National Audit Office Press Releases
Regulation of private renting
A report by the National Audit Office (NAO) has found that the way private renting is regulated is not effective in ensuring the sector is consistently fair for renters or that housing is safe and secure. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) does not yet have a detailed plan to address the problems that renters face.
There are an estimated 4.4 million privately rented households in England. While most tenants have a good experience of renting, those who do not can end up with serious illness, financial issues, or homelessness. DLUHC aims to ensure the private rented sector is fair for tenants, and to protect them from such harms by setting regulatory laws and policies.
Privately rented properties are less likely to comply with safety requirements than other types of housing, and are more likely to be classified as non-decent. An estimated 13% of private rented homes (589,000 properties) have at least one category 1 hazard – a serious threat to health and safety – with associated costs to the NHS estimated at £340 million per year. This compares with 10% of owner-occupied homes and 5% of social housing. In addition, an estimated 23% of private rented homes are classified as non-decent.1
DLUHC has taken a piecemeal approach when introducing legislative changes to protect tenants’ rights. In recent years it has introduced changes such as a mandatory redress requirement for letting agency work2, a ban on charging letting fees to tenants, and temporary restrictions on evictions during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, DLUHC does not yet have a strategy for what it wants the regulation of the sector to look like as a whole. DLUHC told the NAO that it is currently defining the strategic objectives of its reform programme.
DLUHC’s approach is also limited by gaps in the data showing what problems are occurring and where. DLUHC has some insight into how the sector is working, such as on property conditions and tenants’ finances, but it lacks data on key issues where regulatory action may be required. These key issues include harassment, evictions, disrepair that is not being addressed, or on the costs to landlords of complying with obligations. Without this data, DLUHC will also struggle to measure the impact of its interventions. DLUHC told the NAO that it wants to collect better data as part of the planned reforms, but it has not yet developed a plan to improve its data.
Local authorities take different approaches to regulating the sector in their areas, including how they ensure landlords comply with legal obligations. For example, some authorities inspect almost none of their privately rented properties while others inspect a large proportion. There is also little evidence of local authorities making use of certain regulatory tools such as banning orders3 and penalty notices4 – only 10 landlords and letting agents having been banned by local authorities since new powers were introduced in 2016. DLUHC has limited data on what tools and approaches are used by local authorities, and therefore cannot meaningfully analyse which are more effective at improving compliance and protecting tenants.
Tenants face barriers to enforcing their rights. There are limited redress options (which usually provide a more accessible path than the legal system) for tenants when attempting to resolve disputes. For example, in the social rented sector, all housing providers must be part of an ombudsman scheme which is actively used by tenants to resolve enquiries and complaints. In 2018, DLUHC introduced mandatory redress arrangements for letting agency work, but landlords are not required to be members of a redress scheme.
The system therefore relies heavily on tenants enforcing their own rights. This means that tenants must negotiate with landlords directly or take action through the courts, which can be costly. This also relies on tenants having an awareness of their rights. Surveys estimate that 35% of tenants say that a lack of knowledge of their rights made negotiating with their landlord difficult. Other barriers for tenant when enforcing rights include a lack of recourse to public funds, language barriers and distrust of services.
An estimated 35,000 households live in properties unsuitable for their disability or long-term health condition, and 7% of rented properties were overcrowded in 2019-20 (which doubled to 15% during the COVID-19 pandemic). Some households also experience discrimination, with an estimated 25% of landlords unwilling to let to non-UK passport holders, and 52% unwilling to let to those on housing benefit. DLUHC does not have a sufficient understanding of the causes and impacts of tenant experiences meaning it cannot provide tailored guidance and support to those who need it most.
DLUHC is planning to introduce reforms to the private rented sector, and has committed to produce a white paper in 2022. To support this process, the NAO recommends that DLUHC defines an overall vision and strategy for the regulation of private renting. It should review whether current dispute resolutions arrangements for private renters are appropriate and accessible for all tenants, and improve its understanding of the experiences among private renters to inform how support is targeted at those most in need.
“The proportion of private renters living in properties that are unsafe or fail the standards for a decent home is concerning. The government relies on these tenants being able to enforce their own rights, but they face significant barriers to doing so.
Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities should improve the quality of its data and insight into the private rented sector, so that it can oversee the regulation of the sector more effectively. It should develop a clear strategy to meet its aim of providing a better deal for renters.”
Full report: Regulation of private renting
Notes for Editors
- Non-decent homes are those with a hazard of immediate threat to a person’s health, not in reasonable state of repair, lacking modern facilities or not effectively insulated or heated.
- In 2014, DLHUC required all letting agents to be a part of a government approved redress scheme.
- Banning orders prohibit landlords and agents who have committed relevant offences from letting or managing residential properties.
- A Financial Penalty Notice (FPN) is a civil penalty issued against the landlord or agent, as an alternative to prosecution, for offences under the Housing Act 2004.
- Press notices and reports are available from the date of publication on the NAO website. Hard copies can be obtained by using the relevant links on our website.
About the NAO
The National Audit Office (NAO) scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government and the civil service. It helps Parliament hold government to account and it uses its insights to help people who manage and govern public bodies improve public services.
The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Gareth Davies, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO. The NAO audits the financial accounts of departments and other public bodies. It also examines and reports on the value for money of how public money has been spent.
In 2020, the NAO’s work led to a positive financial impact through reduced costs, improved service delivery, or other benefits to citizens, of £926 million.
NAO Press Office
+44 (0)20 7798 7400 or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Latest News from
National Audit Office Press Releases
Regulating after EU Exit18/05/2022 14:25:00
Some UK regulators have taken on significant new roles following EU Exit. However, the work they are doing now to build their capability and manage operational challenges may not align with long-term ambitions or responsibilities, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
Children in custody: secure training centres and secure schools29/04/2022 14:15:00
The opening of the first secure school, intended to improve the life chances of children in custody, has been delayed by approximately three years, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
Investigation into government’s actions to combat waste crime in England27/04/2022 11:25:00
Government does not have the data it needs to assess the scale of waste crime in England, and the incentives for criminals to enter the waste market have increased, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
Managing cross-border travel during the COVID-19 pandemic21/04/2022 14:15:00
Government has an opportunity to learn lessons from its experience of implementing cross-border travel measures during the COVID-19 pandemic should such measures be needed in the future, according to a report by the National Audit Office (NAO).
Managing reductions in Official Development Assistance spending31/03/2022 11:15:00
The speed and scale by which the government reduced its Official Development Assistance (ODA) spending, from 0.7% to 0.5% of gross national income (GNI), meant that it had to make compromises and take difficult decisions across all of its programmes, according to a report by the National Audit Office (NAO).
Investigation into the management of PPE contracts30/03/2022 12:05:00
The Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) continues to deal with the contract management issues caused by the need to purchase unprecedented volumes of PPE in 2020 due to COVID-19, with billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money still at risk, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
The Police Uplift Programme29/03/2022 10:33:00
Government is on course to achieve its target of recruiting 20,000 additional police officers by 2023, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
Investigation into the government’s contracts with Randox Laboratories Ltd24/03/2022 12:15:00
Government had to move very fast at the start of the pandemic to increase testing capacity, but did not document key decisions adequately when awarding a contract to Randox Laboratories Ltd (Randox) for COVID-19 testing services, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
Investigation into the British Steel pension scheme21/03/2022 14:15:00
Some people who transferred out of the British Steel Pension Scheme have suffered significant financial losses because they were provided with unsuitable advice, the regulated financial advice market failed to protect them, and they have not been compensated fully, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).