Reeves’ rent freeze idea clashes with landlord rent rise plans

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Reeves’ rent freeze idea clashes with landlord rent rise plans

Landlords planning rent increases are on a collision course with Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ proposals for a potential year-long rent freeze, with research showing most are already adjusting rents in response to incoming legislation.

Pegasus Insight’s latest Landlord Trends survey shows 61% of landlords intend to raise rents over the next 12 months.

Among that group, 75% point directly to the Renters’ Rights Bill for shaping that decision.

The figures surface as reports suggest the Chancellor is mulling a temporary freeze on rents in the private rented sector as part of measures aimed at easing pressure on household budgets.

The Treasury has declined to comment on media reports, describing them as speculation.

Unprecedented PRS intervention

However, Mark Long, the founder and managing director of Pegasus Insight, said: “A rent freeze would represent unprecedented intervention in the private sector, thwart the business plans of the majority of landlords and potentially force some out of business.

“Landlords are not setting rents in a vacuum.

“Many are already factoring in the impact of the Renters’ Rights Bill, alongside higher costs, and that is feeding directly into pricing decisions.”

He added: “Introducing a rent freeze into that environment could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back for those already struggling to balance the books.”

Move will reduce supply

Timothy Douglas, the head of policy and campaigns at Propertymark, said the reported plans come as the Renters’ Rights Act takes effect on Friday.

He said: “With the UK government introducing huge regulatory change through the Renters’ Rights Act, which will ultimately mean less flexibility and higher costs for landlords and tenants, it is alarming to hear reports that the Chancellor is considering additional rent control measures – particularly when Housing Ministers have recently publicly denounced their role.

“Evidence from across the UK, particularly in Scotland, shows rent controls restrict supply, deter investment, and reduce choice for tenants. Singling out landlords to solve the cost of living is not the answer.”

He added: “Rent controls risk distorting the market and undermining investment at a time when demand already far outstrips supply.

“If the UK government is serious about improving affordability, it must focus on increasing housing supply and supporting long-term investment in the private rented sector, rather than introducing measures that will ultimately make it harder for renters to find a home.”

Creates landlord confusion

Other industry reaction is just as scathing with Oli Sherlock, the managing director of insurance at Goodlord, said: “Floating the idea of a blanket rent freeze on top of the Renters’ Rights Act feels like policy duplication at best, and outright confusion at worst.

“At a time when landlords, agents and tenants are trying to prepare for the biggest legislative shift in decades, this kind of political ‘kite-flying’ is deeply unhelpful.”

He added: “More fundamentally, the evidence on rent controls over the medium to long term is pretty clear.

“They tend to reduce supply, distort the market, and ultimately make things worse for the very tenants they’re supposed to protect.

“If the goal is to improve affordability and stability in the private rented sector, we need clarity and consistency; not overlapping interventions that risk undermining confidence just as the sector is adjusting to major reform.”

Knee-jerk policy

Elsewhere, concerns extend to supply and development and Melanie Leech, chief executive of the British Property Federation, said: “We recognise the current pressures on individuals and households, but there is no surer way for the government to kill off its ambitions to deliver the new homes we desperately need, and the jobs and tax revenue that flow from that, than well-intentioned but inept knee-jerk government intervention.

“If a temporary rent freeze is being considered by the Chancellor, she must learn the lessons of the disastrous impact of the failed attempt to introduce rent controls in Scotland with rents for new lets rising significantly after controls were introduced, alongside a standstill in new home-building.”

Olivia Harris, the chief executive of housing charity Dolphin Living, said: “Any proposals to introduce a one-year rent freeze within the private rented sector risk addressing only the symptoms, rather than the root cause, of the housing cost-of-living crisis.

“The fundamental issue remains that there is a severe shortage of rental homes across the UK which is limiting consumer choice and keeping rents high.”

He added: “The solution is to build more homes, especially those of an intermediate affordable tenure, which can help address many of the affordability issues we are currently experiencing, rather than introducing a measure that will discourage future investment and accelerate of the number of smaller landlords looking to exit the market, thus exacerbating the demand/supply imbalance.”

Watch James O’Brien vs landlord

Property118 readers may be interested in this segment of the James O’Brien show on LBC. It’s called ‘Choose your fighter: James O’Brien vs landlord’ in which he goes head-to-head with landlords discussing Rachel Reeves’ move to bring in a rent freeze. He also uses the phrase that he would ‘break out the world’s tiniest violin’ for moaning landlords.

The post Reeves’ rent freeze idea clashes with landlord rent rise plans appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Reeves’ rent freeze idea clashes with landlord rent rise plans

Renters’ Rights Act raises uncertainty for student accommodation

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Renters’ Rights Act raises uncertainty for student accommodation

The student rental market will change dramatically under the Renters’ Rights Act as student landlords are urged to prepare.

Owen Dixon, founder of Best Student Halls, warns that students could face uncertainty in securing accommodation, with less certainty around tenancy timing and availability.

As previously reported on Property118, industry experts have warned the Renters’ Rights Act could leave students worse off.

Students want certainty

Under the Renters’ Rights Act, renters will be able to end their tenancy at two months’ notice and fixed-term tenancies will be abolished.

Mr Dixon warns that both students and landlords want certainty, and that the changes could mean that tenancies which would previously have ended automatically in June will now depend on the new notice requirements and possession grounds.

He said: “Students want certainty that they will have accommodation secured for the full academic year, and providers need confidence they can legally regain possession in time to prepare properties for incoming cohorts.”

“For example, a student tenancy that would previously have ended in June will now rely on appropriate notice being given and the use of the relevant possession grounds under the new system. While the framework is designed to preserve academic-cycle turnover, any delays in the process could create pressure on turnaround times ahead of the September intake.”

Student landlords need to plan more carefully

Mr Dixon adds that, while there is support for stronger tenant protections, student landlords will need to plan more carefully.

He said: “From a landlord’s perspective, the removal of Section 21 means relying more heavily on defined statutory grounds to regain possession. That creates a fairer and more transparent system overall, but it also requires more planning and may increase administrative complexity, particularly during peak turnover periods.”

Mr Dixon also predicts that purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) will take on a larger role, as it will still be able to offer fixed-term tenancies, unlike private rented homes.

He said: “The student accommodation market is expected to adapt, with purpose-built student accommodation and some larger operators likely to structure their offer around the academic year, supported by the possession of grounds available for student lets.

“As a result, we may see a clearer distinction between providers who can offer structured academic-year certainty and those operating more flexible periodic arrangements, which may require more active management of timing.”

The post Renters’ Rights Act raises uncertainty for student accommodation appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Renters’ Rights Act raises uncertainty for student accommodation

Why fewer landlords are replacing those who exit

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Why fewer landlords are replacing those who exit

A critical imbalance is becoming visible within the private rented sector, and it is not just about how many landlords are leaving, but how few are replacing them. According to the Property118 Landlord Sentiment Survey Q1 2026, the rate at which landlords are reducing or exiting portfolios is not being matched by new or expanding investors. Based on 2,380 completed responses, 57% of landlords plan to reduce their portfolios, while only 6.8% intend to expand. You can review the full findings here.

The headline is clear: exits are not being replaced.

An imbalance in participation

Markets rely on balance. When participants exit, new entrants or expanding participants typically take their place. The survey data suggests that this balance is no longer present within the landlord market. With a significantly higher proportion of landlords planning to reduce exposure than increase it, the gap begins to widen. This is not just a temporary mismatch, it is a directional shift.

Barriers limiting replacement

The absence of replacement is not simply a matter of choice. As highlighted in the Property118 dataset, younger landlords are underrepresented, with fewer than 3% of respondents under the age of 40. This suggests that barriers to entry are playing a role. Higher costs, more complex regulation and changing financing conditions all contribute to a more challenging environment for new investors.

Existing landlords stepping back

At the same time, many established landlords are reassessing their position. With portfolios built over many years and often supported by significant equity, decisions to reduce or exit are being made from positions of strength rather than necessity. This creates a different type of market dynamic. The survey findings show that these decisions are widespread, not isolated.

Implications for supply

If landlords exit without being replaced, the structure of the rental market changes. Properties leaving the sector may not return as rental stock, particularly if they are purchased by owner-occupiers. At the same time, with fewer landlords expanding, there is limited new supply entering the market. This creates a gradual tightening. The effect may not be immediate, but over time it becomes more visible.

A widening gap

The combination of increased exits and limited replacement points towards a widening gap within the sector. As more landlords step back and fewer step forward, the balance shifts further.

For now, one conclusion stands out: the private rented sector is not currently replacing the landlords it is losing, and that imbalance is likely to shape its future direction.

A conversation worth having?

If you are weighing up your own strategy, whether that’s to sell, expand, or restructure to improve profitibility, it is worth having a discussion with a Property118 consultant to take a closer look at how your portfolio is structured as a whole now, and to forecast the outcomes based on multiple scenario’s.

These conversations are typically most useful for landlords with established portfolios and relatively modest borrowing who are beginning to reflect on how their assets could work more effectively in the years ahead.

/* “function”==typeof InitializeEditor,callIfLoaded:function(o){return!(!gform.domLoaded||!gform.scriptsLoaded||!gform.themeScriptsLoaded&&!gform.isFormEditor()||(gform.isFormEditor()&&console.warn(“The use of gform.initializeOnLoaded() is deprecated in the form editor context and will be removed in Gravity Forms 3.1.”),o(),0))},initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.callIfLoaded(o)||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.scriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),document.addEventListener(“gform/theme/scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.themeScriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,()=>{gform.domLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}))},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,r,e,t)},addFilter:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,r,e,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,r){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,r)},removeFilter:function(o,r,e){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,r,e)},addHook:function(o,r,e,t,n){null==gform.hooks[o][r]&&(gform.hooks[o][r]=[]);var d=gform.hooks[o][r];null==n&&(n=r+”_”+d.length),gform.hooks[o][r].push({tag:n,callable:e,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(r,o,e){var t;if(e=Array.prototype.slice.call(e,1),null!=gform.hooks[r][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[r][o]).sort(function(o,r){return o.priority-r.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==r?t.apply(null,e):e[0]=t.apply(null,e)})),”filter”==r)return e[0]},removeHook:function(o,r,t,n){var e;null!=gform.hooks[o][r]&&(e=(e=gform.hooks[o][r]).filter(function(o,r,e){return!!(null!=n&&n!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][r]=e)}});
/* ]]> */

/* = 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_585′);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_585′).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery(‘html’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + parseInt(jQuery(‘body’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + 100;if(is_form){form_content.find(‘form’).css(‘opacity’, 0);jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_585′).html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass(‘gform_validation_error’)){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_585′).addClass(‘gform_validation_error’);} else {jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_585′).removeClass(‘gform_validation_error’);}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_585′).val();gformInitSpinner( 585, ‘https://www.property118.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg’, true );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [585, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_585′] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_585′).replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [585]);window[‘gf_submitting_585′] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery(‘#gform_confirmation_message_585′).text());}else{jQuery(‘#gform_585′).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(“gform_pre_post_render”, [{ formId: “585”, currentPage: “current_page”, abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_wrapper_585″ ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( “span” ); visibilitySpan.id = “gform_visibility_test_585″; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( “afterend”, visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_visibility_test_585″ ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 585, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === ‘attributes’ && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ ‘style’, ‘class’ ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );
/* ]]> */

The post Why fewer landlords are replacing those who exit appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Why fewer landlords are replacing those who exit