Keir Starmer: Renters’ Rights Act will give more power to tenants

Delusional.

Straight jacket and ambulance on order for No 10?

“By giving renters the rights, security and protections they deserve, we’ll be able to prevent homelessness…”.

No, you won’t. Homelessness is not caused by service of s21 notices but by a shortage of housing supply. This is exacerbated by an increase in population, breakdown of marriages/relationships and, crucially, the number of houses available to rent.

Even if fewer than 1% of rental properties cease to be rented out, this will lead to an increase in rents and in homelessness.

To anticipate an argument and before someone says it doesn’t matter if private landlords stop renting because the property remains, consider this. Some landlords don’t need the rental income and don’t want the hassle and the threat of draconian penalties. Others, who get stung with such penalties for trivial infractions will stop renting and try to sell but of course then cannot re-let for at least 12 months. (Nobody seems to have thought about the effect on rents of taking X% of houses off the rental market like this.) Additionally, some houses will be bought, not by a renter but a better off person currently living with their parents or other relatives.

A simple question for those who dispute my point. Suppose a tenant receives a s21 notice and has to move but there are affordable properties available to rent in the vicinity. Will that tenant become homeless?

I predict homelessness will increase because of the Renters’ Rights Act.

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 17/11/2025 – 11:19
yes it will.

But it will increase regardless of the RRA as you rightly say as there is simply not enough supply.

Those left in temp accommodation/emergency accommodation will remain and numbers will simply increase – despite a ban on S21’s.

Will we still be hearing the rants over the PRS from Shelter and GR after May I wonder? Probably not. They very quickly seem to have moved onto another campaign…

“Shelter’s biggest campaign is currently focused on ending the housing emergency by building a new generation of social homes”.

Will also mean

Less rental homes for people to rent.

Higher rents as fiscal logic supply v demand.

Evictions will now show exactly why/what for. Tenants much better under s21 “no fault” as could always blame the landlord, but now, when moving or looking for a new rental, landlords will be better able to evaluate who they wish to rent their property to.

Homeless tenants roaming the streets in winter is heartbreaking ‘but’ with unlimited fines for a speck of dust on the floor it’s either them or me!

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 17/11/2025 – 11:19
…or houses by others just to leave long term empty (to sell/rent at a later date), let to family on another type of ‘arrangement’, or as a commercial let perhaps.

The more this government squeezes the more people look to find alternatives – legitimate or otherwise.

Same with the Fudget, the more tax they want to take, the more people will be finding ways to reduce their liability to pay it in the first place. None wants to feel like a sitting duck.

My prediction is that the charities will quickly move on to a demand for rent caps – and the ‘greedy landlord ‘ rhetoric will continue.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Essex at 17/11/2025 – 12:22
rent caps not needed – the RRB makes challenging a rent increase almost inevitable because there already exists a way that T can challenge an increase if they feel it is ‘unjustified’ or LL is being ‘greedy.

Ergo Market rate is the actual ‘cap’.

Those willing to stay in with the draconian laws brought in, may not realise that a tenant could agree to rent a property at an agreed rent, sign the tenancy agreement and then immediately challenge the rent as being too high.
All I can say is I thought this was a joke but no it is not a joke it is a very serious matter for landlords.

Stupid policy from a stupid P.M. Renters already have too many rights over a property they do not own. Its the Landlord that requires protection over rouge tenants.