Peers reject amendments to Renters’ Rights Bill as Royal Assent looms
6 months ago | 30 comments
Landlords silenced as the Renters’ Rights Bill runs out of steam
10:53 AM, 17th October 2025, 6 months ago
52
Categories:
Well, that’s that then. No glorious resistance in the House of Lords, as the Renters’ Rights Bill limps back to the Commons and then Royal Assent.
No real defence of the PRS to help politicians understand what they’ve got wrong.
And they’ve got a lot wrong, as time will tell.
The game of ‘ping pong’ between the Houses ran out of steam like an asthmatic marathon runner who can see the finish line but has nothing else to give.
Reading the debates shows that some peers did understand the PRS, but they got shouted down and ignored.
We call this democracy.
Not only was there no outcry, but the landlord forums were mute as well. Everyone appears to be exhausted and unwilling to fight more.
Tenants won’t be protected
The debates over pet deposits and re-letting restrictions were interesting, but the government wouldn’t be moved.
What began as a bold Labour pledge to shield tenants from rogue evictions and unfair rent rises has morphed into a decree.
For landlords across England, this signals not victory, but a precarious truce.
We are stuck in the rental trenches, with an air of unease about what happens next.
PRS faces instability
Though there’s still nothing being published about how this Bill really impacts tenants and the inevitable instability that will come.
Smaller landlords will sell and not invest.
That’s tenants losing out twice there.
The government insists that the reforms won’t destabilise the sector but wait and see what happens to a landlord who must wait for a full year before re-renting, or face penalties.
A landlord’s right to choose whether pets are allowed is gone, and there’s no extra cash to cover the inevitable repairs.
Some might say that benefits claimants gaining equal footing in tenant applications is a good thing.
It is if they can find somewhere they can afford.
Don’t get me started on periodic tenancies and the right for a tenant to hand in their notice from day one.
The hassle and cost of recruiting new tenants and the risk of voids will seriously damage supply.
Landlords will leave
It’s going to be an interesting trap that appears in the coming months as landlords reassess whether they want to remain.
I’ve mentioned before that the Bill effectively removes a landlord’s control of their own property which is just nonsense on stilts.
But I hadn’t quite appreciated that a landlord with long-term tenants and rising costs is facing a dilemma.
For many, the numbers won’t add up, and as the risk of making a loss every year grows, they won’t want to let down their tenants.
And here the portrayal of all landlords being heartless will loom large.
That’s because we might have to hand out bad news to decent people who rent our homes.
They’ll be left to find fewer homes at higher rents, and with letting criteria getting tighter, where will they go?
Other RRB problems
Clueless councils bringing in selective licensing adds to the chaos, and the costs for upgrading homes for EPC measures will really put the skids under the sector.
Then we have the prospect of the landlord ombudsman which, I’m predicting, won’t be on the side of landlords.
Plus, the landlord database where our private details are available to the world will be an issue.
Especially, since it will highlight ‘problem’ landlords.
Rents will now inevitably rise to counter the growing costs, bringing hardship to many tenants.
Landlords are facing a dilemma that’s not of our making.
The abolition of Section 21 has always sounded noble because the landlord has always been the ‘greedy’ or ‘exploitative’ one.
In reality, the world is about to learn what landlords really face as eviction cases clog the courts.
Unpaid rent, antisocial behaviour and rented homes wrecked will be top of the bill.
Generational impact of RRB
At the start of this, I mentioned that the reaction from landlords and property experts was subdued, but that’s not all.
The celebration from tenant activist groups who have pushed for this was surprisingly quiet.
Perhaps the penny is starting to drop as members and supporters start telling these clowns that their landlord is bailing out.
It’s going to be a sad day when Royal Assent is given, and the number of evictions begins to rise.
That means it could be a worrying Christmas for many, and that’s without Rachel Thieves’ Autumn Budget, as they begin the search for a home.
Though with all those illegal immigrants leaving hotels for nice, rented homes, they could be moved into those empty rooms.
At the moment, it’s like a Christmas Day truce in the trenches, but when the guns start again it’s going to change the environment completely.
We tried to warn renters and politicians and anyone who would listen.
But you ignored us, and now tenants need to prepare for very bad news.
Everyone in the PRS has been hit by the Bill because this ridiculous law will have a generational impact.
When the dust settles and small landlords disappear, and with no homes to rent, there’s going to be a very unpleasant political blowback.
Good.
Until next time,
The Landlord Crusader
Tags:
commons approval, housing reforms england, Landlords, Lords amendments, No fault Evictions, Private Rental Sector, rental market impact, renters rights bill, royal assent 2025, Tenant Protections, The Landlord Crusader
Comments
Have Your Say
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
or
Related Articles
Nearly half of renters likely to take on a pet as Renters’ Rights Bill nears Royal Assent
6 months ago | 5 comments
Government policies harm tenants as small landlords leave
6 months ago | 1 comments
Member Since July 2023 - Comments: 14
7:40 AM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
I do have to say the clear and obvious influence of the BTR corporates over the last 18 months has been sickening.
When you have so called charities with at least a dozen people earning over £100k a year it is worrying that it has become a sponsored political campaign. Plus the amount of politicians who have been climbing into bed with BTR developers really needs a closer examination.
But most of all that has disappointed me is the complete ineffectiveness of the NRLA, with over 100,000 members they had a great chance to be a ‘Voice’.
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 31
11:04 AM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 17/10/2025 – 11:53
The NRLA has been absolutely useless in defending our rights. Pathetic really.
Member Since September 2015 - Comments: 1013
11:39 AM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Cause For Concern at 18/10/2025 – 11:04
Your absolutely right, but you have to look at the root cause. Fundamentally the NRLA has no teeth even if every private Landlord was a member it would have no teeth – they could hardly call a strike!
The Government know this and at best pays them lip service. The best that the NRLA could do was to get members to withhold payment of tax but it doesn’t really have enough members for this to hold any sway with the Government.
The Government will always side with tenants because there are literally far more of them (potential voters) than Landlords. So any actions Landlords take would necessarily have to avoid affecting/harming tenants. Getting disparate millions of Landlords, even if you could communicate dire tly with to take co-ordinated action, would be like herding cats. Again the Government know this.
Member Since February 2024 - Comments: 64
12:14 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
This is no surprise to us small landlords, I’m already selling up, and it’s taking me years in some cases to get my houses back from tenants who have been great, but suddenly become so hostile when I try to explain the PRS is no longer a viable option for me.
If the courts could get my house back when things went wrong I’d be far more inclined to stay, but they are just a joke, and you can spend months and thousands of pounds going to court only for the tenant to say something stupid and have it postponed for months again due to the backlogs – it’s just so tenant biased now it’s not worth the massive risk with tenants who have nothing to lose.
Member Since May 2024 - Comments: 108
4:35 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
This delusional government really thinks that will be able to force the PRS into a second tier housing association (but without the tax breaks). That we will put up with having no rights over our investments and keep supplying homes to an increasing number of people who can’t or won’t save up a deposit against a backdrop of increased costs and bureaucracy.
This government is in for a shock before the end of this term. It will fail on its targets of house building. It will fail the majority of private tenants squabbling over the last drying puddles of supply. It will be remembered as the party who took a imperfect system and ended up with no system.
Member Since January 2025 - Comments: 90
5:02 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 17/10/2025 – 17:29
Please note: you are not being forced to sell a tenanted property at a discount.
Stage 1: The government introduces burdensome regulations that grant tenants increased occupational protection while imposing maintenance and upgrade obligations on landlords — effectively suppressing property values.
Stage 2: It then grants tenants the Right to Buy at “open market value,” a value already reduced by those very same regulatory burdens.
Stage 3: The government subsequently claims the transfer price represents true market value — insisting there is no discount, since it merely reflects what the market is willing to pay under the newly embedded restrictions.
Stage 4: Tenants who buy at these artificially depressed “market” prices can later sell with vacant possession, achieving full open-market value and profiting from the uplift.
Stage 5: The government then argues that landlords were not deprived of value, asserting they had simply overvalued their properties by ignoring the impact of regulation.
It’s the jab, the uppercut — and then the knockout haymaker.
Only a change in government can stop it.
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2188 - Articles: 2
5:08 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 18/10/2025 – 17:02
Regrettably, even a change of government will probably do nothing constructive. The government wants to rid the country of the pariah that is the PRS and is not at all concerned with the homelessness which results. Landlords and tenants will all suffer with no housing solution in sight.
Member Since February 2018 - Comments: 627
5:15 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 18/10/2025 – 17:02
Spot on and this modus operandi runs through society like a stick of Brighton rock, the ‘Great Depression’ in the US was engineered by central banks leading to both foreclosure on thousands of family farms and closure of many local banks, centralisation of ownership and control on both fronts, while that was going on, a central European country was functioning quite well with no gold, which had been stolen being called “reparation’s”and actively promoted new farmer entrants and supported intergeneration farm transfer, a track record like that, exposing the lies of the fiat monetary system couldn’t be allowed to flourish and so got blackened, metaphorically and physically and here we are.
Member Since February 2018 - Comments: 627
5:17 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 18/10/2025 – 17:02
Not just a change in government, remember George Osborne, we need a root and branch change in governANCE, morals and ethics required might be a good start.
Member Since January 2025 - Comments: 90
6:18 PM, 18th October 2025, About 6 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Disillusioned Landlord at 18/10/2025 – 12:14
The Government has directed the courts to inhibit evictions as a matter of public policy.
At the last election, they simply forgot to mention that landlords would be required to carry the capital, maintenance and occupational risks of ownership while acting as the new unpaid council housing officers — no salary, pension, four day weeks, time off for christmas shopping and other benefits.
Just remember to wipe your feet and say please and thank you when you enter your tenant’s home. They own it in all but legal title — and why would they want to take on the capital, maintenance, or occupational risks when they already enjoy all the benefits without them?
A change in government is needed. Cons had 14 years and landed us in this mess.