In this article
Renters' Rights Act Civil Penalties: The Complete Table
Civil penalties under the Renters' Rights Act 2025 have two ceilings: up to £7,000 for a breach, and up to £40,000 for an offence. Statutory guidance published on 13 November 2025 sets a starting point for each, ranging from £3,000 for minor information failures to £35,000 for unlawful eviction.
This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Landlords should seek independent legal advice for their specific circumstances. It describes the position in England.
Breach or offence: the distinction that sets the ceiling
The two terms are defined in the guidance and they are not interchangeable. A breach means non-compliance where the local housing authority may impose a civil penalty of up to £7,000 and has no option to prosecute. An offence means non-compliance where the authority may either prosecute or impose a civil penalty of up to £40,000.
The standard of proof differs too. Breaches relating to rental discrimination and rental bidding require the civil standard, meaning the balance of probabilities. Every other breach and offence covered by the guidance requires the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt, because prosecution is an available alternative.
There is no statutory minimum penalty.
The complete starting point table
The figures below are the national starting points in the MHCLG statutory guidance "Civil penalties under the Renters' Rights Act 2025 and other housing legislation", published 13 November 2025 and reproduced under the Open Government Licence v3.0. They are starting points, not fixed amounts.
Protection from Eviction Act 1977
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful eviction and harassment | s.1(2) and (3) | Offence | £35,000 | £40,000 |
Housing Act 1988: breaches
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attempting to let the property for a fixed term | s.16E(1)(a) | Breach | £4,000 | £7,000 |
| Attempting to end the tenancy by notice to quit | s.16E(1)(b) | Breach | £6,000 | £7,000 |
| Attempting to end the tenancy orally | s.16E(1)(c) | Breach | £6,000 | £7,000 |
| Serving a possession notice outside the prescribed Section 8 process | s.16E(1)(d) | Breach | £6,000 | £7,000 |
| Relying on a ground without reasonably believing possession can be obtained | s.16E(1)(e) | Breach | £6,000 | £7,000 |
| Failing to give prior notice that a ground may be used | s.16E(1)(f) | Breach | £3,000 | £7,000 |
| Failing to issue a written statement of terms within 28 days | s.16D | Breach | £4,000 | £7,000 |
| Failing to give an existing tenant the prescribed information sheet | Sch.6 para 7, RRA 2025 | Breach | £4,000 | £7,000 |
Housing Act 1988: offences
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relying on a ground knowing possession could not be obtained, or reckless as to that | s.16J(1) | Offence | £30,000 | £40,000 |
| Reletting or remarketing within the 12 month restricted period after using the moving or selling grounds | s.16J(2) | Offence | £25,000 | £40,000 |
| Continuing breach, or repeat breach within 5 years of a penalty for a first breach | s.16J(3) and (4) | Offence | Double the combined starting level of the two constituent breaches | £40,000 |
Housing Act 2004 offences
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to comply with an improvement notice | s.30(1) | Offence | £25,000 | £40,000 |
| Mandatory HMO unlicensed | s.72(1) | Offence | £17,000 | £40,000 |
| Additional HMO unlicensed | s.72(1) | Offence | £17,000 | £40,000 |
| Knowingly permitting over-occupation of an HMO | s.72(2) | Offence | £20,000 | £40,000 |
| Property subject to selective licensing unlicensed | s.95(1) | Offence | £12,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to comply with an overcrowding notice | s.139(7) | Offence | £20,000 | £40,000 |
HMO management regulations, made under s.234(1) Housing Act 2004
| Conduct | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to provide information to the occupier | Offence | £3,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to take safety measures | Offence | £20,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to maintain water supply and drainage | Offence | £10,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to supply and maintain gas and electricity, or supply a gas safety certificate | Offence | £12,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to maintain common parts | Offence | £7,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to maintain living accommodation | Offence | £7,000 | £40,000 |
| Failure to provide adequate waste disposal facilities | Offence | £7,000 | £40,000 |
Housing and Planning Act 2016
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of a banning order | s.21(1) | Offence | £35,000 | £40,000 |
Renters' Rights Act 2025 breaches
| Conduct | Provision | Type | Starting point | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discrimination against those on benefits or with children in the lettings process | s.33 and s.34 | Breach | £6,000 | £7,000 |
| Failure to specify the proposed rent in a written advertisement or offer | s.56(2) | Breach | £3,000 | £7,000 |
| Inviting, encouraging or accepting an offer above the advertised rent | s.56(3) | Breach | £4,000 | £7,000 |
The guidance sets no national starting point for breaches of licensing conditions under sections 72(3) and 95(2) of the Housing Act 2004, on the basis that licence conditions vary substantially between authorities. Each local housing authority must determine and publish its own starting level for those offences.
The £30,000 to £40,000 increase
The maximum for existing offences under section 249A of the Housing Act 2004 and section 23 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 rose from £30,000 to £40,000 on 1 May 2026. The guidance states that a statutory instrument giving effect to that increase came into force on the same date as the Renters' Rights Act provisions it covers.
The increase is not retrospective. Where an offence was committed before 1 May 2026, the authority's policy in force at the time and the April 2018 MHCLG guidance continue to apply, so the applicable maximum depends on the date of the conduct rather than the date of the notice.
How the final figure is reached
The guidance sets out a four step method that authorities must have regard to.
- Seriousness. Identify the starting point from the table above, which reflects harm and culpability intrinsic to the category of conduct rather than the facts of the case.
- Aggravating and mitigating factors. Adjust for case specific culpability and harm. The guidance lists portfolio size, previous non-compliance, any admission, how quickly the matter was remedied, the level of risk to tenants, whether it materialised, and tenant vulnerability.
- Financial considerations. Test whether the figure punishes, deters and removes financial benefit. Authorities may adjust for local rent levels, but no percentage adjustment may exceed the percentage by which local rents differ from the national average. Reliable evidence of profit from the conduct can generally be treated as a minimum.
- Totality. Where multiple penalties are being issued against the same person at the same time, consider whether the aggregate is just and proportionate, and reduce proportionately if not. Any rent repayment order made for the same offence is disregarded in this assessment.
Authorities may offer a discount for prompt payment, capped at one third of the amount in the final notice.
When a breach becomes an offence
Two routes convert a £7,000 breach into a £40,000 offence, and both are worth understanding because they are time based.
Continuing conduct. Where a civil penalty has been imposed for a breach of the landlord's duties under an assured tenancy and the conduct continues for more than 28 days after the penalty is imposed, or after the conclusion of an appeal, the landlord commits an offence under section 16J(3) of the Housing Act 1988 and becomes liable to prosecution or a penalty of up to £40,000.
Repeat conduct. Where a person has previously been liable for a civil penalty for a breach relating to assured tenancy duties, and receives a further penalty or is convicted in relation to a different breach within five years, that also becomes an offence.
Rental discrimination and rental bidding work differently. Continuing and repeat breaches in those categories do not become offences. A continuing discrimination breach attracts further civil penalties of up to £7,000, and a repeat breach of the same provision within five years may attract an additional civil penalty.
Multiple penalties across a portfolio
A single £40,000 ceiling does not cap total exposure. Where a person commits more than one breach or offence, the authority may impose a separate penalty for each. The guidance confirms that authorities can issue multiple penalties for different breaches at the same property, or for the same breach at different properties.
Section 234(3) of the Housing Act 2004 is the clearest illustration: each failure to comply with a separate HMO management regulation is its own offence with its own penalty. The exception is an improvement notice, where only one penalty may be imposed regardless of how many hazards the notice covers, though the number of hazards may be reflected in the amount.
Where more than one person is liable for the same conduct, penalties may be imposed on each. For assured tenancy, discrimination and bidding matters the authority may instead impose a single penalty for which those persons are jointly and severally liable. Company officers may be penalised individually where the conduct was committed with their consent or connivance, or is attributable to their neglect.
What is not in this table yet
The guidance states that it will be updated to cover landlord redress schemes and the PRS Database in Part 2 of the Act, and the Decent Homes Standard in section 100 and Schedule 4, once those provisions are in force. No national starting points have been published for them.
Penalties under regimes outside this guidance are also unaffected by it. The Electrical Safety Standards in the Private Rented Sector (England) Regulations 2020 carry their own maximum, which rose to £40,000 on 1 November 2025, and the deposit protection sanction remains a court ordered payment of between one and three times the deposit rather than a civil penalty. Landlords checking their exposure should treat this table as covering the landlord legislation defined in the guidance, not every obligation.
Appeals
A person given a final notice may appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) within 28 days of issue, against the penalty or its amount. The notice is suspended while the appeal is live. The appeal is a rehearing, and the tribunal may confirm, increase, reduce or cancel the penalty, though any increase is capped at the applicable maximum of £7,000 or £40,000.
Before any of this, the authority must serve a notice of intent no later than six months after it has sufficient evidence of the conduct, extending to six months after the conduct stops if it is continuing. The recipient has 28 days to make written representations.
Most of the breaches in the table above are records questions rather than judgement calls: whether a written statement of terms was issued within 28 days, whether the information sheet went out, whether a certificate was current on a given date. LLCR tracks these deadlines across a portfolio and gives each property a compliance score so gaps surface before an authority finds them.
Frequently asked questions
Is £40,000 the most a council can fine me?
£40,000 is the maximum for a single offence, not the maximum overall. The statutory guidance confirms that where a person commits more than one breach or offence, an authority may impose a separate civil penalty for each, including the same breach at different properties. The totality step requires the authority to check that the aggregate figure is just and proportionate, but the aggregate can exceed £40,000.
Can I be fined and prosecuted for the same thing?
No. Civil penalties are an alternative to prosecution for offences, and the legislation does not permit an authority to do both for the same offence. If a person has been convicted or acquitted, or a prosecution is under way, the authority cannot impose a penalty for that offence, and if a penalty has been imposed the person cannot then be convicted for it. Continuing and repeat breach offences are treated differently, because a previous penalty forms part of the new offence.
What is the starting point for not issuing a written statement of terms?
The statutory guidance sets a starting point of £4,000 for failing to issue a written statement of terms within 28 days of an assured tenancy coming into existence under section 16D of the Housing Act 1988, against a maximum of £7,000. If the failure continues for more than 28 days after a penalty is imposed, it becomes an offence under section 16J(3) with a maximum of £40,000.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. LLCR is a compliance management platform, not a law firm. For advice specific to your situation, consult a qualified solicitor.