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


At Last! - Evidence shows most tenants like their homes and landlords

The significant majority of private renters are happy with their properties, status and their landlords according to a new survey.

A report from a cross-party independent think tank, the Social Market Foundation, says that – contrary to some narratives suggest renting is an inherently unhappy experience – no fewer than 81 per cent of tenants say they are happy with their current home and 85 per cent are satisfied with their landlords.

The greatest single source of dissatisfaction among tenants is with “being a renter” although even here this applies to only 34 per cent - the majority are happy with their status as a tenant. The SMF says this suggests that where people are unhappy in the private rented sector it is not about their living circumstances, but about the fact of having to rent rather than own a home.


Satisfaction with private renting is particularly high among older renters: nearly three-quarters (74 per cent) of those aged 55 and over report being satisfied, compared to 58 per cent of those aged 35-54.

Private renters particularly value not having to pay for repairs, maintenance or insurance and other costs, with over two-thirds citing this as a benefit of renting; some also see it as a way to afford more expensive locations or to live more flexibly.

However, the disadvantages of renting were named as being a financially worse option than ownership in the long run, being unable to make decisions over furnishing and décor, to improve energy efficiency, or to keep a pet.

A key finding in the report reads: “Despite the political focus on security and stability, this came lower down the list of concerns in our survey: four in 10 private renters said that they dislike the uncertainty of being on a fixed contract, rising to 45 per cent of parents. Overall, most renters are happy to be where they are for now, but most do not see it as their ideal long-term option.”

However, even with the strong endorsement of rental properties and landlords contained in the report, the SMF says major policy changes are needed to ensure the sector continues to work well for tenants.  

Only half of renters expect to leave the private rented sector in the next 15 years, suggesting that significant numbers will remain renters for long periods. Among them, the SMF finds that just 13 per cent would be satisfied with long-term renting.

That will see the average age of tenants rising: by 2035, more than half of private renting households are likely to include someone aged 45 or older, the SMF forecasts. 

Couples and families will also make up a rising proportion of renters

The SMF says its research challenges the narratives which assume private renting is unsatisfactory and exploitative for the typical tenant.

At the same time, it acknowledges that a minority of renters have particularly negative experiences and so endorses measures expected to be in the Rental Reform White Paper - due in the near future - such as abolition of Section 21 evictions and introduction of a Decent Homes standard for private rental properties similar to that in existence for social renting.

The SMF’s key recommendation is to enable renters to build wealth while remaining in the private rental sector, addressing their number one concern: the financial opportunity cost of renting, which have prevented savings, for a deposit or later life needs. 

Several innovative schemes could be implemented, including ‘deposit builder ISAs’ that offer a financial return on deposits, or ‘rentership’ models that offer tenants stakes in their building.

One of the Social Market Foundation’s report authors -  economist Aveek Bhattacharya - says: “Dominant cultural narratives about the private rented sector paint a misleading picture. In contrast to the horror stories that get wide circulation, the majority of renters are satisfied with their living conditions and have decent relationships with their landlords. 

“It is absolutely right that the government should seek to help the minority with poor standard accommodation and unprofessional landlords. At the same time, it needs to think harder about what it can offer the typical renter – who is largely happy with their circumstances today, but has doubts about whether they want to keep renting long-term.”

He continues: "Giving renters more control over their homes – allowing them to keep pets or decorate would help. So would incentivizing landlords to make improvements to properties to make them good, and not just decent. But perhaps the biggest challenge is developing policies that can persuade renters that they are not missing out financial security and stability if they don’t own their home.”

Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.

  • icon

    I agree most renter’s are happy with their Landlords and the condition of the property. However, there is a close connection between the quality of the Tenant and the property if a good Tenant get a good property it stays that way for years, on the other hand when you get a rough occupant it’s ruined in months and then likely to contact Council to complain about the condition.
    Asking Tenants if they would like to get rid of S.21 is a bad joke, why not ask LL’s would they like to get rid of HMO licensing Schemes.
    Huge numbers of renter’s don’t even know what Section 21 is despite renting for years or care good people are not going to be asked to leave. I know some changes their partners a lot more often than their accommodation. It like we are the only business that are not allowed to have terms & conditions. Regarding the 15% of renters that are not not happy with LL or because they don’t own their own home, this is not a surprise no one likes paying rent but understand it’s necessary if thy want to live in a property belongs to another, there is also a small number that wants to game the system and pay nothing.

    PossessionFriendUK PossessionFriend

    Yes, and the Immorality of Tenant campaign groups is that they don't - won't recognise this. Ginger Rent and No Shelter will not accept there is, Ever, - even ONE deserved eviction case.
    How on earth can there be any progress between Landlords and tenants when Tenant representatives hold this attitude.
    Contrast this with Landlords who are readily willing to condemn unscrupulous landlords. ... and where are politicians for not being alive to this biased disparity ?

  • icon

    At last?

    It's always been the case that most tenants and landlords are happy with each other.

    Shelter, Generation Rant etc are the ENEMIES of all decent tenants and especially of potentially decent tenants who can't get properties which rent dodgers are being aided and abetted to squat in for months or even years.

    Now one message seems to be getting across, it's time to expose Polly and her Baroness crony for what they really are!

  • icon

    Why would a tenant stay in a property that they disliked ?

     G romit

    As a result of the actions of Gen Rent, Shelter, ACORN ,et al driving Lanlords out of the PRS, there are fewer properties to rent and in a growing number of places a complete shortage i.e. there is nowhere to move into.
    If there was a plentiful supply of properties to rent then substandard properties would remain vacant, and rogue Landlords who own these properties would have to improve or exit the market. The actions of tenant support groups is successfully bringing the the complete opposite were the net result is tenants suffer, and rogue Landlords prosper.

  • icon

    Wait so you mean we aren’t the Devil reincarnated?? I’m so confused!

    Unfortunately nothing will change as this information will stay between us because the NRLA will do nothing with it to change publics perception and sadly for us that’s all that counts when it comes to Policy.

  • George Dawes

    Only the msm disagrees and we all know their agenda….


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up