The government’s new Renters’ Rights Bill is being sold as a major step forward for tenants. By abolishing Section 21 “no fault” evictions and giving renters more power to challenge rent increases, the Bill promises more security and fairness.

However, from a landlord’s point of view, the reality appears quite different. In fact, many of the reforms could have unintended consequences that actually make life harder for tenants.

Stricter tenant selection

With Section 21 gone, landlords worry about being stuck with tenants who stop paying rent or cause problems. Evicting under Section 8 is slower, riskier, and tied up in court delays.

The rational response is to only rent to tenants who pass the strictest referencing, often the standards required by rent guarantee insurance.

That means self-employed tenants with irregular income, people on benefits, students, or anyone with a patchy credit history will find it much harder to secure a home.

Landlords will turn more to rental insurance to protect their positions.  The terms of that insurance always require strict affordability checks, which many of those the Bill is trying to protect will not be able to meet, therefore, restricting their options further.

End of up-front rent as a fallback

At the moment, tenants who cannot pass traditional affordability checks often offer six to twelve months’ rent up front. It is a way for freelancers, contractors, or those moving from abroad to prove they can pay.

The new Bill bans landlords from accepting rent in advance at the start of a tenancy. The intention is to stop abuse, but it also removes a legitimate safety net for tenants with non standard incomes.

Higher starting rents

Today, some landlords advertise properties slightly below market rent. It helps fill properties quickly, reduces void periods, and attracts reliable tenants.

Under the Bill, any rent increase can be challenged by tenants at a tribunal. Even if the rent is still below local market rates, the tribunal could block the rise.

The logical outcome is that landlords will set rents at full market value from the outset. Over time, this could drive up advertised rents across the board.

Less flexibility, fewer options

Previously, landlords sometimes offered flexible terms, lower deposits, unusual payment schedules, or informal arrangements, because they knew they could adjust later if needed.

Now, the risk of being locked into a problematic tenancy means many will adopt a “by the book” approach only. That rigidity removes the little flexibility some tenants relied on.

Pets and selectivity

The Bill gives tenants the right to request a pet, and landlords cannot unreasonably refuse. On paper, this looks like a win for renters with animals.

In practice, landlords with multiple applications can simply pick tenants who do not own pets in the first place. The law cannot stop that kind of selection. Many landlords will see tenants without pets as the lower risk option, especially when insurance does not cover pet-related damage.

This means tenants with pets may find it even harder to compete for properties, even though they technically have new rights.

Fewer rental properties overall

Another overlooked impact of the Bill is the likelihood of fewer rental properties in the market.

Many small landlords are already selling up due to rising mortgage rates, higher taxation, and tighter regulations. Adding more restrictions and risk through the Renters’ Rights Bill could push more landlords to exit the sector entirely.

Every time a landlord sells, the property is often bought by an owner-occupier rather than another landlord, which reduces the overall rental stock. Less supply means more competition for tenants, higher rents, and fewer choices. If the trend continues, the shortage of rental homes could become even more severe in the years ahead.

Practical advice for landlords

Landlords who want to protect themselves under the new system will adapt in the following ways:

• Use rent guarantee insurance to cover arrears and legal costs, but be aware that this will push you toward strict referencing requirements.
• Price at full market rent from the start to avoid being locked into a low rent that cannot later be increased.
• Rely on professional referencing services rather than taking chances, even if it means longer voids between tenants.
• Keep tenancy agreements watertight and compliant with the Bill, since courts will scrutinise the details.
• Be upfront about pets and set clear property rules in advance to avoid disputes later.

The bigger picture

The Renters’ Rights Bill aims to make renting fairer, but it may achieve the opposite. By raising the risks for landlords, it encourages behaviour that ultimately raises entry rents, excludes more tenants from the market, reduces flexibility in rental agreements, and shrinks the number of rental properties available.

This is not landlords being malicious. It is a rational response to increased legal and financial risk.

The irony is that the very groups the Bill was designed to protect, tenants with insecure work, benefits claimants, and those struggling to afford market rents, may be the ones who lose out most.

Security on paper means little if fewer tenants can access homes in the first place. Unless these issues are addressed, the Renters’ Rights Bill could go down as a reform that drove up rents and shut people out of the rental market altogether.