Reform UK is right to target the flawed Renters’ Rights Act

Reform UK’s pledge to repeal the Renters’ Rights Act and John Lewis exiting its much-trumpeted build to rent fiasco shows what happens when housing policy fantasy meets harsh market reality.

But then we are run by politicians and civil servants without any real-world experience.

So, every bonkers idea they dream up will be a huge success. Until it isn’t.

For me, Reform’s deputy leader Richard Tice has nailed it when saying the Act is well-intentioned legislation but it’s having the opposite effect.

Landlords are already voting with their feet because the situation has now gone way beyond notice periods and ditching ASTs.

Put simply, the balance of risk and reward is broken so with landlords leaving, supply drops and rents go up.

Rogue landlords not affected

The other knock-on effects being seen by tenants are rents that stayed flat for years are now jumping up as landlords try to get ahead of the Act’s restrictions.

Plus, there needs to be more income to offset compliance costs and added risk.

No doubt most landlords will demand guarantors, or as reported by Goodlord, increasingly buying rent guarantee insurance.

The tenants who once slipped through selection criteria on flexible terms, the ones good landlords used to house without drama, now face closed doors.

Section 21 was never the villain painted by campaigners since most landlords never used it.

It was the backstop that let us take a chance on borderline cases.

Now it is being removed, and we risk a tribunal saga or months of lost income?

And, ultimately, those rogue landlords who seem to be the target of all this legislation will ignore the law anyway.

They always have done and councils are reluctant to tackle them so focus on the law-abiding ones.

Most tenants are happy

As predicted, tenant campaign groups are upset that scrapping the Act would condemn renters to insecurity.

Yet last week I highlighted that most renters are happy with their home.

A lot of critics are about to learn that rights on paper mean little when the pool of properties to rent shrinks.

Generation Rent calls the Reform call a gift to unscrupulous operators.

It’s funny though, isn’t it, how those operators never seemed bothered by existing rules.

John Lewis backs out

Then there’s the high-profile corporate retreat which tells its own story.

John Lewis has just closed its housebuilding arm and is exiting property management.

Just like that, plans for 1,000 homes across three sites are binned.

The reason is down to borrowing and construction costs shifting so dramatically since 2020 that the numbers no longer work.

It also underlines how preposterous the government’s claim to be building 1.5 million new homes is becoming. It’s nonsense on stilts.

If a retail giant with deep pockets and scale cannot make residential investment stack up, what message does that send to the average private landlord already juggling EPC upgrades, selective licensing and punitive tax changes?

Policy colliding with reality

So, here’s where government policy collides with reality since tribunals will not become magically faster.

Council enforcement budgets are finite.

Every extra burden that brings cost or risk onto landlords means they must either raise rents, tighten selection criteria or exit.

Supply will fall, rents will go up and demand will increase – and the country is facing a massive stealth tax in housing those who can’t rent a home.

For me, Richard Tice is correct because there must be balance.

There’s no doubt that decent standards matter but not at the price of emptying the sector.

The months ahead will show whether tenants notice the squeeze first or whether enough landlords have already quietly cashed out.

Reform at least admits the problem exists, while others keep pretending the market can absorb endless one-sided pressure without consequence.

Until next time,

The Landlord Crusader