A recent Landbay survey revealed that nearly half of landlords plan to raise rents ahead of the Renters’ Rights Bill. It’s a clear sign that, once again, government policy is missing the mark.
We’ve been here before. Successive governments, including the Conservatives, have attempted sweeping reforms of the rental sector without fully appreciating the real-world impact. Labour now seems determined to go further, despite evidence that the sector is already under intense pressure. Their narrative of helping “working people” is undermined by tax increases and overregulation that ultimately reduce rental supply, increase costs, and hurt the very people they claim to protect. NIC increases hitting highly taxed businesses is having the same impact - many working people are losing jobs, promotions or pay rises. Promote growth and investment (medium term) or squeeze more out of a depressed and overtaxed population for longer term damage?
The UK’s private rented sector houses around 4.6 million households. It’s a vital part of the housing ecosystem, one that I’ve worked in and supported throughout my career. Despite constant interference — whether from poorly timed policy or Truss-induced interest rate shocks — landlords have remained resilient. But even resilience has its limits.
Markets find their balance when left to operate. More landlords means more homes, more competition, better quality, and downward pressure on rents. Tenants are empowered by choice, not regulation, and can vacate poor properties. The popular narrative of slum landlords and arbitrary evictions just doesn’t reflect the vast majority of landlords I’ve worked with. The PRS struggles if it’s easier and safer to put your money in government bonds.
Let’s not forget: the last government’s version of this bill was stopped by the House of Lords in late 2023. Not because they opposed better rights for tenants — but because they recognised the danger of removing landlord protections without first resourcing the courts, supporting local councils, and allowing for a phased transition. Their conclusion? These reforms risk increased homelessness, landlord withdrawal, and a deterioration of the rental stock.
Yet here we are again pressing on with largely the same proposals, without addressing the same risks. The result? A few too many landlords sell up. Those staying are increasing rents to manage risk and tax burdens.
This isn’t a defence of bad practice —it’s a call for evidence-based policy. Landlords will invest when the market feels fair and stable. That leads to better homes and more choice for tenants. Hoping that Build-to-Rent schemes will pick up the slack is naïve. Institutional landlords target prime locations and wealthier tenants — not the working families these policies are meant to support.
If we want a functioning, affordable rental market, we need confidence, not confusion. Stability, not uncertainty. Market engagement, not political posturing.
I’ll save my views on EPC targets for another time — but let’s just say it feels like one demand too many in an already overstretched game of landlord Buckaroo.
