Renters' Rights Act: implications for residential property managers

While much of the public discussion around the Renters' Rights Act 2025 (the Act) has focused on its headline changes – including the end of rental bidding, 'no fault' evictions and fixed-term tenancies – the legislation will also have a significant impact on those managing tenancies day to day.

For letting agents and in-house management teams in England, the reforms represent not simply a change in compliance requirements but a broader transformation of operational risk, tenant engagement and portfolio strategy.

Processes that once relied on flexibility and discretion will need to be replaced with more robust documentation, and decisions will require clearer justification.

As changes come into effect, property managers will increasingly operate in an environment that demands both heightened professionalism and greater procedural discipline to handle the enhanced risks and responsibilities.

They will also play a critical role in helping landlords navigate the new regime, by not only ensuring legal compliance but also anticipating issues, resolving conflicts early and maintaining tenancies in a more regulated market.

Landlords and agents in England have had to familiarise themselves with the new section 8 notice for ending tenancies and its 37 associated grounds, as well as the relatively underused section 13 mechanism to vary the rent and the section 14 parameters for its determination.

The biggest implication of the withdrawal of section 21, however, is the loss of its implied bargaining power. The threat of a 'no fault' notice was always a lingering factor when negotiating a rent increase or when relations between the parties became strained.

If agreement could not be reached, the landlord could simply serve two months' notice after the first four months, subject to any fixed term, and start again with a new tenant. Now, as it is the tenant who can serve two months' notice at any time without reason, that dynamic changes.

Tenants can also pay the £47 fee to challenge and delay a rent increase, provided they are prepared to invest some time in completing the paperwork.

While some property managers and landlords may already have received their first post-1 May pet request, it is advisable to have a set process in place, including statutory timelines and a tenant application form.

It is reasonable to ask for the pet's age, breed, microchip number, vet information and the contact details of whoever will care for the pet in an emergency.

Where consent is granted, reasonable behavioural conditions can be set to prevent nuisance to neighbours, particularly where this is also a condition of the lease.

Property managers should follow the 28-day rule and use the additional seven days to request further information if needed. However, if no response is given within 28 days, the pet request will be deemed accepted.

If refusing a request, landlords and property managers should consider whether there is a legitimate reason, such as animal welfare concerns, a dangerous breed or a clear prohibition in the head lease. Refusals should not be based on weak grounds that are unlikely to be upheld; a landlord's allergy to cats, for example, is unlikely to be sufficient.

Property managers should therefore do their research now, rather than wait until the first request arrives and the response period has already begun.

The best way to ensure this is to have evidence – which may seem obvious, but evidence was not previously required to serve a section 21 notice to quit or to negotiate a rent increase.

It is a fallacy that only comparable evidence is required to support a section 13 appeal. Property managers may need evidence of a property's good order or risk discounts to the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT's) determined rent because of landlord disrepair or lack of maintenance.

If the tenant is responsible for deterioration of the property, property managers should consider how they will prove that. Typically, a tenant may point to landlord disrepair in a mouldy bathroom when, in fact, the tenant is continually failing to ventilate or use the extractor fan.

Time-stamped inspection reports and ongoing communications with the tenant advising them on how best to use the property could make a significant difference in demonstrating cause and effect.

Where a tenant repeatedly refuses or evades access to undertake a repair, having this properly documented could be invaluable.

If systems are robust, it is often the absence of evidence that provides the evidence: a property manager can only address an issue they've been made aware of.

If a tenant raises a series of issues for the first time in response, the property manager needs to demonstrate not only that they did not know about them, but also that they could not reasonably have been expected to know – for instance, by showing that they did not fail to inspect or otherwise 'look the other way'.

Aside from inspections, property managers should store and record all messages and emails, make time-stamped file notes of phone conversations, ask contractors to provide written reports of anything concerning they have seen, and keep a consistent and proper log.

It may be that a property manager is made aware of an issue and, after consideration, decides not to act or simply to monitor the situation. In such cases, they should keep a record and state why that decision was taken. Evidence gathering is rarely a snapshot observation; it tends to happen over time.

Ending the tenancy should be a last resort. Some breaches are far more serious than others, which is why the grounds for possession are categorised as mandatory or discretionary.

If a landlord can prove the substance of a mandatory ground for possession, such as three months' rent arrears, the evidence trail is relatively clear.

Breaches such as anti-social behaviour or deterioration of the landlord's furniture are far more nuanced in evidential terms and may be less likely to justify possession because of the discretionary nature of the ground.

For possession to be granted, the impact of the breach will need to be meaningful and clearly evidenced. Inventories should therefore be carried out as part of the tenancy sign up and this information should be shared with the property manager.

Managing agents must first be seen to have attempted to get the tenant to remedy the breach. Asking a tenant to correct problematic behaviour is likely to create some friction, but it is an important part of showing that possession was not pursued prematurely.

If a tenant is hoarding to such an extent that it presents a pest control hazard, or is repeatedly blocking fire exits, this is not something that can be ignored.

Equally, anti-social behaviour is notoriously difficult to prove and can be hugely time-consuming, particularly where it involves managing relationships with other stakeholders such as the block manager, neighbours and co-tenants.

If the property is subject to a licence, such as a mandatory, additional or selective licence, specific timelines must be followed to prevent and address anti-social behaviour. Property managers must therefore be diligent in record-keeping and follow-up.

If matters reach an impasse, it may be useful to appoint a mediator to try to resolve the situation with the tenant. If the tenant fails to cooperate or engage with mediation, a mediation certificate will provide evidence of this to support possession proceedings.

The latest reforms emphasise the burden of proof that a change in mindset is needed. Property managers should review the full toolkit available to them as part of managing risk, gathering evidence and demonstrating that possession is genuinely a last resort.

Property managers should set appropriate inspection intervals in line with their terms of business and prudent management standards. If the property is licensed, the local authority will mandate the frequency as a licence condition.

Inspections are typically more frequent for mandatory HMOs, with some local authorities requiring monthly inspections, although quarterly inspections are also common. For additional and selective licences, the timeframe is usually six-monthly.

Inspections have many purposes, so property managers should have a robust and detailed template and procedure that they follow consistently. Dedicated software should also be considered if it is not already being used.

Preparation is important. Property managers should note prior issues to bring forward and comment on, and should have a clear follow-up process once the inspection has taken place.

A standalone report that is simply filed away is unlikely to add much value. If evidence of a tenant breach is not used to enforce the contract at the time, this could be seen in law as acceptance of a variation of the terms.

For example, if an inspection shows that a tenant is smoking, the property manager should not simply take surreptitious photographs of overflowing ashtrays with a view to making a deposit deduction later for additional cleaning. Instead, the tenant should be told at the time that they are in breach and should stop immediately. Failure to do so could imply that smoking is being permitted.

This is where soft skills become essential. Tenants often see inspections as intrusive and any follow-up as judgemental. Property managers must therefore tread a fine line on behalf of their client: addressing breaches clearly and promptly, while managing the tenant relationship professionally.

Historically, local authority fines and tenant claims for rent repayment orders (RROs) were typically issued for properties that should have been licensed but were not. Property managers might think that if they have already audited their portfolio and ensured that all properties requiring a licence have one, their job is done; however, that is no longer the case.

More fines, civil penalties and RROs are being issued where a licence was in place but the landlord or licence holder was in breach of one or more licence conditions.

At the same time, the financial stakes have risen significantly. The maximum civil penalty is now £40,000, while the maximum RRO has increased from 12 to 24 months' rent. Given this escalation in risk and potential liability, property managers should reassess how they approach licensing compliance across their portfolios.

After confirming that there are no missing licences or outstanding applications, property managers should scrutinise the relevant licence conditions, put systems in place to ensure they are met, maintain records demonstrating compliance and establish a process for regular monitoring so that any lapses can be identified and rectified promptly.

Licence conditions can be numerous and granular. They may include supplying window keys to tenants, displaying emergency contact details for the managing agent, providing information on recycling arrangements, obtaining references for tenants and carrying out portable appliance testing, among many other requirements.

For those operating across multiple local authorities, the challenge is greater still. Conditions vary not only between councils but often between different licence types within the same authority.

Mandatory HMO licences, for example, typically carry more onerous requirements than selective licences. And, although it should go without saying, ensuring that all safety certificates remain current is an essential part of maintaining compliance.

Local authorities don't only police licensed properties. Under the Act, they have enhanced investigatory powers and, with 24 hours' notice, may attend a place of business to inspect and potentially seize records, including emails, WhatsApp messages, documents and physical computers.

They also have a statutory duty to investigate and enforce the legislation, further changing the risk landscape for landlords and managing agents.

To better understand how local authorities are likely to approach enforcement, it is worth reading the government's guidance aimed specifically at councils, as well as the guidance produced for landlords and tenants. The differing perspectives can provide useful insight into enforcement priorities and expectations.

Maintaining a constructive relationship with local authorities is increasingly important. Sign up for their email updates, attend landlord forums and establish a contact within the housing department who can help with queries when they arise.

Keep a close eye on properties that may be at risk of overcrowding. Remember that, for the purposes of the Housing Act 2004, minimum room-size requirements apply and occupancy limits can change over time – for example, a two-person bedroom can be no smaller than 110 sq. ft (10.2m²), and a child under ten counts as half a person for overcrowding calculations; but once they turn ten, a property that was previously compliant may no longer be so.

Any communication from a local authority, particularly an overcrowding notice or improvement notice, should be treated seriously and acted on promptly.

As enforcement activity increases, we are likely to see more collaboration between tenants and local authorities in gathering evidence and pursuing claims against landlords and managing agents through the FTT.

Ensuring that compliance processes, record-keeping and evidence trails are robust will be essential in this new environment.

This evolving regulatory environment brings greater responsibility, requiring property professionals to raise their standards accordingly. RICS-regulated firms should already belong to a redress scheme and operate an internal complaints procedure as a condition of registration. In time, landlords will also be required to register with a landlord database and join a new ombudsman scheme.

Ultimately, property management is about adding value: providing a diligent service, managing relationships, applying professional expertise and, above all, managing risk effectively.

That does not mean becoming overly cautious in every decision. Rather, it means adopting a mindset of continual risk assessment and mitigation, ensuring potential issues are identified and addressed before they escalate.

By staying informed, keeping abreast of regulatory developments and regularly reviewing your processes, RICS members will be well placed to meet these challenges and continue demonstrating the professionalism and expertise that set them apart.