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


Fifth of landlords not raising rent despite interest rates and inflation

Some 18 per cent of buy to let landlords have suggested they are not raising rents for tenants despite inflation and soaring mortgage rates. 

A survey by lender Landbay shows that 61 per cent of landlords would be obliged to raise rents and 21 per cent remain undecided. 

The research shows that over the past year, a majority - 76 per cent - of landlords raised their rent, primarily to cover increasing mortgage costs, with most attributing the rise to increased interest rates.


Additional reasons for rental hikes included covering maintenance, repairs, increases in taxation or energy bills, and the habitual annual raise practiced by some landlords.

Of the respondents, 38 per cent expect rent increases to range between six and 10 per cent; just over a quarter said they would only raise the rent by a maximum of five per cent.

Some landlords admit they are absorbing losses to retain good tenants, while others are postponing rental increases.

Paul Brett, managing director, intermediaries at Landbay, says: “Many landlords, whose mortgage interest rates are increasing, find themselves in the position of having no alternative than to put the rent up in order to cover their outgoings.

“Mortgage costs obviously play a big part in landlords’ expenditure and there is a lot of remortgage activity this year. Our latest product development of like-for-like two-year fixed rate remortgages will help landlords, as the stress test we have to apply for affordability is based on pay rate plus one per cent, instead of the more usual two per cent.

“In fact, we are seeing more landlords opting for two-year terms, which is why we have also launched two-year discounted trackers with no early repayment charges. Borrowers can leave their options open with the opportunity to move onto another product at any time if mortgage rates improve.”

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 am not raising my rents simply because I do not want to make them unaffordable. I have had increased costs - some substantial, but tenant costs have gone up, too. They need to be able to put the heating on when it is cold and to eat properly etc.

    However, I will not be continuing as a landlord under the provisions in the Rental Reform legislation, and that is because while I will help my tenants as much as possible while they are my tenants, I am not going to lose the ownership rights to my property. A contract is an agreement between the parties concerned and I would not enter into a contract imposed by the State which excluded my right to any determination of the terms.

    Peter Why Do I Bother

    Morning Ellie, I was exactly the same train of thought, good tenants so leave the rent alone. But since the RRB announcement and direction of travel I have changed my mind. My letting agent instructed to put annual increases in all agreements, If they do not agree then they have to leave. Sounds very harsh but how can landlords protect their investment against ever rising costs and militant action groups stoking the tenants to not pay rent or be downright difficult.


    Good morning Peter.

    If you are carrying on letting after the legislation is in force then you would probably be wise to have an annual increase in rent.

    However, I would not let under the RRA irrespective of the rent that I was receiving. I am not going to lose control of the property. That is not something that I would entertain doing. It would be out of the question for me to let for an indeterminate period. I do try to accommodate my tenants now regarding how long they wish to stay, but the legislation goes far too far for me to continue as a landlord.


    The right to evict in order to sell will always remain so no need to evict good tenants until time to sell. I am not selling but not letting to families any more either.

    Tenants should not be insulated from the real world and should pay market rents.

    Landlords not charging market rents are doing no one any favours and will receive no thanks from anyone.


    The right of eviction to sell did not exist in the past. You had to sell for a pittance with a sitting tenant on a controlled rent. As Nick said this morning, I think our rights could diminish further with time.



    I am telling you what is the current situation in Scotland and it will definitely not be worse in England when the new law comes into force.

    No lender would ever agree to not being able to secure vacant possession of buy to let properties. We will not go back to the bad old days of sitting tenants where only cash buyers could buy those properties, as you say, at a pittance.


    Sorry Robert, I only just saw your post. How awful that you have to sell your property to get it back - that is quite ridiculous in my opinion.

    Also, don't forget that it was previous Labour policy to force landlords to sell to tenants at a lowish price - that was John McDonell's right to buy scheme.

    In the more distant past landlords with mortgages were still subject to the same rules regarding sitting tenants. You couldn't ask them to leave to sell the house.



    There are still quite a few ways to get your property back in Scotland without having to sell and England won't bring in more severe legislation than the loony SNP and their little Green helpers.

    The point I am making is that there is no need to panic and evict good tenants in case they turn bad with Section 21 removed. Landlords can wait until problems arise and will always have the nuclear option of selling if all else fails.

    Incidentally you could sell to a limited company that you own as that's a separate legal entity and get better tax treatment afterwards as well. There's also no compulsion to sell at any price so after trying to sell, it would be quite legal to change your mind if you can't get an acceptable sale price, although care must be exercised to avoid future repercussions.


    You are more of a risk taker than I am Robert - and that is probably why you are very successful. I am afraid that I defintely am not prepared to let to anyone unless I know that I can get my property back at the end of a fixed term tenancy.

    I will get all my properties empty before the Renters Reform legislation applies to them.

    That sounds like a great idea about selling to one's own limited company - would that count as a reason? You might be able to do it once.

    When you let to students have you ever considered a head lease with a/the local university - wouldn't that mean that they HAD to leave after a fixed term?



    I now only rent to groups of students each with a solvent guarantor who values their credit rating.

    I no longer rent to families or young professionals who might want to stay long term.

    I regard students as much lower risk tenants now than young families and many others now feel the same.

    My main frustration now is students not getting their act together and giving a decent amount of notice so it's a mad scramble to get tradesmen organised and new tenants lined up to avoid any voids.

    The Scottish PRS legislation only helps rogue tenants and harms young families in particular.

    Market forces have also allowed me to increase my best rents for a 4 bed flat in Glasgow from £1600 in 2017 to £2100 in 2018 and now to £2800 per month.

    I am very grateful to the SNP and their little Green helpers and won't be selling up, but equally won't be buying more with the SNP 6% stamp duty penalty and mortgage rates of over 6%.

    God help Scottish tenants because the Scottish government certainly isn't!

    English tenants have all this to look forward to!

  • icon

    Well I am not one of them 💰💰

  • icon

    If you don’t pass the costs on then you are subsidising their lifestyle. If they were to qualify for a mortgage they would be paying the same amount or more.
    Every homeowner with a mortgage is having to make cutbacks or their house will go and tenants are going to have to pay the increased costs or their home (my property) will go too


    Jahan, last month, you said you are having to "consider rent increases for some of my properties due to mortgage rates". Earlier this year, you claimed you are "taxed more than what we earn", implying you're making a loss as a landlord after tax. It sounds like you're having a hard time managing money and struggle with taking on debt to pursue a lifestyle and career you can't afford. Have you considered speaking to Citizens' Advice? They can help you make a budget, figure out what to cut back on and identify any benefits you might be entitled to in light of your financial situation.


    Ah Shimon, I do love banter. So I must say your comment has made me laugh today, put a right smile on my face that. Now the only response I can give to yours is as follows.
    "consider rent increases for some of my properties due to mortgage rates" - Yep thats correct & I have done & that means as a business I am still solvent & that also means the tenant has a roof over their head so will not be getting their hair wet.
    "taxed more than what we earn", implying you're making a loss as a landlord after tax. - Again that is true as this is due goverment interference. Its called Section 24. (Probable reason why your rent has gone up)
    It sounds like you're having a hard time managing money and struggle with taking on debt to pursue a lifestyle and career you can't afford. - Thank you for your concern. I'm alright though. Told the missus we have to shop at Lidl & Iceland from now on.
    I make no assumptions about your lifestyle but I assume you are only responsible for one roof to keep over your head whereas I am responsible for a lot of families roofs.
    Now as for speaking to Citizens Advice. I will leave their services for the likes of you but bear in mind if you take amateur advice you will get amateur results. I pay professionals hence why I get professional results which in turn keeps my tenants with yes you getting the drift now. A roof over their heads.

    Some friendly advice take it or leave it. Instead of being a cheeky sod, show a little respect for the people who have made something of themselves, gain some of their knowledge, work on your skills, re-read 'How to win friends & influence people' by Dale Carnegie, save a deposit & stop ordering from Deliveroo

  • icon

    I will be selling mine if they move to periodic. It’ll be a form of Air B&B witt increases costs and time wasting for Landlords having to re let time and time again. It’ll be open to short term contractors, those in between houses and those trying out an area. Having properties unfurnished may give you longer terms as costs arise for tenants with removal costs. Forced to take in pets is another where a good number of properties are totally unsuitable yet a blanket ban throughout does not take this in to consideration.

  • icon

    I would convert houses to HMOs where possible, keep flats and sell off all other houses. All new contracts will have an annual rent increment included. So the net effect is, it will be difficult for families to get houses, young families will cope with flats until they have to move to a larger property to accommodate a growing family. Others may not want to have children or have just one child. The biggest problem the western world faces is lack of Labour and this type of policies will add fuel to the already growing problem.

  • icon

    The removal of Section 21 is the end of right to legally end the Contract Voluntarily entered into by both parties.

  • icon

    Until last summer I had almost never increased rents for existing tenants. When they were nearly all students or young professionals and only stayed a year or two that was fine. New tenants would pay market rent and existing ones just carried on with the same rent for however long they were my tenants. The few long term families I have were basically living in a timewarp as far as rent was concerned.

    Things came to a head last summer with the utility price rises. I had contracts with several of the utility companies that went bust and had tenancy agreements for 8 student houses and HMOs based on the prices I had signed up for. Suddenly the utility bills went from a predicted £8000 for the year to over £30000 combined total. There was nothing I could do with any tenancies that were still in the initial fixed term but all the ones that were trundling along on a SPT could be increased last October.
    I sent an email to all tenants explaining how much utilities had gone up and that some rents would have to increase. Then I went and talked to some of them to see how they felt about paying more. It was all uncharted territory for me. The reactions were far more positive than I had expected. Some thanked me for explaining why it was necessary, some said the increases were far lower than they had expected (between £25 and £70 per tenancy per month depending on how long they had been in situ) and one HMO household asked if the increase was sufficient and said they would be happy to have a whip round if it wasn't. The important thing for several of them was that I wasn't thinking of selling up and evicting them.

    This year I have 5 mortgages reaching the end of their fixes with increases of around £2000 a month in mortgage payments. I've very unsubtly dropped it into conversations with tenants and prepared them for the idea of another rent increase in October. I've increased a few other rents over the last few months after they've clocked up a year or for the LHA assisted ones that I didn't increase last year. This year my policy has so far been 7% on the basis that if it's OK for Social Housing tenants everyone else must be expecting at least that much. Some of them know I'm waiting for the August BoE meeting before deciding October's increase.

    The thing I've learnt is that communication is essential. I don't want to lose any tenants but equally they don't want to lose their homes.

  • George Dawes

    I am and I'm sick of my daft tenants not moving and letting new ones move in

    That's the problem with renting to kids or airhead adults that act like them


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up