it.

So it seems to me that as part of your standard credit referencing checks applied to all tenants you could specify:

– evidence of last 2 years of income as evidenced by your self-employed or employed self-assessment tax return, and/or
– evidence of pension income, and/or
– evidence of savings that would cover X months rent plus X months living expenses.

X could be the current no. of months that the courts are taking to give landlords back their properties and as the government’s performance improves over time (thereby reducing your risk) this could reduce.

Now of course there’s no guarantee that even if a tenant has savings a tenant is going to pay you but if you had evidence of those savings then (a) you would know that they would be worth pursuing if they defaulted on their rent and (b) you’d have sufficient evidence to pass the debt on to a debt collection agency.

So yes, I think that in some cases a guarantor makes sense, but in other cases I think landlords would be well-advised to think much harder about credit-referencing and affordability checks; they have to carry out right-to-rent checks anyway.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/05/2026 – 15:51
“if your standard rental agreement states a start date that is conditional upon either one month or 28 days of rent clearing either your account or your agents account before the tenancy commences (which is permitted by the RRA), with keys only being handed over at the commencement of the tenancy, then the tenancy won’t start if the tenant doesn’t pay during the pre-tenancy period.”
Other opinion states that once the tenancy document is signed, such a clause would be deemed invalid.
That’s what the first test case will establish. Personally I don’t want to be the first, which is why I (and many others) have been not only recommending home-owning guarantors in every instance, alongside thorough vetting, but also the issuance of S21s to every tenant who didn’t have one (along with an invitation to sign a new tenancy including one) long before the Act came into force.

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/05/2026 – 16:15
I think that if your standard tenancy agreement makes it CLEAR that keys will only be handed over at the START of the tenancy and that the START DATE of the tenancy is dependent upon 28 days of rent in the case of weekly payment, or one month rent in the case of monthly payment being paid and cleared into your account or your agent’s account during the PRE-tenancy period then it won’t breach the eviction act of 1977 and you won’t have a problem. You won’t have a problem because the tenant won’t be IN your property and they will have to take YOU to court to get access to your property and justify to the judge why they shouldn’t have to pay you any rent when the RRA and the government guidance on the RRA say that you have to pay rent and the rental agreement you signed said that you had to.

I think where the eviction act of 1977 could come in would be the situation that arises when the council is still able to pay you in advance to house homeless people (because according to government guidance they are not prohibited from paying you in advance), you’ve accepted the money in advance and let the homeless person in to the property but then the Council stops paying you.