The Effect of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 on Rent Increases


Scroll Down
Home > Knowledge Hub > The Effect of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 on Rent Increases

The only way is up…maybe (not) 

1 May 2026 – the day landlords, estate agents and property lawyers across the UK have had marked in their diary since late last year – is upon us. This is the date the first tranche of the reforms to the private rented sector brought about by the Renters Rights’ Act 2025 (Act) come into force, from the abolishment of “no-fault evictions” to the right not to be unreasonably refused a cat in your flat (other pets are available).  

Of practical and financial relevance to landlords is the effect that the Act will have on their ability to increase rent. It is this aspect of the Act that shall be the focus of this article.  

The position before 1 May 2026   

Landlords wishing to increase rent, in theory, had two options: 

  • relying on a contractual rent review clause (if the relevant tenancy agreement contained such a clause); or  
  • for periodic tenancies, the serving of a notice in accordance with the statutory regime set out in Section 13 of the Housing Act 1988 (Section 13); or 

In practice, if the agreement in question did not contain a contractual rent review clause, the Section 13 option was rarely used. Landlords would simply seek to agree a new rent with tenants and if no agreement could be reached, the landlord would look to evict the tenant using the (now abolished) Section 21 “no fault” possession option.   

If a landlord relied on the Section 13 route, the tenant could make an application to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (FTT) for a determination of the open market rent.  

The new position: increasing rent 

The Act amends Section 13 so that it makes clear that the only way rent can now be increased is:  

  • by a landlord serving a Section 13 notice (using Form 4);  
  • following a FTT determination of the open market rent (if the tenant decides to challenge the Section 13 notice); or 
  • if, following an FTT determination, the landlord and tenant mutually agree a rent that is less than the sum determined.  

On 1 May 2026, all residential tenancies will become periodic, meaning that Section 13 will apply to all* tenancies. The effect of this is that all contractual rent review clauses will now be void.  The Act has retrospective effect and so this includes all rent review clauses that pre-date the Act.  

Furthermore, with the Act abolishing the Section 21 “no fault” eviction option, landlord’s will no longer be able to rely on this as a method for leveraging rent increases in negotiations with tenants.    

The statutory, Section 13 method is therefore now the only way landlords can increases rent. This means:   

  • rent can only be increased after a minimum of 1 year from the start of the tenancy and, if increased, the landlord will have to wait a further 52 weeks before seeking another increase; and 
  • all rent increases will now be open to challenge in the FTT, whereas previously contractual rent increases could not be challenged.  

The Act also makes amendments to Section 13, including the provision that notices must give tenants a minimum of 2 months’ notice of rent increases. The previous position for monthly periodic tenancies was that only 1 month’s notice was required.  

The new position: challenges to rent increases 

The Act makes the following changes to the regime for challenging Section 13 notices: 

  • if the FTT’s determination of the open market rent is greater than that which the landlord was proposing, it will be the landlord’s (lower) proposal that will take effect; and 
  • any rent determined will only take effect on or after the date of the determination. 

Previously, if a tenant applied to the FTT for a determination of the open market rent, the risk was that the FTT could determine that the rent was actually higher than what the landlord was proposing in the first instance. Now there is essentially nothing to lose for a tenant in choosing to make an application to the FTT for a rent determination. This is especially true because, in the FTT, the “losing” party is generally not ordered to pay the “winners” costs. Additionally, the Government have recently announced that the relevant court fee for making a rent determination application will be only £47.   

The fact that the Act provides that any new rent determined will only take effect on or after the determination means that tenants will also have the opportunity to kick the any proposed increase into the long grass. This is particularly true given that the no risk reality of making an application for a determination means that the FTT are likely to be inundated with applications and any determination will therefore be significantly delayed.  

In light of the above, landlords will have to accept that any increases to rent that they now seek to achieve are much more likely to be challenged.  

* apart from “low-cost tenancies” which are exempt and will retain the ability to include contractual provisions in the agreement to increase rent. 

If you have any queries or concerns relating to how the matters discussed in this article or, the Renters’ Right Act 2025 generally, may affect you, please do not hesitate to contact our Property Litigation Department.

Disclaimer: General Information Provided Only

Please note that the contents of this article are intended solely for general information purposes and should not be considered as legal advice. We cannot be held responsible for any loss resulting from actions or inactions taken based on this article.

Insights

Latest Insights

Photo of city skyline
02 October 2025

What are directors’ duties?

For most, being a director of a company is hard work: you’ve put the blood, sweat and tears into setting… read more
A picture of a small village street lined with houses and shops
24 September 2025

SDLT – Why is it back in the headlines?

We have all seen the reports in the press about the former deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner. It comes as… read more
Picture of a doctor making notes on a patient in the background
23 September 2025

Employee awarded £1.2m after employer mishandles sickness absence – how can employers avoid getting it wrong?

In the recent case of Wainwright v Cennox plc, the Employment Tribunals considered a situation where an employee discovered that… read more

Request a call back

We’ll arrange a no-obligation call back at a time to suit you.