u/Landlordlabuk

The situation for landlords who are based overseas has been complicated in many areas by the need to name a local manager on the application. In councils like Wandsworth and Westminster it is mandatory.

Under these licensing schemes, overseas landlords are expected to have a "local" representative who is available to deal with day to day management not just of the tenancy but also the council if they make requests. This person will share in the liability and some managers and agents have refused to be named on the license to take this liability on.

Landlords must demonstrate “satisfactory management arrangements” and any manager with control of the property must be considered “fit and proper” and "competent". That means that you can be challenged on who you name and appoint. Therefore you should document your decision making.

So in short you do need someone local on the licence, they need to meet certain criteria and if they are named they do share in potential liability.

Feel free to contact Landlord Lab if you need help. We are acting on behalf of many landlords in this situation who are based overseas. And if you don't need our help then we hope you found the clarification useful.

We've had a few clients we are helping in Wandsworth who have the same question - how do I handle this from overseas as the application is asking for a local representative? This post is for people looking for that information.

Under Wandsworth’s licensing schemes, overseas landlords are expected to have a "local" representative who can actively deal with:

• council communication,
• inspections,
• repairs,
• tenant complaints,
• compliance issues,
• and licence conditions.

Wandsworth does not prescribe a formal qualification requirement, but landlords must demonstrate “satisfactory management arrangements” and any manager with control of the property must be considered “fit and proper” and "competent". Our interpretation of this is that you should be able to defend why you deemed them "fit and proper" (them signing a declaration) and "competent" (document their experience, training, insurances etc. at the time of the application). If you can't defend this point you could be challenged if something went wrong.

So in short you do need someone local on the licence, they need to meet certain criteria and if they are named they do share in potential liability.

Feel free to contact Landlord Lab if you need help. We are acting on behalf of many landlords in this situation who are based overseas. And if you don't need our help then we hope you found the clarification useful.

The 10-year bond yield - effectively the interest rate charged to the UK government for a 10-year loan - rose above 5.17% at one point on Friday, the highest since 2008.

Now what does that translate to for landlords? Well there are most likely two impacts:

1. In the short-term at least there is more likely to be an increase in borrowing rates.

2. This is not good news on the economy so is likely to depress growth and spending power. This will put pressure on affordability.

The action we would suggest is that if you are refinancing at the moment then it would be best to lock in a rate as we expect there to be a bit of volatility in what lenders are offering.

In the past few days it has been confirmed that landlords will have to pay £500 to mount a challenge to a fine from the council.

The fees come from the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Fees (Amendment) Order 2026. The Order introduces a £200 application fee plus a £300 hearing fee for financial penalty appeals.

Is that really a just and equitable position? If a council issues a fine that they should not have and a landlord challenges it and wins they are still £500 out of pocket. And they can't recover those costs except in the most exceptional circumstances. Is that the basis of a "fair" system? We don't think so.

The latest report by Savills, quoted over the weekend in the FT, confirms what we've been seeing on the ground. Landlords ARE exiting. The stats show that the number of ex-rental properties on the market has increased by 28% over the last 2 years and that is a clear trend line rather than a one-off.

Savills research also examined whether buy‑to‑let properties listed for sale ultimately changed tenure, finding that 14% of those which sold were purchased by other landlords, effectively saying that 86% are not returning to the private rented sector.

At the same time stock advertised to rent has fallen by 17% over the last two years.

The press release is below but the stats are aligning with the anecdotal evidence that we see every week among landlords and independent agents we work with. The PRS is shrinking at the moment. It is hard to see how that trend will reverse given that the number of ex-rental properties on the market is growing still.

https://www.savills.co.uk/insight-and-opinion/savills-news/390500/700-former-homes-to-rent-listed-for-sale-every-day--says-savills

It's the start of operating differently.

Good timing to have a long weekend for everyone to settle down after the introduction of the Renters Rights Act. But as we get back to work and the dust has settled - this is now where the real work starts.

We put together a checklist to help landlords understand what's happening in this transition period, covering the core changes around:
- Tenancies
- Rent increases
- Possession post Section 21

Have a look on our Insights on the Landlord Lab website if you want to download a free copy. (Link in comments)

But don't let the checklist be the end of your work as a landlord. Being regulated means changing the way you operate, not just knowing the rules, but building the systems to stay compliant as things evolve.

It's why we created Compliance Shield, a one-stop solution so you can stop juggling checklists, reminders, and legislative updates.

We do that for you.

Spending yesterday with landlord’s at the Kent Landlord Investment show we’d say 80% of portfolio landlords I spoke to had or were in the process of reducing their portfolio with a longer term plan of exiting the market. That’s anecdotal but it does mean we very much can recognize in the reality of actions the survey results below. I can’t see how this doesn’t reduce supply in the PRS and lead to higher rents. These things never happen quickly in property but they are happening.

https://www.allsop.co.uk/insights/the-renters-rights-act-what-do-our-clients-think/

I still see people every day discovering AI and thinking it just solves their problems as a Landlord. I actually like AI and use it as a tool to speed up things. But when I have used it to think AI can give you an answer that sounds right but is legally wrong or out of date.

With the fines for getting things wrong so high I would really caution using AI too much. It's not ready to run your business.

If something goes wrong AI won't be a good defence at all!

Reading through this and other forums and the replies people seem to get the main rules and especially the more competent landlords don't think that changes much.

But how to manage all the requirements seem all over the place. Curious what are people actually using to manage and where they see the gaps or stresses in those solutions?

Spreadsheets? Agents? Software? Or just keeping it in your head?

I’ve been looking at what’s coming with the Renters’ Rights Act, and I am starting to think that it’s not the big rules that catch people out. It’s the small, boring stuff.

Quick test:

If someone challenged you tomorrow, could you prove ON PAPER:

• Every required document was served correctly
• Dates and timelines were compliant
• You have a clear audit trail of communication

Not “I know I have” - actually prove it like you would in a court of law.

Because I think that’s where this is heading. Be interesting where the fines start though.

Curious - how many people here are confident they’d pass that test today?

If your local council or an auditor reviewed your property tomorrow…

Would everything stack up?

• Certs all in place
• Licensing sorted
• Paper trail documented

Or would you be scrambling?

No one gets this perfect but curious how confident people actually are and why?

From 1 May the rules around section 13 change. One of the time sensitive changes is that if you issue your S13 today if falls under the current rules which allow for the increase to be effective from the notice date. If you issue in in two days then the tenant can go to a tribunal and the rent increase is only effective from the date the tribunal approve it.

That could be many months. So the logical advice is that if you are below market - act now!

You hear a lot about fines for non-compliance.

But I’m curious to hear the experiences in real life so far:

• Actually been fined?
• Been inspected?
• Had issues with licensing enforcement?

Interested in real experiences. We think this is going to get worse but it's hard to judge the reality TODAY as a base line.

There's a lot on our plates at the moment. But be honest - what’s actually keeping you up at night right now?

• Renters’ Rights Act?
• Licensing schemes?
• Tenants?
• Tax / MTD?
• Something else?

No judgement—just interested to see what people are dealing with.