Right to Rent – Is there a counter claim?

I have such a tenant. It’s quite straightforward to check the right to rent. I have a certificate provided by gov.uk The tenant provides me with a number he is given by government.uk , I go on the gov.uk website put the number in and it provides me with a copy of his picture and proof of his entitlement..
It is renewed every 12 months until either refused or leave to stay indefinitely.
If they haven’t got a British passport from the start they have to prove their right.

Yes u say it well. You get fined either way. The Police missed the person coming in, yet you get done for it.

“bring a subsequent action, in light of my fine, against the UK Border Agency.”

You could be bankrupted by the legal fees. The legal route is usually available to
(1) Tenants on legal aid/pro bono/no-win-no-fee,
(2) Gov/Councils spending tax payers’ money.
(3) Giant Build to rent operators

The RTR legislation provides a list of reasonable excuses which could be used as a defence – e.g. you have used an approved Digital Verification Service Provider (DVSP) or certified Identity Service Provider (IDSP) to carry out the checks. That is the sensible option if you still want to stay in the PRS. DVSP/IDSP/Computer says no = “No tenancy”.

Most of the tenants with no right to rent entered the country legally on a tourist visa or study/work visa that’s now expired, so your premise is not correct.

Nice, I like your angle, but the government does’t play fair.
They are not using logic or common sense, just force and threats against you.

Hi Phil,

The honest answer is the counter claim doesn’t exist, and the reason’s structural rather than unfair.

The Home Office owes you no duty of care for how it polices the border, and a penalty you’ve been told to pay is pure economic loss. Courts won’t let a private party recover that from a public body for failing to stop someone else’s wrongdoing, so it would fail before anyone reached your merits.

What you’ve got instead is a statutory route. Sections 29 and 30 of the Immigration Act 2014 give you 28 days to object on three grounds: you aren’t liable, you’ve got a statutory excuse, or the amount’s wrong. If that fails, there’s 28 more days to appeal to the County Court, which can cancel the penalty or reduce it.

The statutory excuse is what’s worth your attention. If you’ve done the prescribed checks properly before the tenancy began, you keep it even if the documents turn out forged, unless the forgery was reasonably apparent to an untrained person looking carefully but briefly. That’s a better shield than anything aimed at Border Force.

Since you mention the latest rules, a new code of practice took effect on 1 October 2026 and tightens the digital verification requirements.

The scheme also survived a challenge on your exact fairness point, in SSHD v JCWI [2020] EWCA Civ 542.

OJ

Those entering the UK on a visitors’ visa, e.g., don’t have the right to rent but wouldn’t be prevented from entering the UK at the border.
Then there are overstayers who entered the UK with a visa but have not left when the visa, or conditions of the visa, expired. One could argue that the Home Office should hold this person’s sponsor/employer/university etc liable for ensuring the person leaves the UK.

It depends on the reason your hypothetical person is in the UK and looking to rent.

Reply to the comment left by Oliver Tandy at 16/10/2026 – 01:54

Thanks Oliver,

I hope to never find myself in that position, nor my fellow landlords, but it seems a possible scenario & that a defence could be legally costly in itself. I wonder if defence costs could be recovered, assuming an outcome favours my defence?

It’s a very interesting scenario that, whilst theoretically is unlikely, seems possible to predict.