Renters' Rights Act Landlords | A Microcosm of Modern Britain

Home Landlord Blog The Private Rented Sector: A Microcosm of Modern Britain

The housing debate has become a political debate Simple explanations for complex problems The Renters' Rights Act - is it really a big change?Why the courts will become increasingly important Loud is not always representative Housing needs more nuance Looking ahead

The Private Rented Sector: A Microcosm of Modern Britain

9th Jun 2026

10 min read

Copied

How the debate surrounding the Renters' Rights Act reflects wider questions of evidence, fairness and political polarisation.

A research piece by Alexandra Morris, Founder of Good Landlord & Director of Make Ur Move Limited.

The debate surrounding the Renters' Rights Act is often framed as a discussion about landlords, tenants and housing policy.

In reality, it is about something much bigger.

The Private Rented Sector (PRS) has become a microcosm of modern Britain. The issues being debated within the sector reflect many of the wider political, economic and social challenges facing the country today. Questions around affordability, regulation, individual rights, responsibility, investment and economic growth all collide within the housing market.

This is one of the reasons why conversations about renting have become increasingly polarised. Housing is no longer simply a practical necessity; it has become a political battleground.

As the Renters' Rights Act begins to reshape the legal framework governing the PRS in England, it is worth stepping back and asking a broader question: what does the debate around renting actually tell us about Britain in 2026?

Although the Renters' Rights Act applies to England, many of the themes emerging from the debate around private renting reflect wider social and political tensions evident across Britain.

The significance of the debate is difficult to overstate. According to the English Housing Survey, the private rented sector is home to approximately 4.7 million households, representing around 19% of all households in England. The sector has more than doubled in size since the early 2000s and now forms a central part of the nation's housing system.

The housing debate has become a political debate

Few issues affect people more directly than housing.

Whether someone is renting, buying, investing or attempting to save for a deposit, housing costs influence almost every aspect of financial wellbeing. It is therefore unsurprising that housing policy has become one of the most politically sensitive areas of government policy.

The challenge is that housing is often discussed through the lens of individual experiences rather than broader evidence.

A tenant who has experienced poor housing conditions may understandably conclude that regulation does not go far enough.
A landlord who has faced significant rent arrears or lengthy court delays may feel the system already provides insufficient protection for property owners.

Both experiences are valid. However, neither necessarily reflects the reality of the sector as a whole. They are polarised in their very nature, we know this because of recorded data from actors in the industry.

Indeed, official data suggests that the majority of tenancies function without serious dispute. In 2023–24, 95% of private rented households reported that they had not been in rent arrears during the previous year. In 2024–25, 81% of private renters reported being satisfied with their accommodation.

Increasingly, public debate is driven by the most extreme examples rather than the average experience. Social media has amplified this tendency, rewarding outrage and conflict over nuance and evidence.

Housing discussions have therefore become vulnerable to the same problems affecting wider political discourse.

Simple explanations for complex problems

Modern public debate often favours simple explanations for complex problems. On the face of it this helps but in reality it leads to a shadowing of the central issues because complex is hard to relay to a wide audience.

Within the PRS, the need for a simple presentation has led to the emergency of the following competing narratives.

One side argues that landlords are responsible for rising rents, poor affordability and housing insecurity.
The other argues that excessive regulation is driving landlords from the market and creating housing shortages.

The reality is significantly more complicated.

The rental market is influenced by a vast range of factors, including:

• Housing supply
• Population growth
• Interest rates
• Tax policy
• Inflation
• Construction costs
• Planning restrictions
• Wage growth
• Social housing availability

Reducing these challenges to a simple "landlords versus tenants" debate risks overlooking the structural issues that have developed over decades.

The UK housing market did not arrive at its current position because of a single policy failure or a single group of stakeholders. It is the product of numerous political and economic decisions made over many years.

There is also the very overlooked impact of lending policy. For a significant number of us, the ability to get a mortgage determines whether you have a choice; to be a tenant or property owner. Unless of course you have a friend who has a spare couple of million pounds lying around (look away). I first explored this theory during my law degree studies in 2019, I believe it is fair to say that things have only gotten tougher since then, yet it is still rarely mentioned in the debate over the rights to a home.

The Renters' Rights Act - is it really a big change?

Regardless of where people stand on the reforms, the Renters' Rights Act 2025 represents one of the most significant changes to the PRS in a generation. The legislation seeks to strengthen protections for tenants while increasing expectations placed upon landlords.

In practice, aside from the implementation requirements, the obligation to provide prescribed information to tenants and the loss of the so-called 'fast' routes to possession, for many landlords the day-to-day management of their properties will remain largely unchanged. This raises an important question: how widespread were the practices that the reforms were designed to address?

Official government data shows that only 8% of landlords reported asking a tenant to leave during 2024, with only 7% of those cases involving the service of a Section 21 notice.

Ministry of Justice statistics demonstrate how the same dataset can be used to support very different narratives. Industry groups have highlighted that approximately 28,600 accelerated possession claims were issued during 2025, representing a relatively small proportion of the millions of private tenancies operating in England. Tenant campaign groups, meanwhile, have focused on the 11,402 households repossessed by county court bailiffs following no-fault possession proceedings during the year to June 2025.

Neither figure is inaccurate. They simply answer different questions. One asks how often landlords initiate legal proceedings. The other asks how many households ultimately lose their homes through the court process.

The challenge for policymakers is ensuring that decisions are informed by the complete picture rather than the statistic which best supports a pre-existing position. This is a useful example of the difficulty created when narrative is added to data.

On balance, the possession figures above represent a very small proportion of the overall PRS. It is a fact that the majority of tenancies end at the tenant's initiative. Equally, it would be naive to suggest that Section 21 notices were never used unfairly. It may come as a surprise, but I am broadly supportive of the abolition of Section 21. My view is that what many stakeholders ultimately wanted was greater transparency around why tenancies were ending. Recorded possession grounds may help provide that evidence in the years ahead.

The same questions arise when considering rent increases. If we assume that all landlords behave purely as investors, then retaining good tenants for the long term would ordinarily be in their financial interests, given the costs associated with void periods and reletting. Before the pandemic, many landlords applied modest annual increases of between 1% and 3%, or reviewed rents only when properties became vacant. More recently, rent increases have accelerated as landlords seek to respond to higher borrowing costs, regulatory change, increased taxation and wider inflationary pressures. ONS data recorded annual private rental inflation of 9.0% in the 12 months to December 2024, following a record high of 9.2% in March 2024.

However, not all landlords operate as traditional investors. Some act as trustees or attorneys on behalf of beneficiaries. Others let out former homes temporarily whilst pursuing alternative life paths. Many accidental landlords never intended to enter the sector at all. Understanding the composition of the market is therefore essential before attempting to reshape it through legislation.

If more than three quarters of private renters report being satisfied with their accommodation, it is reasonable to ask whether a divisive approach that risks alienating responsible landlords may be short-sighted. Equally, the remaining minority should not simply be ignored. The more important questions are: who are these dissatisfied tenants renting from, why are they dissatisfied, and will the reforms address the underlying causes of that dissatisfaction?

The answers matter. Even if dissatisfaction affects a relatively small proportion of households, that still represents hundreds of thousands of people whose housing experiences could potentially be improved. The challenge lies in ensuring that interventions are sufficiently targeted to address genuine problems without creating unintended consequences elsewhere within the sector.

Many agents report an increase in the number of landlords selling up and, unless this housing stock is replaced, there may be further pressure on the supply of private rented homes. This concern is particularly relevant given the structure of the sector itself. The English Private Landlord Survey found that 45% of landlords own just one rental property, while a further 38% own between two and four properties. Much of England's rental housing stock therefore continues to be provided by relatively small-scale investors rather than large institutions. They are often working professionals that face the same cost pressures as tenants.

Evidence suggests that the full impact will not be known for some time.

Legislation often operates differently in practice than it does on paper. The interpretation of new rules by landlords, tenants, local authorities and the courts will ultimately determine how the reforms function in the real world and it will take time to understand how these changes are interpreted and applied by the courts.

This is particularly important because housing law rarely develops through legislation alone. It evolves through thousands of individual cases, disputes and decisions.

Why the courts will become increasingly important

One of the less discussed consequences of the Renters' Rights Act is the role that the courts will play in shaping its practical application. New legislation inevitably creates uncertainty.

Questions arise about interpretation, procedure and evidence as I have discussed throughout this piece. Different scenarios emerge that legislators may not have anticipated, some processes are now a lot more complicated, simple amendments handled incorrectly could be a minefield later on, issuing new agreements will incur unforeseen consequences in the event of possession for the purpose of sales and so on. The testing phase of the new rules has already begun.

Over time, court decisions will provide clarity. Or at least the solicitors advising clients who favour caution in their court approaches will set the agenda.

This process is not unique to housing law. It is how much of the legal system develops. A key difference in housing law though is the tier of court that most cases are heard in and the lack of judicial precedent this creates.

As possession claims, rent disputes and enforcement actions progress through the courts, a clearer picture will emerge regarding the real-world impact of the legislation at the lower level and I predict that we may start to see more interest from stakeholders in seeking to appeal which will certainly help develop this area of law over the coming years.

This is important because it creates something that has often been missing from housing debates: evidence.

Rather than relying solely on headlines, campaign groups or anecdotal experiences, policymakers and industry professionals will gradually gain access to more reliable information about what is actually happening on the ground.

The hope is that a combination of real data, recorded possession reasons and evidence can shape political outlooks on the industry and potentially draw some positivity, which is severely lacking currently.

Loud is not always representative

One of the challenges facing modern policymaking is that public debate is often dominated by those with the strongest opinions.

This is true across many areas of society and particularly true within housing. The majority of landlord and tenant relationships attract little attention because they function relatively well.

Rent is paid.

Repairs are completed.

Tenancies end without dispute.

Neither party feels compelled to share their experience online.

As a result, public perception can become distorted. The most visible stories are often the most contentious.

This can create the impression that conflict is the norm when, in many cases, it is the exception.

That is not to suggest genuine problems do not exist. Poor housing conditions, unlawful evictions and rogue operators should be challenged wherever they occur.

Equally, official housing data shows that standards remain an issue. Around 21% of private rented homes in England failed to meet the Decent Homes Standard in 2023, demonstrating why concerns around housing quality cannot simply be dismissed.

Equally, deliberate rent arrears, property damage and abuse of legal processes should not be ignored. It may be possible to shine a light on this as we see the impact of new grounds for possession set in.

However, effective policymaking requires a clear understanding of the sector as it actually exists, not merely how it appears through the lens of social media and headlines. How can we achieve more?

Housing needs more nuance

The housing debate has become increasingly polarised at precisely the moment when greater nuance is required.

The UK faces genuine challenges around affordability, housing supply and quality standards. There are no simple solutions.

Improving outcomes for tenants does not require viewing all landlords negatively.

Supporting investment does not require ignoring poor practices. Encouraging higher standards does not necessarily mean increasing regulation in every circumstance.

The most effective policies are often those that acknowledge competing interests and seek to balance them fairly.

That approach may be less emotionally satisfying than choosing sides, but it is more likely to deliver meaningful long-term improvements. That approach is often lacking in public debate, where political messaging can take priority over long-term policy design.

We can only fix this by identifying the real problems in all their complex forms and addressing them together.

Author’s note

A further subsection of the private rented sector includes the growing rent-to-rent market, which I have not considered within this piece. Whilst rent-to-rent operators form part of the wider housing landscape, the regulatory and commercial issues they present are sufficiently distinct to warrant separate analysis.

Similarly, my research touched upon the increasing prominence of social media influencers promoting buy-to-let investment through 'get rich' narratives. Whilst these commentators undoubtedly shape public perceptions of landlords and property investment, I have not sought to incorporate those perspectives into this discussion of the sector as a whole.

Both areas may contribute to broader attitudes towards the PRS and the assumptions people bring to housing debates. They may therefore merit further consideration in future articles.

Looking ahead

The Renters' Rights Act will undoubtedly change the Private Rented Sector.

Some outcomes will be positive.

Some may create unintended consequences.

Many will take years to fully understand.

What is certain is that the debate surrounding housing is unlikely to become less important.

If anything, housing will remain one of the defining political and economic issues of the coming decade. It will be the centre of political campaigns, locally, regionally and nationally.

For that reason alone, the sector deserves discussion that is informed by evidence, grounded in reality and willing to acknowledge complexity.

The Private Rented Sector is not simply a housing issue.

It is a reflection of the wider challenges facing modern Britain.

And perhaps that is why the debate around it matters so much.

About the Author

Alexandra Morris is the Founder and Director of Make Ur Move and Good Landlord. With almost two decades of experience in the private rented sector, she is currently undertaking the Bar Training Course following the completion of a First-Class LLB (Hons). Alexandra writes about housing policy, regulation and the practical realities facing landlords and tenants, with a particular interest in evidence-based reform within the private rented sector.