Is the government’s PRS Database registration putting landlords at risk?
2 weeks ago | 35 comments
NRLA warns of landlord database ‘rip off’ cost
12:01 AM, 5th October 2026, 7 days ago
17
Categories:
England’s planned landlord database is set to cost the private rented sector at least £327 million a year, with tenants ultimately footing the bill, the NRLA warns.
The government will begin rolling out the database in December as part of its Renters’ Rights Act, but Landlords will be charged to submit much of the same information many already give their councils.
The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) says that at £65 a year for each property, the charge is almost seven times the figure ministers envisaged in the Bill’s impact assessment.
Database costs criticised
The organisation’s chief executive, Ben Beadle, said: “A well-designed database should make it easy for landlords to demonstrate compliance with their obligations; empower tenants; and be truly digital in every way.
“This looks likely to fail on every count.”
He added: “What we have on offer is a costly mess.
“It expects payment for landlords to provide much the same information as many already give their councils, with no additional benefit to them or their customers.”
Landlord paperwork burden
The database charge will sit alongside licensing fees in areas where councils operate schemes.
However, these can cost as much as £2,300 per property which is being charged by Arun District Council.
Mr Beadle said: “The mind boggles that landlords are to be forced to pay more to manually upload documents to a website than mechanics are permitted to charge to carry out an MOT check, which includes a comprehensive, hands-on examination of a car’s roadworthiness.
“Frankly, landlords and tenants are being ripped off in the name of consumer protection.”
Other database issues
The NRLA also warns that there are currently no government plans to digitise gas and electrical safety certificates in the same way as Energy Performance Certificates (EPC).
That means landlords will have to scan the documents manually and upload them to the database, adding to the administrative costs of compliance.
The NRLA says this will be particularly burdensome for larger landlords, including build-to-rent providers managing hundreds or thousands of properties.
Further costs ahead
Meanwhile, the sector is still awaiting details of the charge for joining the planned private rented sector Ombudsman scheme.
The NRLA says that fee is widely expected to be significantly higher than the database charge.
Landlords are also preparing for a tax increase on rent income from 2027, the association says.
Mr Beadle argued that the hundreds of millions earmarked for the database would be better spent helping landlords meet the government’s energy efficiency targets.
Tags:
landlord costs, Landlord Database, Landlord Licensing, NRLA, Private Rented Sector, Renters’ Rights Act
17 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.
Previous Article
Two councils fail tenants over housing standardsNext Article
Inheritance boom could create more landlordsRelated Articles
Government urged to expand PRS Database to include rent and eviction data
1 month ago | 17 comments
PRS Database must be more than a licensing fee collector – Propertymark
2 months ago | 5 comments
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2550
12:15 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Ray Guselli at 05/10/2026 – 12:08
I don’t know the answer to your question but if the government publishes the rent paid on a property, that creates risk; rent paid is sensitive financial information. Also, if the government publishes names of individuals, those names can make it easier to identify landlords from specific ethnic groups, and this creates risk for those individuals. Where there are two landlords who have names associated with one sex this makes it easier to infer sexuality from this information. All these things are protected characteristics.
The government shouldn’t be going ahead with its database without consulting with the police and the Information Commissioner’s Office on the protection of sensitive personal information. But there also has to be a clear public interest argument and there isn’t one for this proposed database given that landlords already have to declare their income to HMRC.
Member Since September 2026 - Comments: 3
12:25 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Judith Wordsworth at 05/10/2026 – 10:25
I wholeheartedly agree with this. It is a total breach of privacy, as pretty much anyone can see the data. Leading to potential scamming, ID theft, and who knows what might happen in the case of a breakdown of the landlord-tenant relationship.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2550
12:43 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Jenby at 05/10/2026 – 12:25
It doesn’t even need to be a breakdown of the landlord-tenant relationship that could lead to a problem here: There are plenty of people out there who want to attack landlords, and this problem is being fuelled by the anti-landlord rhetoric of the ultra-left, including the Green Party. HMRC should be asking the police and the Information Commissioners Office about this as they are liable for breaches.
Member Since May 2017 - Comments: 838
12:47 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Who rattled Ben Beadle’s cage?
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2550
2:18 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by JB at 05/10/2026 – 12:47
I don’t know but I have often wondered why the NRLA has previously supported a landlord database.
And reflecting on the statement in the article “The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) says that at £65 a year for each property, the charge is almost seven times the figure ministers envisaged in the Bill’s impact assessment”, recognition that in fact this does not in any way represent the true cost to landlords and that the risks have been understated, I suspect that Ben Beadle must realise that supporting a landlord database risks the NRLA alienating many landlords, especially small landlords who must form a large portion of its claimed 100,000 membership.
Why would any landlord support this landlord database?
Member Since May 2017 - Comments: 838
3:03 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 05/10/2026 – 14:18
It makes me wonder what BB is getting out of it as he is also a landlord. I would expect him to share our opinions and fight in our corner instead of supporting everything the government proposes – including the RRA
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2550
3:23 PM, 5th October 2026, About 6 days ago
Reply to the comment left by JB at 05/10/2026 – 15:03
I don’t know why the NRLA has supported this database; at the very least, supporting the database is extraordinarily naive as it’s likely to be used by a variety of people and organisations to target or attack landlords, especially in the current climate.
Because of the likely attractiveness of one of my properties to developers I am regularly targeted by ‘property developers’ who get my contact details from the Land Registry. But my details aren’t PUBLICLY available from the Land Registry and I’m signed up to the alerts service, which is here:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/property-alert
If anybody does obtain my details from the Land Registry they have to pay for them and this creates an audit trail if there’s a problem. The details that somebody can get from the Land Registry are limited, as they should be. I sign up to Land Registry alerts to protect my property from fraud, or at least to reduce the impact of fraud, because the risk of fraud is higher with rental property than other properties. Fraud concerns me more than other issues because I am not gay or easily associated with any particular ethnic group. But for people from certain religious ethnic or religious groups or backgrounds and for some people with different sexual orientation they are at serious risk of attack if somebody makes their personal details available.
The Information Commissioners Office points out that you have a right to object to organisations using your data:
https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/the-right-to-object-to-the-use-of-your-information/
I cannot see why any reputable organisation pretending to represent landlords, especially small landlords, would be supporting the landlord database.