Landlords are being urged to check local licensing rules as councils expand schemes and penalties for non-compliance rise.
The first phase of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 came into force on 1 May 2026, increasing the maximum civil financial penalty for relevant Housing Act offences from £30,000 to £40,000.
The offences include operating a house in multiple occupation (HMO), or another property, without a required licence and failing to comply with licence conditions.
Councils across England are also consulting on new or expanded selective and additional licensing schemes, as well as Article 4 Directions affecting houses in multiple occupation.
Propertymark said the combination of greater local regulation, higher penalties and the forthcoming private rented sector database meant landlords needed a clear understanding of their obligations.
Depending on the circumstances, liability for an unlicensed property can apply to those managing or controlling it, as well as landlords higher up a rent-to-rent chain.
Failure to obtain a required licence can also lead to a rent repayment order, with councils and tenants able to seek the repayment of up to two years’ rent in relevant cases.
The government intends to begin a regional rollout of the private rented sector database from late 2026. Registration will be compulsory and subject to an annual fee.
Propertymark supports a national register but said landlords and agents should not have to provide the same information repeatedly to different regulatory systems.
Tim Thomas, senior policy and campaigns officer at Propertymark, said: “The regulatory landscape for the private rented sector is becoming increasingly complex, and the cost of getting compliance wrong is rising.
“Agents and landlords need to be absolutely clear about whether a property requires a licence, what conditions apply and who carries responsibility within the ownership and management structure.
“Licensing can play a role in tackling poor standards and helping councils identify properties that require intervention, but schemes must be evidence-led, proportionate and properly enforced.
“Responsible landlords and professional agents should not be faced with unnecessary duplication, excessive administration or a patchwork of requirements that makes it harder to provide much-needed homes.
“With the PRS Database coming forward, now is the time for central government and local authorities to work together to make regulation simpler rather than adding another layer of bureaucracy.
“A national system should help councils identify non-compliance and support responsible landlords to demonstrate that they are meeting their obligations, not require the same information to be submitted again and again.
“We are encouraging our members to engage with local consultations and tell us where new licensing schemes are creating additional costs, administrative burdens or risks to rental supply.
“This evidence is vital in ensuring regulation delivers better housing outcomes rather than simply increasing the regulatory burden.”
Propertymark said licensing schemes should have clear objectives, be supported by robust local evidence and produce measurable improvements.
It added that fees and enforcement policies should be transparent and consistent, while councils should have sufficient resources to inspect properties and take action against landlords deliberately operating outside the law.
Proposals in Ealing, Preston, Burnley and the Royal Borough of Greenwich illustrate the variation between local schemes. Fees under consultation range from hundreds of pounds to more than £1,000 per property, while several councils are also considering Article 4 Directions and additional licensing for houses in multiple occupation.
