By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards


Sex-Pest Landlords face prosecution under proposed new legislation

A Labour MP is proposing legislation which would mean that landlords who offer accommodation in exchange for sexual favours could be easier to prosecute.

Peter Kyle is proposing an amendment to the Police Bill now under consideration in Parliament to target rogue landlords and advertising platforms that allow their requests to be publicised. 

At present, landlords offering such arrangements can only be prosecuted under Section 52 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. This law requires the victim to legally define as a prostitute to secure a conviction, which MPs argue deters victims from coming forward.


Kyle’s amendment, revealed in the Daily Mail - which has been campaigning against rogue landlords - would mean that any landlord requiring or accepting sexual relations as a condition of accommodation would be liable to up to seven years in jail. 

Websites hosting 'sex for rent' advertisements would be liable for fines of up to £50,000 per post.

The Mail reports that Tory safeguarding minister Victoria Atkins says: “We will continue to work closely with the police to ensure they have the tools they need to tackle this issue.”


However Kyle - who is Labour’s shadow schools spokesman - says : “Labour have acted. We've drafted powerful new offences to crack down on these vicious landlords, and on the websites that host them. Now it's up to the government to help us pass these amendments.”

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is a large piece of legislation currently making its way through parliament.

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • icon

    I fully agree, I suspect this mainly goes on in the lower end of the rental market, I can see the sex workers wanting to pay their rent this way.

  • icon

    It takes two to tango!


    Which is why both should be prosecuted, it is after all prostitution .


    Disgusting old man


    Prostitution is not a crime, Andrew. Unlike unlawfully kicking people out of their homes, to pick a crime completely at random.


    Leics Landlord Prostitution IS illegal


    Rubbish. Living off immoral earnings is illegal, controlling prostitutes is illegal, keeping a brothel is illegal. But prostitution itself is not illegal.

  • girish mehta

    What safe guards are there when tenants make false accusations when faced with eviction


    Spot on! There need to be robust safeguards to protect LL’s from unscrupulous tenants making false accusations.

    My (ex) Brazilian tenant had falsely accused her Boyfriend at the time of being a sex pest. It resulted in him being barred from seeing his daughters, later on DNA results proved her wrong but by that time BF had lost his job & suffered with mental health problems.

    Being the LL, I felt quite guilty for banning BF from my property-based on a false accusations of the tenant.
    Eventually I evicted the tenant, who was by then with another BF & used all tactics including pretending to be pregnant 🤰but was unable to produce a medical certificate to confirm it in court.
    Best wishes to all good LL’s.


    none--deliberately so

  • icon

    Girish, I was just thinking the same thing!

  • icon

    How about a specific offence of MP's offering favours for sex after all I am sure some of these MP's would not wish people to imagine they were motivated by mindless bigotry prejudice and hatred of landlords and their families and after all it would be discriminatory to not to offer victims of sexual harassment lesser protection against sex pest MP's

    PossessionFriendUK PossessionFriend

    If all the M.P's who had Unlawfully, Fraudulently claimed expenses were prosecuted, ( as they should ) there would be hardly anyone left in the HoC ( They could down-size and hold parliamentary business in their Tax-payer subsidised bar-Restaurant ! )
    Pot and kettle come to mind.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up