A system that relies almost entirely on Section 8 possession grounds must be underpinned by a court service capable of handling cases efficiently and consistently. Where possession processes are slow, costs rise and confidence declines.
For the Renters’ Rights Act to achieve its objectives, improvements to court capacity and case management must accompany the removal of Section 21. Predictable, timely possession processes are not a concession to landlords; they are a prerequisite for a stable and functioning rental market.
Section 8 reliance and landlord risk
In London, the average waiting time for an eviction after a possession order has been granted is 8 months, and the average unpaid rent at the time of eviction is almost £20,000. Where a tenant has no UK guarantor and limited recoverable assets, that financial exposure sits almost entirely with the landlord.
This increased exposure is likely to influence decision-making, and applicants perceived as presenting lower financial risk may be prioritised. Those without a UK guarantor, with limited credit history, or who are unable to offer rent in advance due to new restrictions may find it more difficult to secure accommodation.
The concern is not with the principle of reform, but with the real-life consequences if court processes are slow and unpredictable. If possession claims routinely take many months, risk is concentrated in a way that can unintentionally restrict access for some of the very renters the reforms are designed to protect.
The student market is vulnerable
The capital’s rental market operates at scale and under sustained demand. Even marginal shifts in landlord behaviour can have significant cumulative effects.
Survey data from the English Private Landlord Survey shows that the private rented sector remains dominated by smaller landlords, many of whom have limited financial resilience and are less able to absorb extended periods without rent.
The capital also has a substantial international and student population. Many students rely on housing that turns over in line with the academic calendar. We have previously raised concerns that Ground 4A (student possession) is limited to HMOs, potentially leaving some one- and two-bedroom properties outside scope. This could restrict flexibility and create bottlenecks where properties are not returned to the market in time for new cohorts.
Restrictions on rent in advance, while intended to improve fairness, may create additional practical challenges for international students and others without a UK-based guarantor or credit footprint. In combination with longer possession timelines, this may encourage more cautious applicant selection in competitive areas.
Renters’ Rights Bill: transforming how student lettings operate
For agents in England working with landlords in this specialist market, it is vital to understand the changes, the risks, and the opportunities ahead. Propertymark has been campaigning hard to ensure student housing is not undermined by reforms designed for the wider private rented sector (PRS). The loss of fixed terms is the single biggest risk for this market, and we continue to fight for workable solutions that protect the annual student lettings cycle.
Enforcement and regulatory complexity
London’s regulatory landscape is already complex, with numerous selective and additional licensing schemes operating across boroughs. We have raised concerns about how the new PRS Database will interact with existing local licensing regimes. Without coordination, there is a risk of duplication, inconsistent enforcement and increased administrative burden for compliant landlords and agents operating across borough boundaries.
Effective targeting of rogue operators remains essential. However, reforms must avoid creating fragmentation that makes compliance more difficult for responsible landlords while failing to address the minority who deliberately operate outside the rules.
