The Renters’ Rights Act introduced a number of significant protections for tenants when it comes to rent, and it banned rent in advance for new assured periodic tenancies entered into from 1 May 2026.
While the rules on rent increases fall short of rent control or caps on rent increases, they have still changed the way in which landlords can advertise and agree the rent for new tenants, and increase rent for existing tenants.
The Act additionally makes it not just less risky, but also more appealing, for tenants to challenge rent increases at the First-tier Tribunal, even if the increase is entirely reasonable and not above the market rent. This is because tenants have nothing to lose by appealing apart from the fee of £47, and a challenge delays the start date of the new rent until after the tribunal makes a decision.
It is also easier for tenants to challenge the rent in the first six months of a tenancy, by applying to the First-tier Tribunal for an “initial rent determination”.
The Act bans landlords from asking for upfront rent before the tenancy is entered into, and the only rent in advance provisions that are enforceable are for the initial rent for up to one month, payable between signing and the tenancy start date.
In this blog post, I explain what the Renters’ Rights Act now requires landlords to do, and not do, when it comes to setting and accepting the initial rent, and increasing rent once they have moved in.
Rent is just one of the topics I cover in my bestselling book, The Good Landlord Handbook. It also goes through each stage of the tenancy cycle, with the rules in the Renters’ Rights Act fully integrated. If you have questions, you can ask me at twice-monthly livestreams in my membership, The Independent Landlord Hub.
Last updated: 28 May 2026
>> Related Post: How to complete Form 4A to increase rent (Section 13 notice)
>> Related Post: Section 13 rent increase challenges: First-tier Tribunal process and cases
What’s new in the Renters’ Rights Act about rent?
- 1. The new maximum rent period
- 2. Requirement to state specific proposed rent when advertising
- 3. Obligation not to encourage rental bidding or accept higher rent than stated
- 4. Banning of pre-tenancy rent payments and rent in advance
- 5. Compulsory Section 13 statutory notice procedure to increase rent
- 6. Rent review clauses are now invalid
- 7. Why more tenants will challenge Section 13 rent increases
- 8. Increased rights to challenge initial rent in first 6 months
- How do rent increase appeals to the First-tier Tribunal work?
- Does Labour’s Renters’ Rights Act introduce rent controls or caps?
- Final thoughts
1. The new maximum rent period
The concept of the “rent period” lies at the heart of the new assured periodic tenancy system in the Renters’ Rights Act that came into force on 1 May 2026.
The rent period means the “period of the tenancy for which rent is payable”, and Section 1 of the Act has changed the law so that the rent period cannot be longer than one calendar month in a new Section 4A Housing Act 1988.
Whereas landlords could previously set quarterly or six-monthly rent periods, these longer periods are no longer permitted for assured periodic tenancies. Any existing agreements specifying longer rent periods were automatically adjusted to monthly periods on 1 May 2026.
The rent period can start at any day of the month and ends the day before the start of the next rent period. For instance, a rent period may run from the 25th of the month until the 24th of the month.
As an aside, a notice to quit by a tenant needs to expire at the end of a rent period, or the first day of the next, so unless they get the timing spot on, the notice is likely to be longer. This sounds good but may lead to longer voids as incoming tenants may need to give notice to their landlord, who may not wish to release them early.
>> Related Post: The rules for tenants to end a tenancy with a valid notice to quit
2. Requirement to state specific proposed rent when advertising
The Renters’ Rights Act requires landlords and letting agents to state the amount of the proposed rent in any advertisement, listings or other offer in writing. This doesn’t include a “To Let” board, but would include advertisements on Gumtree or Facebook, as well as the property portals.
This is unlikely to be a change for renting in practice as, unlike the sale of property where a range or guide price are common, rent has invariably been stated as a specific amount.
However, the requirement is important for the ban on rental bidding. Also, if the proposed rent is not stated in the listing, the council may impose a civil penalty of up to £7,000.
Do bear in mind that tenants can challenge the level of the rent at the First-tier Tribunal in the first six months of the tenancy on the grounds the rent is above the market level for a similar property in a similar condition in the area.
3. Obligation not to encourage rental bidding or accept higher rent than stated
Section 56 of the Act states the landlord or letting agent “must not invite or encourage any person to offer to pay an amount of rent under the proposed letting that exceeds the proposed rent” stated in the advertising or offer (see above).
It doesn’t stop there. Landlords and letting agents cannot accept an offer from an applicant to pay higher than the stated rent.
As with a breach of the duty to state the proposed rent, the local authority may impose a civil penalty on a landlord or agent up to £7,000 “if satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the person has breached the prohibition”.
Landlords and letting agents must not accept unsolicited offers from tenants to pay above the proposed rent, as the “balance of probabilities” is a fairly low threshold of proof.
I suspect that in areas of high demand the proposed rents in listings will be increased, and applicants encouraged to put in a bid below the proposed rent.
However, bear in mind when setting the initial rent that tenants previously had the power to challenge the initial rent in the first 6 months of a tenancy under Section 22 of the Housing Act 1988 if it was “significantly higher” than the rent for similar properties in the area.
This means the Act makes it easier for tenants to challenge the level of rent in the first 6 months, as they will only need to show it is more than the “open-market rent”.
So it’s important for landlords to keep evidence of offers from other applicants to rent the property, and also the basis upon which they chose how they set the rent.
4. Banning of pre-tenancy rent payments and rent in advance
The Renters’ Rights Bill was amended at the Report Stage in the House of Commons to introduce “prohibited pre-tenancy rent payments” as a new category under the Tenant Fees Act in what is now Section 9 of the Renters’ Rights Act. This means that landlords and letting agents cannot ask for or accept any payments of rent until both parties have entered into the tenancy agreement.
The maximum initial rent that landlords and letting agents can ask for is one calendar month’s rent.
Consequently, if a landlord or agent asks for the first month’s rent before the tenancy agreement is signed, say at the same time as they ask for the tenancy deposit, this breaches the Tenant Fees Act.
On the other hand, once the agreement is entered into, tenants can voluntarily pay in advance (see Section 8 RRA). However, any term in an agreement saying this is null and void, and not enforceable.
The Government guidance says: “A landlord will only be able to require up to one month’s rent […] once a tenancy agreement has been signed and before commencement.”
Tenancies already in place when the Renters’ Rights Act came into force are not affected by this rule, and rent in advance clauses in existing tenancies are still valid.
>> Related Post: The new rules on rent in advance
5. Compulsory Section 13 statutory notice procedure to increase rent
The only way that landlords can now increase the rent for existing tenants in an assured periodic tenancy isby using the Section 13 notice procedure every 12 months.
The notice must be in the prescribed form on the GOV.uk website, which is now Form 4A.
The Renters’ Rights Act doubled the notice period from one to two months, and tenants can challenge the increase at the First-tier Tribunal without any risk of the rent being set higher than the landlord proposed (see section 7 below).
Rent review clauses can no longer be used as an alternative route (see section 6 below). Informal rent increases agreed with the tenant outside Section 13 are not enforceable, although the tenant can agree to a lower rent than the one stated in a Section 13 notice.
For a step by step walk through of Form 4A, see the related posted below.
>> Related Post: How to increase rent with Section 13 notice (Form 4A)
6. Rent review clauses are now invalid
Landlords can no longer include rent review clauses in their assured periodic tenancy agreements.
Any existing rent review clauses in tenancy agreements became null and void from 1 May 2026. Landlords cannot to agree it informally with their tenants, unless the landlord agrees to reduce the rent stated in a Section 13 notice they have served on the tenant.
7. Why more tenants will challenge Section 13 rent increases
The Renters’ Rights Act makes it less risky and, in fact, more appealing for tenants to challenge an increase in the rent at a First-tier Tribunal under Section 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
This is because they have nothing to lose other than the £47 fee, and the time it takes to complete the 22-page Form MR1. On the other hand, an appeal delays the increase in the rent, and the subsequent rent increase, as that cannot take effect until at least 52 weeks after the date on which the previous increased rent took effect.
8. Increased rights to challenge initial rent in first 6 months
Section 7 RRA gives tenants increased rights to challenge the amount of rent in the first six months of a tenancy at the First-tier Tribunal, referred to as “initial rent determinations”.
Tenants could previously challenge rent in the first six months of a tenancy under Section 22 of the Housing Act 1988. However, this wasn’t easy to do as the First-tier Tribunal could only reduce the rent if it is “significantly higher than the rent which the landlord might reasonably be expected to be able to obtain under the tenancy” for similar houses let in the locality.
Section 7 RRA removed this hurdle, by making the test the same as for challenging rent increases, namely whether or not it is above the “open-market rent”.
The government’s Implementation Roadmap states “In the longer term, the government intends to establish an alternative body or mechanism to the First-tier Tribunal to make initial rent determinations, subject to a final viability assessment. This will help support the Tribunal’s capacity”.
How do rent increase appeals to the First-tier Tribunal work?
The First-tier Tribunal assesses the proposed rent against what the landlord could expect to receive if letting to a new tenant on the open market. As a result of the changes in the Renters’ Rights Act, the FTT may only keep the rent the same or reduce it. Previously, the Tribunal could increase it if they determined the market rent is higher than the rent proposed in the notice.
This means the Renters’ Rights Act has taken away the risk for tenants in challenging a rent increase at the First-tier Tribunal as they have nothing to lose as there is no risk that the tribunal will increase the rent, as there was previously.
Importantly, and I would say unfairly, the new rent won’t come into effect until the next payment date after the tribunal makes its decision. The FTT also has the power to delay the increase in the rent if they believe it will cause the tenant “undue hardship”.
Landlords now need to give two months’ notice of a rent increase, instead of one month as at present. This means the tenant have longer to decide whether to challenge the rent.
>> Related Post: Section 13 rent increase challenges: First-tier Tribunal process and cases
Does Labour’s Renters’ Rights Act introduce rent controls or caps?
No, the Renters’ Rights Act does not include provisions that would enable the government to introduce rent controls or to cap the amount of annual increase. A number of amendments were proposed at the Report Stage to introduce rent controls, none of them were passed.
The only form of rent suppression is that tenants can appeal against a rent increase at the First-tier Tribunal, but they will not win if the proposed rent is not above what the FTT decides is the market rent.
Matthew Pennycook has confirmed this many times, including in a written response to a question from Kemi Badenoch: “The Government does not support the introduction of rent controls. We have made clear that we intend to use the Renters’ Rights Act to provide tenants with greater protections against unreasonable within-tenancy rent increases”.
The Act does not include a power to devolve rent control powers, in keeping with the statement released by MHCLG on 15 August that the “government has no plans whatsoever to devolve rent control powers”.
Final thoughts
Although the Renters’ Rights Act has not introduced rent controls as such, the Act does make it more problematic for landlords to increase rent, and there are the additional rules prohibiting rental bidding
It is entirely predictable that the First-tier Tribunal will be busier, with both in-tenancy rent challenges and the “initial rent” challenges in the first six months of a tenancy.
Hi Suzanne,
If I sign a brand new AST tenancy just before royal assent and assume the commencement date is 3 months after assent then can the new tenant (who has signed the AST before Royal Assent) challenge the rent via FTT as it is in the 6 month window?
I think so.Best to assume they will (they already have a right to do this, but it’s changing a bit under the Bill)
Currently, I did not think the tenant could challenge the rent via a FTT for a current brand new AST. I thought they could only take it to FTT after a section13 notice was issued only for a rent increase?
BUT the introduction of allowing a rent review (in current draft RRB) within 6 months of a new tenancy is again very harsh as the rent would have been agreed/negotiated with the new tenant and landlord at the beginning of acceptance of an offer (below or at asking price). This is going to make relationships with LL and tenant very hostile and unreasonable. 82% of tenants are happy with PRS according to EHS so this could change dramatically downwards after RRB.
This isn’t changing the law. It’s just making it a little more prominent, and is taking away the risk for tenant. It’s a little known provision in the Housing Act 1988 that a tenant can challenge the initial rent under Section 22. Almost no-one does because of the risk they may lose and the tribunal will increase the rent because the market rent is higher than the actual rent.
Hi Suzannee
Couple of questions :
Do you know what sort of metrics are used by courts to determine “open market rent” ?
And is the bar still “significantly higher” with the RRB?
I’m very careful to research myself and get advice from my agents as to what rent to set every year. Unless there has been substantial movement in the market my default has always been RPI (or slightly less if they have been a good tenant).
Now of course RPI is out the window, one must only use “open market rents” for comparable properties in the area. The only way to know that is via one’s agent or a good scoot around letting websites.
I’m guessing that to protect oneself against frivolous claims regarding the level of rent some sort of pre-tennancy/pre rent review openess about how the initial asking rent has been arrived at and a signed attestation from the tenant that they have been informed, understand and agree to it, might be a good idea. Not watertight, but better than nothing.
The tribunal takes evidence from the parties. I’m sure some company will fill the vacuum and supply details of rents achieved rather than advertised rents. In the meantime, keep screenshots of listings of similar properties.
I’m preparing a new tenancy agreement for a student HMO starting in October. Can I proceed with a fixed term AST and request 3 monthly rents in advance as agreed by the tenants? Will this tenancy be nullified once the RRB becomes law?
This isn’t legal advice, and the rules may still change, but here are my thoughts on your excellent question. As soon as the commencement date happens, any term in the contract that has rent on any other basis than calendar month (or less, eg weekly), will be null and void. The tenancy will still be valid, but the rent period will become one calendar month. It will also become periodic immediately, and they’ll have the right to terminate with 2 months’ notice at any time.
Remember that if you enter into the agreement more than 6 months before the tenancy starts, you won’t be able to use ground 4A.
Will it be necessary to provide current tenants with new contracts when the new bill comes into force? And if we increase the rent now to match market rent in the area, will this be affected by the new Bill please?
I don’t think we’ll need to, but we may want to, depending on how much in your current agreement needs to change. If you increase the rent to market now, you should only increase it after the bill comes into force if you have evidence that your new increase is still not above market
Thanks Suzanne. The rent is currently more than £400 below the market rent; are there rules about how much we can raise it now and how we should do it please?
I have a blog post that will help you with increasing rent, as it goes through the different methods, and gives guidance on how much to do in one go. £400 would be a huge increase for anyone, so I advise doing it gradually. https://theindependentlandlord.com/rent-increase-landlords/
As usual excellent blog. One thing though: You said in the Youtube video “no rent controls’” but I feel it would be more accurate to say that the govt are saying no rent controls while actually introducing them. Controls can take the form of limiting increases and this will be achieved albeit indirectly. One possible outcome is a race to the bottom of quality. If tribunals ignore some of the value issues then the only viable offer will be a bare bones service.
The government are making it easier for tenants to appeal, but are not limiting or stopping rent increases as such. Section 13 is already there, and they’re changing it to delay the start of the new rent and to make it less risky for the tenant to challenge. David Smith calls this “rent stabilisation” as opposed to rent controls.
Excellent blog.
On the point of rent increases, if the market rate is 500 pcm and I raise to 525 and its set back to 500, because its deemed to be 500 on the basis of other listings, how does the market rate ever change? Tribunal-determined market rents are an oxymoron. These are rent controls.
Hello, thank you for an excellent video.
If all tenancies magically change to Assured tenancies on a specific day does that mean that there is a new tenancy created.
If so will the date that the rent was first increased under the assured tenancy change to the first increase date under this assured tenancy even if s13 has previously been used in the previous AST?
Hope that makes sense.
Also if it so treated as a new tenancy are there any implications for having to rebond deposits etc – I’m keen to avoid another Superstrike situation.
Thank you Mark.
Hello and thank you. No, a new tenancy won’t be created, and you won’t need to rebond a deposit. The AST will just change into an assured tenancy. The rules for using a s13 notice aren’t changing in that it can’t be a shorter period since the last time the rent increased after using a s13 notice. None of the dates “reset”.
Hello Suzanne,
Thank you for your helpful blog.
I am a tenant and we have being on a rolling contract for the last 2years. The management of the flat has changed and we are now discussing with the agency the new contract. We recived offers based on a 1-year and a 2-year contract, and I am now wandering what’s the validity of these offers with the introduction of the new renting period. If I understood correctly, going forward it would be a rolling contract, with 2-month notice for any change, where a rise in price cannot happen less than every 52 weeks. Does it mean they can give us notice after 6 months?
Thank you for helping us navigate this.
Thank you. I aim to be balanced and help tenants as much as landlords. When the Renters’ Rights Act comes into force, a fixed term contract will turn into a periodic tenancy which you can terminate with 2 months’ notice. The landlord will only be able to terminate if they have one of the new grounds for possession under section 8, and the amount of notice depends on the ground – https://theindependentlandlord.com/rrb-grounds/
I’m currently purchasing a new buy to let property and obviously wanting to maximise my rental income (due to rising costs and adminstrative burdens).
Will a “Dutch Auction” be permitted under the rrb?
How might this be viewed?
Will i be able to discriminate against tenants who already have pets? (my last bad pet experience cost me over £3000 due to fleas, urine and faeces).
Thanks Philip
Yes, a “Dutch auction” will be allowed, ie tenants bid under a proposed rent.
You will be able to turn down applicants who already have pets as the rules only protect tenants. But once they move in, you’ll have to give a good reason. If they move in with pets without telling you and then request, then you’d still need to have a good reason to turn them down. This is why it’s better to be pet friendly in the first place and mitigate your risk. I write about it here: https://theindependentlandlord.com/pet-friendly-landlord/
You will be able to charge the tenant for pet insurance, but won’t be able to turn tenants down just because you once had a bad experience, unless you have another good reason. And it shows how important tenant selection is.
Hi Suzanne
Do you have any pointers/experience/knowledge to share about getting a long lease changed in order to ban pets? This seems to be the ultimate get out clause for those lucky enough to have them. Those with leases that are a bit old and written in the ‘Age of Sanity’ will not have such clauses (naturally why would they given Landlords had the right to refuse).
Clearly this would mean engaging with the Freeholder I know, and it would come at a price I know, but any ideas whether a single one liner amending a lease simply banning pets of all kinds would be overly complicated and costly? (assume all leaseholders in the building agree as well).
Thanks!
I’m a pet friendly landlord… Under Section 11 RRA, the exception would only assist if “an agreement between the landlord and a superior landlord prohibits the keeping of a pet at the dwelling-house without consent of the superior landlord, and the landlord has taken reasonable steps to obtain that consent but the superior landlord has not given it”.
Thank you for the reply. I think most landlords like to think they are “pet friendly”. Whether they are or not is now of course moot.
Seems to me as though Landlords may do well to ensure superior leases have such clauses/agreements.
Most of my tenants have pets, so I walk the talk.
Hello Suzanne,
Will the tenants also be able to challenge rent increases that amount to inflation figures? For example, if the CIPH for the last 12 months is 4% and the proposed rent increase is also 4%, can the tenant take this to the FTT?
And if the FTT decides in the landlord’s favour and allows a rent increase of 4% but the tenant doesn’t pay the increased rent, is that ground for eviction? Or will the landlord have to wait until this rent shortfall amounts to 2 full months of rent arrears before they can start eviction proceedings?
Thank you,
Anna
Here are my thoughts in bold:
Will the tenants also be able to challenge rent increases that amount to inflation figures? For example, if the CIPH for the last 12 months is 4% and the proposed rent increase is also 4%, can the tenant take this to the FTT? Yes
And if the FTT decides in the landlord’s favour and allows a rent increase of 4% but the tenant doesn’t pay the increased rent, is that ground for eviction? Not in itself
Or will the landlord have to wait until this rent shortfall amounts to 2 full months of rent arrears before they can start eviction proceedings? Landlords will need to wait until there is 3 months’ arrears for a mandatory ground. See this post – https://theindependentlandlord.com/rrb-grounds/
Hi Suzzane
I never see the fact that a Landlord can sue through the County Court also for non payment of rent discussed or highlighted anywhere.
I really think its a good idea (if you dont already) to educate Landlords about this option (which I understand can run along side any reposssion orders and can be started pretty much as soon as a rent payment is misssed) I’m sure that is correct? You can’t gain repossession of the property (I don’t think?), but it will make life incredibly hard for those who can pay but just don’t – those who game the system and hide behind this new law, which in my experience is the majority.
As far as I can see, this is now the only possible avenue where rogue tenants can be made to face any consequences whatsoever for delinquency.
Thank you. The focus of this post is the new rules about rent in the RRA> Here’s my content on managing rent arrears: https://theindependentlandlord.com/rent-arrears/
Thank you for the link. Much appreciated. The process you spell out there is very clear and usefulto know. Hopefully never to be needed, but Landlords have little else left in their armoury should things get that bad.
Hello Suzanne,
I’m really pleased I found your blog, it has helped me understand the implications of the up coming legislation.
I have a couple of queries that you may be able to clarify for me. I have a property with exiting tenants and it’s time to renew their annual contract.
My letting agent wants to renew their contract, at a fee, of course. Is there any point in me doing this? Considering they will migrate to a period tenancy shortly? So, why should I not simply let the existing contract merely roll over to the inevitable period type and save myself the agent’s management fees? Are there benefits in renewing the AST?
The next point relates to FTT under the new legislation. If the tenant questions a rent increase and takes it to the FTT. On the assumption the FTT then upholds the proposed rent increase, after a deliberation of 18 weeks. Does the tenant have to pay the new rent from the date of the FTT’S decision OR do they have to pay the rent back dated from the initial rent increase date?
Thank you
Paul
Glad you like the blog. Such good questions.
There is no need to “renew” the AST. At the expiry of the fixed term, it will automatically become a rolling, periodic agreement. Letting agents encourage landlords to enter into another fixed term primarily so they can charge a fee, and also because it’s an easy way to put up the rent.
The pros for a landlord is that you have certainty for the fixed term, but in reality if the tenants’ circumstances changed and they wanted to leave anyway, you’d let them go. You’d have to mitigate your loss by looking for new tenants, so you wouldn’t be able to hold them to the end of the fixed term anyway.
The cons are that you can’t serve a s21 during the fixed term – you may wish to if you discover they are subletting or breaching the agreement.
Add to that the Renters’ Rights Bill, when fixed terms will become periodic anyway. We’re not sure when it’s going to be, but I’d say Q2 2026.
If your rent is below the market, you can increase it either in accordance with a rent review clause (if there is one) or by serving a s13 notice. That’s what we’ll have to do when the RRB comes into force. Here’s how to do it: https://theindependentlandlord.com/resources/property-investors-glossary/section-13/
As the rules stand, the new rent will come into effect after the FTT’s decision, at a date they determine.
If you don’t already, you should subscribe to my weekly newsletter: https://theindependentlandlord.com/subscribe/