As the Renters' Reform Act takes effect, a growing number of UK landlords are facing a daunting uncertainty: whether existing tenancy agreements still hold sway over notice periods or are now superseded by a statutory two-month default. The legislation's introduction has sparked conflicting advice from various sources, including government guidance, leaving property owners on shaky ground.
The Act amends section 5 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977, introducing new provisions regarding tenant notices. Section 5(1ZA) stipulates that a tenant's notice must be for no more than two months if the landlord has agreed to this period in writing, or at least two months where no other period was agreed. The crux of the issue lies in determining whether a tenancy agreement signed before 1st May 2026 constitutes 'agreed a different period in writing', as highlighted by a query on Property118.
Government information sheets for existing tenants assert that a minimum two-month notice is required, though a shorter period can be agreed in writing. This suggests a default two-month period unless an explicit agreement for a shorter term is made. However, other government guidance appears to suggest that a tenancy agreement can specify a notice period, provided it does not exceed two months – raising an apparent contradiction.
Landlords seeking legal advice have been told that historic Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) notice clauses may no longer be valid. This view implies that a pre-1st May tenancy agreement requiring, for instance, one month's notice might not qualify as a 'new written agreement' under the new section 5(1ZA), thus making the statutory two-month default take precedence.
The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) has acknowledged the issue, confirming it is being passed to their training and policy team. This indicates the widespread nature of the confusion and the need for a definitive stance to guide landlords. The ambiguity leaves many landlords in a precarious position, unsure of their legal standing if a tenant gives notice based on an outdated agreement that may no longer apply.
The implications of this uncertainty are significant for both landlords and tenants. Landlords may face unexpected voids if tenants provide shorter notice periods than anticipated, impacting rental income and property management. Conversely, tenants might be confused about their obligations, potentially leading to disputes if they adhere to an old agreement while expecting the protections afforded by the new legislation.