Government vows Renters’ Rights Act will tackle rental discrimination

Will i get early release like murderers!

Reply to the comment left by David at 03/08/2026 – 14:32
It costs £21.50 to do a DBS check:

https://www.gov.uk/request-copy-criminal-record

A tenant credit referencing check typically costs £15 and £45.

But to avoid discrimination referencing checks have to be applied to all tenants.

To be clear, just in case anybody missed it, you do NOT HAVE TO INCLUDE THE PRICE for the property on a notice on the property to say that it is to let.

If you do include a price in any advertisement anywhere else then you cannot accept more than that price EVEN if the tenant offers it. So ANY price that you advertise MUST be very high. Your agent can always come down, e.g. for a tenant with lots of income and no children.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/08/2026 – 14:29
But many leasehold properties do not allow sales boards.

Reply to the comment left by David at 03/08/2026 – 14:44
Then IF they are going to advertise they need to ADVERTISE HIGH.

But of course it does depend upon what it is doesn’t it? I believe the greatest demand is for 3 bed flats and 3 bed semis or 3 bed detached houses. There may be so many people registered with agents looking for those 3 beds that nobody needs to advertise; if the agent has asked “…what’s your budget?” when the tenant registered with the agent, agent will have some idea of what the tenant can afford.

If the agent says “…can we show tenants around..?” before you are ready to let then you just have to be clear to tell the agent in writing not to advertise for a set amount and that they do not have authority to advertise (even if you are allowing them to visit). I have considered using two agents in the past; the best agent in the future is probably going to be the agent that gets you the best tenant at the best price.

That could be a tenant on benefits….but it’s unlikely. And the professional couple or retired couple with no children is going to cost you less than the tenant with 3-4 children, even if they do own a Yorkshire Terrier.

Reply to the comment left by Adamufc1 at 03/08/2026 – 00:29
Totally agree. We only choose the best candidates to protect our business.
We do have a couple of tenants who are on in work benefits. We apply the same criteria to all prospective clients. With our HMOs we have to consider maintaining harmony in the household as well.

Reply to the comment left by Carl Pengelly at 03/08/2026 – 15:36
I completely sympathise with “…maintaining harmony…” although I have no idea of how you do that; historically you could meet the tenant, eyeball them, make a subjective judgement about whether they were going to be good or bad tenants. But when a government introduces an anti-discrimination test what it is doing is removing your ability to make the subjective judgements that you might have made in the past.

Because the Labour Renters Rights Act has increased landlords’ risks and costs the real test for me would have to be, do you have enough detail to pursue a tenant for non-payment if he or she defaults? E.g. do you have enough data for the bailiffs, or for the Money Claims Online service to have a chance of getting your money? You can’t request payment upfront anymore so you have to consider, how would I recover an unpaid debt?

I think the difficulty with “maintain harmony” and subjective judgements is that IF a requirement is ever introduced to tell prospective tenants WHY they were unsuccessful this becomes a risk ESPECIALLY if you have retained any of their personal details.

But if all tenants have to provide you with e.g. mobile phone contract, evidence of savings, SA302 or tax return that’s not something subjective and it doesn’t discriminate in any way that is not lawful; you have a legal right to look at affordability and you have to undertake right to rent checks. The upside of having all the extra data is that if a lot of the income is coming from large working families tax credit or child tax credit payments then you also know that they have a lot of children and that your maintenance costs are likely to be high.

Reply to the comment left by Adamufc1 at 03/08/2026 – 00:29
It IS possible for a tenant on benefits to pass a credit check. Any landlord who has aligned themselves with an insurer/guarantee scheme/agent/other that makes this impossible is likely committing indirect discrimination under the Act.

Reply to the comment left by Candyman1980 at 03/08/2026 – 09:36
“I dont think justification is mandatory”

It is if the applicant formally challenges it and if you cant provide that justification to the Council when its then demanded, youre likely to face a £7k fine.

Reply to the comment left by DPT at 03/08/2026 – 17:41
It IS possible for a tenant on benefits to pass a credit check: This is correct. However, if you have twenty other prospective tenants wanting the property that you have available you are not obliged to let the property to that tenant.

If the applicant formally challenges the fact that they didn’t get the property then you can just tell the tenant that the other tenants more easily satisfied the affordability criteria: Not only are you not obliged to provide the council with the referencing details of the successful tenant, or of any other prospective tenants in the very long queue ahead of your benefits tenants you would actually be breaching personal data protection law if you did it.

Reply to the comment left by DPT at 03/08/2026 – 17:37
Many benefit tenants pass the referencing check, few if any pass the affordability check.