Today’s stories are about enforcement finally showing up: fresh data puts the rent tribunal backlog up 56 per cent since the Renters’ Rights Act began, and two separate councils have handed out or threatened their first civil penalties under the Act’s new powers. Layer on record high-loan-to-value mortgage lending and the government’s own research quietly admitting a flagship home-buying reform has a design flaw, and it’s a day about paperwork, evidence and process rather than headline policy.
Tribunal cases are up 56 per cent — and the real crunch hasn’t arrived yet
New analysis from Savills, reported by Property118, shows the First-tier Tribunal received 4,613 residential property cases in the second quarter of 2026, up 56 per cent on roughly 3,000 in the same quarter last year, taking the rolling annual total to 15,929 cases — 24 per cent up on the year before. The Renters’ Rights Act only took effect on 1 May 2026, so this quarter captures barely two months of the new regime. Savills’ head of residential research, Lucian Cook, said he’d expect referrals to “rise exponentially” as the Act beds in, “particularly in respect of rent reviews,” and flagged landlords’ concern about delays to charging a reviewed market rent while a case sits in the queue.
A tribunal that’s already a quarter busier than last year, with most of the Act’s rent-review provisions barely underway, tells you the queue is going to get longer before it gets shorter — which is presumably why moving initial rent-increase decisions to HMRC’s Valuation Office looked like an attractive fix to whoever signed that off. Faster paper-based decisions only help if the volume behind them is manageable; on these numbers, it isn’t yet.
If you’re a landlord weighing a rent increase, plan the cash flow around the possibility of a multi-month wait for a decision, not just the increase itself — the tenant doesn’t pay the higher rent until the case is resolved, so a referral is effectively a rent freeze by another name. And if you’re a tenant thinking about challenging one, don’t leave it to the last day of your window; a backlogged system rewards an early, well-evidenced application over a rushed one.
Two councils show what the new civil penalty powers actually look like
Landlord Today reports that Bristol City Council has issued its first civil penalty notice under its strengthened enforcement policy: a portfolio landlord who let an unlicensed HMO faces a proposed £13,090 fine, reduced from the government’s £17,000 starting point after they applied for a licence within 14 days of being caught, with a further £1,309 possible if the rent charged was above Local Housing Allowance. On the same day, a separate report covers Southampton City Council, which is investigating 30 landlords with fines starting at £17,000 threatened in some cases, after receiving over £610,000 in government funding and doubling its enforcement team to two officers. Both are using the civil penalty powers — up to £40,000 per breach — that came into force alongside the Renters’ Rights Act’s wider enforcement regime.
The detail that matters more than either fine is how Southampton found its 30 cases: cross-referencing licensing records, council tax data, HM Land Registry entries and property condition surveys, not tenant complaints. That’s a different kind of exposure to the one most landlords plan around — you’re not caught because someone reported you, you’re caught because two public databases didn’t match. Bristol’s discount for a landlord who fixed the licensing gap within 14 days of being contacted is the other half of the lesson: moving fast once you’re caught still matters a great deal to the final number.
If you hold an HMO, or a property that’s drifted into HMO territory through occupancy changes rather than a deliberate decision, check the licence against the current household mix now rather than waiting for a letter — a council doing data-matching this systematically will find a lapsed licence eventually, and the 14-day window for a lighter penalty starts the moment they do.
High-LTV lending is at an 18-year high, and it changes what a survey needs to catch
Bank of England data published on 8 September and reported by Mortgage Solutions shows 8.4 per cent of new mortgages in the second quarter went above 90 per cent loan-to-value, the highest share since the same quarter in 2008, while lending above 75 per cent LTV reached 47.5 per cent of all advances, the highest since late 2007. Gross mortgage advances rose 11.1 per cent quarter-on-quarter to £77.4bn. Rachel Springall of Moneyfacts called it a sign of “just how vital low-deposit borrowing has become in the housing market.”
A buyer putting down 5 or 10 per cent has almost no financial cushion if something expensive turns up after exchange — and a mortgage valuation, which is what most high-LTV buyers get by default, checks the property’s worth to the lender, not its condition for the buyer. The more the market skews towards thin deposits, the more that gap between “the lender is comfortable” and “the buyer knows what they’re taking on” matters, and the less room there is in the budget to absorb a surprise repair bill.
If you’re buying with a 90-per-cent-plus mortgage, budget for an independent survey as a fixed line item from the start, not something to consider only if the mortgage valuation comes back with a query — by the time a lender’s valuer flags something, you’ve often already committed emotionally and financially to the purchase.
The government’s own research says its home-buying fix arrives at the wrong moment
Today’s Conveyancer reports on a Kantar study commissioned by MHCLG, published as part of the government’s home buying and selling reform work, that tested reservation agreements — a proposed early, paid commitment between buyer and seller — and found a timing problem: participants felt it was “unrealistic to ask buyers to make a commitment in the absence of key information about the property,” yet by exchange, when that information typically does exist, the commitment is already treated as made. The report also concluded reservation agreements wouldn’t stop gazumping in practice, since a seller can simply accept a higher offer and let the buyer forfeit their reservation deposit.
This matches what I see from the buyer’s side of a transaction: the pressure to commit hardest lands right after an offer is accepted, before a survey, an EPC or a proper look at the title has happened — exactly the information gap the report describes. It doesn’t kill the idea of reservation agreements, but it does confirm the sequencing has to change: upfront information before binding commitment, not the other way round, which is the same logic behind the Sales Packs the wider reform roadmap is meant to deliver first.
If you’re preparing a property for market, treat the survey, EPC and title information as part of getting the property ready to list, not paperwork you produce reactively once an offer lands — it’s the exact gap the government’s own research has just confirmed buyers feel, and closing it early is a genuine point of difference in a chain-heavy market.
What I’d actually do
- Increasing a tenant’s rent under a periodic tenancy? Plan for a multi-month wait if it’s referred to tribunal — the current rent stands until the case is decided, so build that into your cash flow, not just the new figure.
- Hold an HMO, or a property that’s drifted into HMO occupancy? Check the licence against the current household mix now — councils are finding lapsed licences through data-matching, not complaints.
- Buying with a 90 per cent-plus mortgage? Budget for an independent survey from day one — a lender’s valuation protects the lender, not you.
- Selling this autumn? Have the survey, EPC and title pack ready before you list, not after an offer arrives — it’s the upfront information buyers say they’re missing, per the government’s own research.
Today’s notes span landlord compliance, mortgage risk and home-buying process as much as bricks and mortar — the practice covers full EPCs and building surveys across the South East for exactly the buyers, sellers and landlords facing these decisions. Get in touch.
Small print. General commentary, not advice for your specific circumstances — regulations, schemes and deadlines change, and your property is not the average property. Sources linked were accurate when read on 11 September 2026.