Keir Starmer’s Attack on Landlords
Transcript
Hi, I’m Ruban Selvanayagam, co-director at Property Solvers.
Since taking office, Keir Starmer’s government has made it clear that housing will define its domestic agenda. As home ownership drifts further out of reach and living costs continue to squeeze, the private rented sector is now where much of the political fight is being played out.
For millions of tenants, Labour’s promises of security and fairness sound long overdue. But for the country’s two-and-a-half million landlords, the message is far less reassuring.
The government’s early signals point to the most sweeping set of reforms in decades — changes that could Fundamentally Alter How Private Renting Works in the UK.
In this video, I’ll break down what Labour is proposing, the thinking behind it, the likely impact on landlords and tenants, and how these policies could accelerate a shift towards large-scale, institutional ownership of rental housing.
Let’s dive in…
The broad direction has been clear since the campaign trail. Labour believes the private rented sector has grown too large, too fragmented, and too lightly regulated. Its solution is to “professionalise” the market — code for fewer small landlords, more oversight, and stricter standards.
Nobody expected the party to go easy on landlords, but the scope of what’s being drawn up goes further than most anticipated.
At the centre of Labour’s plan is the forthcoming Renters’ Rights Bill.
This flagship legislation will abolish Section 21 “no-fault” evictions and create a national landlord register.
Housing barely featured in Keir Starmer’s keynote speech at the party conference — beyond a few crowd-pleasing soundbites — but he did touch on it briefly in an interview with PoliticsJOE.
🎥 [Insert PoliticsJOE clip – Keir Starmer speaking]
“What we’ve done on renters’ rights is really important — and sometimes maybe we don’t make enough of it — which is better protection and making sure that people can’t be evicted for no reason.”
🕐 On-screen caption: Clip ©PoliticsJOE – used under UK fair dealing for commentary/review
📝 Description credit: Contains excerpts from PoliticsJOE’s interview with Keir Starmer (1 October 2025). Used under UK fair dealing for the purpose of commentary and review.
That clip captures the essence of Labour’s message: security for tenants and more accountability for landlords.
On paper, this vision gives renters greater stability — but it also raises a difficult question: how will landlords regain possession in legitimate cases? Indeed, in practice, removing Section 21 looks set to fundamentally rewrite the legal framework of private renting.
Section 21, introduced in 1988, was the mechanism that made buy-to-let viable. It gave owners confidence that, if circumstances changed, they could regain possession quickly.
Without it, everything pivots to Section 8 — which requires landlords to prove a prescribed ground such as selling the property, rent arrears, or moving back in. Even before reform, possession cases typically took nine to twelve months to process through the courts.
The Ministry of Justice currently reports more than 25,000 live possession claims in backlog. Housing solicitors warn that, unless the government funds additional court capacity and digitises case management, wait times could double.
There’s also a ripple effect on lending. Mortgage providers have already raised concerns that, without fast routes to possession, buy-to-let becomes riskier — potentially pushing interest rates higher or tightening criteria.
For landlords with vulnerable tenants or rent arrears, that combination of risk and delay will be a deterrent. Many will simply choose to exit the market — particularly those with just one or two properties.
Beyond evictions, the Bill will embed a new Decent Homes Standard across the private sector, mirroring rules long applied to social housing. That means legally enforceable minimum standards for insulation, heating, and damp prevention.
Personally, I don’t think that’s a bad thing — as long as it’s implemented properly. Most responsible landlords already meet or exceed these benchmarks, and decent housing should be a baseline expectation.
The challenge, though, is cost and execution. The Department for Levelling Up estimates that over a million privately rented homes would currently fail the new criteria, implying billions in upgrade work. Without realistic timelines or proper grant support, well-intentioned reform could end up forcing more landlords to sell rather than improve.
And this ties directly into two related policies: energy efficiency and licensing.
The government plans to revive the EPC C by 2028 requirement — the same target the Conservatives quietly dropped. For landlords with older housing stock, particularly pre-war terraces and converted flats, upgrade costs of £10,000 to £20,000 per property are typical.
Grant support remains unclear, and a 2024 National Residential Landlord Association Survey found that nearly 30 percent of landlords would sell at least one property if the rule returned unchanged.
It’s a particular concern in northern and midlands markets where values are lower and margins tighter — the very areas providing the country’s most affordable rents.
At the same time, Labour wants to introduce a National Licensing Register, replacing today’s patchwork of local schemes. The Local Government Association estimates setup costs at around £250 million, with ongoing enforcement funded through annual fees. Realistically, those costs will be passed on through higher rents.
Then, there’s Rent Regulation…
Ministers avoid the phrase “rent controls,” but Labour mayors such as Sadiq Khan in London and Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester have both pushed for locally set rent caps — potentially linked to inflation or local wage growth.
Berlin’s 2020 rent freeze remains the warning: listings fell by around 40 percent and unregulated rents jumped by more than 20. Yet politically, rent caps remain popular; they allow ministers and mayors alike to claim direct action on affordability, even if the long-term impact is reduced supply.
There are also growing rumours about Further Taxation — particularly that the Treasury is exploring whether to apply National Insurance to rental income, effectively treating it as earned income rather than investment return.
If that happens, many landlords could see what are already tight margins reduced to almost nothing. Once you factor in rising mortgage costs, compliance fees, and potential energy upgrade requirements, it’s hard to see how smaller landlords — especially those with one or two properties — could make the numbers stack up.
And the data already shows how this pressure is playing out.
According to EIG auction figures, more than 30 percent of residential lots sold this year were ex-rental properties — up from around 20 percent in 2019. In Scotland, where rent freezes and eviction bans came in earlier, the number of available rental listings has fallen by about 40 percent.
Collectively, these reforms reveal a philosophical re-alignment: housing viewed as a regulated service rather than a private enterprise. Labour’s base is younger and urban; many rent. Championing tenants cements that relationship and breaks from Conservative homeowner politics.
Starmer’s broader housing message has been all about supply — the idea that if Britain just builds more homes, affordability will magically take care of itself. Here’s another clip from the same PoliticsJOE interview.
🎥 [Insert PoliticsJOE clip – Keir Starmer speaking]
“More houses will also mean that it won’t be so easy for landlords in the private sector to charge the sorts of rents they’re charging at the moment…We saw — we’ve put an end to this — but there used to be bidding wars where landlords were basically bidding rents out.”
🕐 Caption: Clip © PoliticsJOE – used under UK fair dealing for commentary/review
This comment captures Labour’s familiar streak of wishful thinking…
To focus on the facts, according to BCIS data, housing starts remain around 25 percent below pre-pandemic levels. Councils are building fewer homes than at any point since 1991. Planning departments have lost a third of their staff, and construction costs are roughly 20 percent higher than in 2019.
Add to that the growing wave of “Not In My Backyard” opposition — or NIMBYism — and Labour’s 300,000-homes-a-year target looks increasingly distant, if not impossible.
Savills estimates it would take a decade of over-delivery before affordability recovers. So while Starmer’s logic links building to rent moderation, the real-world barriers make relief distant. That’s why the government is acting now through regulation and taxation, not construction.
Behind the rhetoric lies what many see as a strategic goal — to replace fragmented private ownership with large-scale, professional landlords who can be more easily monitored, regulated, and taxed.
According to figures from HM Revenue & Customs and the National Residential Landlords Association, the number of individual landlords in England has fallen by roughly a quarter since 2016, so pretty much when Section 24 of the Finance Act started rolling out.
Over the same period, research by Savills shows that institutional ownership of rental housing — mainly through build-to-rent schemes — has grown by around 30 percent. And Labour’s proposed reforms look set to accelerate that shift.
Evidence presented by Propertymark to Parliament’s Housing Select Committee found that when landlords exit the market, the properties are “more often being acquired by other investors, developers, or housing associations — not new owner-occupiers.”
The organisation told MPs this trend “Suggests a consolidation of ownership rather than an expansion of homeownership…”
In some cases, local authorities even lease those same homes back for social use. So the housing stock doesn’t disappear — it just changes hands.
And those new owners aren’t local investors. Increasingly, they’re some of the world’s biggest financial institutions.
Over the past few years, Lloyds Banking Group has launched its Citra Living arm, aiming to own up to 50,000 rental homes within a decade, while Legal & General already controls or funds more than 20,000 build-to-rent properties nationwide.
Even though new build-to-rent development has slowed sharply — with investment down roughly 30 percent year-on-year, according to Savills — institutional investors haven’t left the sector. Instead, groups like BlackRock, Blackstone, and Apollo Global Management have shifted strategy: they’re now buying existing rental portfolios and forming joint ventures with developers to acquire completed housing stock rather than build from scratch.
As smaller landlords sell up, these players are stepping in — bringing capital and compliance, but also concentrating ownership in fewer hands.
For tenants, corporate ownership can mean more consistency, longer leases, and professional management. But it also means distance — homes owned by pension funds and overseas investors, where decisions on rent levels or repairs are driven by spreadsheets rather than local realities.
The Resolution Foundation estimates institutional landlords now control around £60 billion of UK housing assets, up from under £10 billion a decade ago. Savills projects that by 2030, corporates could own one in five private rental homes.
So while Labour frames its agenda as tenant-friendly, the long-term result could be a rental sector dominated by global finance rather than local ownership.
Supporters say this will raise standards and drive out “rogue” operators. That may be true. Large landlords often invest more in maintenance and compliance. But they also cherry-pick high-yield urban schemes and avoid lower-rent housing. The mid-market — affordable, flexible, often run by local owners — is being squeezed out.
Meanwhile, rents keep climbing. ONS data show average private rents rose 9.4 percent in the year to August 2025 — the fastest increase on record. In the North West and West Midlands, rises topped 11 percent — the areas where landlord sell-offs are sharpest.
Pressure landlords and supply falls; supply falls and rents rise.
“Levelling the playing field” is an easy sell. For a newish government keen to show action, landlords make a visible target — and an even easier scapegoat. And it fits Labour’s broader philosophy:
- redistribute ownership from individuals to institutions,
- raise revenue through taxes
- treat housing as infrastructure rather than enterprise.
It’s coherent politics — but risky economics.
As smaller landlords exit, the market loses one of its key stabilisers — local ownership.
These are the owners who traditionally absorbed shocks, offered flexibility to tenants, and kept older housing viable. Once they’re gone, the system becomes more brittle: rents react faster to financial pressures, maintenance gets deferred, and market control shifts to balance sheets rather than experience.
In the short term, it may look more professional. In the long term, it risks eroding the resilience that once defined the private rented sector.
So what can landlords do?
First, Structure Matters. Renting property now needs to be treated as a business, not a sideline. The “one or two buy-to-lets for retirement” model is fading fast. Incorporation, proper accounting, and a focus on cashflow and compliance are no longer optional — they’re the baseline for staying viable.
Portfolio Mix is important too. Energy-efficient, modern stock will hold value and remain lettable under tightening EPC rules, while older, inefficient properties will face the greatest pressure.
Then there’s Diversification. HMOs, mixed-use properties, and short-term lets can still deliver competitive returns — provided they’re managed properly and compliant.
And finally, Exit Strategy matters. Many landlords we’ve spoken to over the past decade have built up substantial equity. Despite the tax implications of selling, a growing number have chosen to either reinvest in different asset classes or restructure their portfolios entirely. It’s something my co-director James and I have had to do ourselves — adapting to a shifting landscape rather than waiting for policy to settle.
If you’re considering selling and want to explore how to do it strategically while still achieving a strong result, the team at Property Solvers would always be happy to have that conversation.
To draw this video to a close, the passive “buy-to-let and forget” model of the early 2000s has gone. Landlords now need to think and operate like business owners — tracking policy shifts, managing cashflow in real time, and adapting their strategy before regulation forces their hand.
For transparency, I voted for Labour in 2024 — perhaps idealistically, or maybe foolishly — hoping for balanced, evidence-based reform after years of Conservative drift. At this stage I’m thinking I might have been better off spoiling the ballot instead.
Indeed, it’s clear that Labour’s approach isn’t easing the pressure on landlords — it’s tightening it. The Renters’ Rights Bill, the Decent Homes Standard, tougher EPC rules, and potential tax proposals all point toward a more heavily regulated, centrally managed sector.
And looking across the political spectrum, it’s clear that Labour isn’t breaking new ground so much as continuing a trend that began years ago. The Conservatives were the ones who first cut mortgage interest relief, added stamp duty surcharges, tightened EPC rules, and set in motion the abolition of Section 21.
Labour hasn’t reversed those measures — it’s doubled down on them. With the Tories still struggling for credibility and Reform largely feeding on frustration, it’s difficult to see any party truly changing course. The language may differ, but the direction of travel remains the same: more control, less freedom, and an ever-shrinking space for private landlords.
If the direction of policy doesn’t change, 2025 will likely be seen as the point where the traditional buy-to-let model began to fracture — even if the full consequences take a few more years to unfold.
Looking ahead, two broad paths appear to be taking shape.
In one, professionalisation brings stability: institutional investors provide scale, standards improve, and the rental sector becomes more tightly managed — if less flexible.
In the other, over-regulation drives smaller investors out faster than corporates can replace them, shrinking supply, pushing rents higher, and putting home ownership even further out of reach.
Somewhere between these extremes sits the professional, mid-sized landlord — the ones running property as a business rather than a sideline. They’ll still have a place in the market, but only if they adapt: tightening compliance, investing in efficiency, and treating portfolio management with the same rigour as any other enterprise.
Britain’s rental landscape is likely to look very different five years from now — fewer individual owners, more corporate portfolios, and a generation of renters who will be less used to dealing with a private landlord.
Thanks for watching. If you found this breakdown useful, please like the video, subscribe to the channel, and hit the notification bell for more insights on auctions, fast sales, and the UK housing market.
I’ll see you in the next one…
