Professor warns Renters’ Rights Act has backfired on tenants

Reply to the comment left by Tim Peters at 09/09/2026 – 10:04
Sadly, a professor cannot get the basics right.

Self-employed cannot take dividends, only shareholders in (generally) small companies can do so, instead of or in addition to a salary. The self-employed only receive profits.

Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 09/09/2026 – 11:54
Certainly he needs to check his facts: He is wrong about dividends but he is right that the self-employed (and partners in partnerships) are disadvantaged. He is also right that the Act is perverse. Labour’s Renters Rights Act creates an offence to discriminate against tenants on benefits and tenants with children, but [perversely] it makes these tenants even higher risk than they were before the Act.

Reply to the comment left by Kate Mellor at 09/09/2026 – 11:17
Absolutely Kate, I agree.
A 6-month fixed term gives certainty all round, to landlord and tenant. My tenants actually felt that fixed term tenancies gave them security.
A 2-month notice period is inconvenient for everyone – tenant, old landlord, new landlord, new employer if relocating.

Also, a tenant can now say they will stay for six months, but they no longer need to.
So, a 2-month turnaround time on a tenancy reduces landlords to AirBnB owners without any of the benefits.

As everyone on this forum already said – this Labour government never asked the people that mattered (tenants and landlords) what worked for them.

Since when do self-employed people pay themselves dividends, as the learned professor has stated? Dividends are paid by companies to shareholders. Maybe a one-man company might pay him/herself dividends instead of or as well as a salary but that person is an employee of the company, not self-employed. Is this chap really a professor of economic history?

These are not unintended consequences as far as the lobby for corporate housing are concerned. This is paving the way for low quality, high priced, internationally invested big business to step in and take the last UK national assets. Think the Thames Water of housing with the government falling over themselves to provide subsidies for a sector too big to fail. We have a useless, wet behind the ears, simpering, dumb lot of politicians like Pennycock who are like seal cubs being wined and dined by sharks. Feeling a thrill of power whilst actually giving power away, forever. Not only will these homes end up more expensive for tenants, all the profits will go overseas like the profits from the utilities and infrastructure created in the UK by foreign companies over the last 40 years.

Reply to the comment left by Jack Jennings at 10/09/2026 – 10:49
When Rachel Reeves’ inheritance tax changes kick in in spring of 2027 bringing UK pensions into the scope of inheritance tax (thereby simultaneously attacking both the pensions and principle private residences of middle-income earners and working families) this will create an incentive for more families to dump UK assets. This is because UK land and property are subject to IHT even if family members have retired, or are considering retiring, abroad to places like Australia, Canada or Portugal (where IHT for family members is 0). You are broadly correct….this government has been creating incentives not just for profits but also for ownership of assets to be held overseas. There is nothing about this strategy that is good for growth in the UK economy; but the current chancellor, John Healey, has just publicly recognised that the only solution to being able to spend enough money on defence and also afford the social security bill is to grow the UK economy.

Where are the key performance indicators and who takes accountability? Without these they will likely try and fix with rent controls and make bad matters worse. There needs to be accountability for harmful decisions, the problem was and remains a lack of housing and banks being too selective in who they rent to.

Reply to the comment left by Paul Smith at 11/09/2026 – 06:54
When did you ever see anyone in the public sector take accountability for their decisions 😂😂😂

Reply to the comment left by Paul Smith at 11/09/2026 – 06:54
It’s true that financial institutions plays a part….my lender restricts who I can rent to. However, if government changed the law such that it was clear that the housing benefits people couldn’t get the money back off the landlord if they discover that the tenant isn’t eligible for benefits then many of us wouldn’t be as concerned about taking on benefits tenants. The problem is bad policy and poor governance.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 09:11
Equally the problem could be solved by the government acting as guarantor for the benefit tenant. 😂🤣😅😆