Two months’ notice or not two months’ notice? That is the question

As far as I am concerned the RRA completely supercedes all existing tenancy agreements. It isn’t a pick and mix situation.
Landlords can’t pick which bits to abide by and which bits to revert to the original wording on the tenancy agreement. There is absolutely nothing in the RRA that says tenants don’t have to equally adhere to the new rules.

As landlords, we may choose to be a bit flexible but that is our choice. Sometimes it works well for all parties. However, the RRA has stated tenants are required to give 2 months notice ending on the first or last day of a rent period. Effectively often closer to 3 months notice.

Reply to the comment left by Jo Westlake at 18/06/2026 – 09:54
I completely agree with everything you’ve said. I contacted the NRLA to check the notice period my tenants had given and was told by the advisor that they could leave at the end of June as they’d served notice in June, effectively less than 1 month’s notice. By any stretch of the rules it should at least be the end of July. The NRLA quoted CAB and Shelter guidance to me at first, I asked ‘where does it say that in the legislation?’ The NRLA came back to me the next day quoting the legislation and stating the ‘previously agreed in writing’ section, saying that meant the tenancy agreement could revert the notice period to 1 month (or whatever it stated). It’s so ridiculous, I have no words! Actually, I do have quite a few words, most of them unsuitable for publication. Hence I went for a more debating approach here.

It would need to be tested in court to get a definitive position, which probably wont happen as its a time limited issue. However, most lawyers and landlord associations believe that a clause in an existing tenancy agreement specifically giving a shorter period would meet the test in the RRA and be valid.

Landlords in this position and whose tenants are claiming the right to give less than 2 months notice would be wise to agree it.

interesting. I too had a tenant on an old AST give notice after 1st May and after a call to NRLA was told that AST said one months notice and that is what stands, because the two month notice only applied to new APTs which only come into effect after 1st May.

It does seem like double standards on this point. We were told that old ASTs automatically moved into being aligned with an APT after May 1st – the whole idea being (apparently) so there was not confusion after 1st May and all tenants would be treated the same…

Clearly not the case. It does seem a pick and mix approach on this point.

Tenants under a pre 1st May contract may still remain in the current property for years, so this will linger for a while yet still if this is not brought into line with APT requirements.

This means there is clear discrimination baked into the new RRA, as the same rule does not apply equally to all tenants!

spoke to an adviser through my legal expenses insurer. Their view was that historic AST notice clauses are not automatically preserved, that an existing tenancy agreement may not amount to a new written agreement for the purposes of section 5(1ZA), and that the statutory two-month default would therefore apply.

I would agree on the basis that …

In section 5 it clearly states that a valid notice to quite (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER the commencement of this Act) is only valid if it is written and it is given with no less than 4 weeks before the date on which it is to take effect.

It then goes on to say, the notice to quit is satisfied when it is given to a tenancy under and assured tenancy (NB so no legal difference between AST and APT is made here?????)

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 11:22
The paralegal adviser on my legal assistance helpline categorically and unequivocally said 2 months notice. Landlords were advised that they didn’t need to re-issued tenancy agreements ahead of 1 May 2026 because the changes in the law would override the clauses in the tenancy agreement. Section 21 no longer a legal option, 4 months’ notice for selling the property on a Section 8 notice, all took immediate effect. The only thing that landlords thought they could rely on was 2 months’ notice from tenants. If this is truly the situation, why aren’t we now all rushing to update our tenancy agreements?!

Reply to the comment left by Jo Westlake at 18/06/2026 – 09:54
I agree, that is our understanding too.

Reply to the comment left by Clara Skye at 18/06/2026 – 11:42
as far as im aware anyternant tith the AST still gives the notice stated on that contract 1 month from tenants and 2 from landlords all new tenancys tenant gives 2 months full notice in writing unless otherwise agred between the 2 parties and the landlord give 4 im sure if selling otherwise 3 if they just want to vacate the property for repaird and ugrades toEPC which some cant be done with tenants in situ

as far as im aware anyternant tith the AST still gives the notice stated on that contract 1 month from tenants and 2 from landlords all new tenancys tenant gives 2 months full notice in writing unless otherwise agred between the 2 parties and the landlord give 4 im sure if selling otherwise 3 if they just want to vacate the property for repaird and ugrades toEPC which some cant be done with tenants in situ

Reply to the comment left by Jo Westlake at 18/06/2026 – 09:54
so if a T gave you notice tomorrow will you be saying they require to give you two months notice?

I suppose we should really refer them to the RR Info sheet they all got supplied with. Technically if the T reads this and then gives 2 months notice as a result , on the basis it is what the government has told them, then how can the LL be deemed at fault when they are simply accepting what the T has requested?

I think that’s the angle I am going to use in future if anyone on and old AST givens notice from now on,