The private rental sector in England changed considerably on 1 May 2026 with the introduction of the Renters’ Rights Act reforms.
One of the most significant changes was the replacement of fixed-term Assured Shorthold Tenancies with Assured Periodic Tenancies. Rather than signing up to a six or twelve-month fixed term, most private tenants now have a rolling tenancy which they can bring to an end by giving two months’ notice.
At the same time, Section 21 “no-fault” evictions were abolished, meaning landlords can no longer simply give notice because a fixed term is coming to an end.
Nearly four months into the new system, what has this actually meant for tenants and landlords?
For tenants: more freedom, but not necessarily more flexibility
One of the aims of the new tenancy system was to give tenants greater flexibility.
Previously, somebody signing a twelve-month tenancy could potentially find themselves committed to paying rent for the entire fixed term unless the landlord agreed to release them early.
Under the new system, a tenant isn’t tied into a long, fixed term. If their circumstances change, perhaps because of a new job, relationship, growing family or simply because they find somewhere more suitable, they can give notice and move.
That is a significant improvement in mobility.
There is, however, an interesting contradiction.
Although tenants are no longer tied into lengthy fixed terms, the standard notice period is now two months.
For tenants who previously had a contractual or periodic tenancy requiring only one month’s notice (estimated around 61%), this can actually make moving more difficult.
For example, imagine finding your ideal new home today. The new landlord may want somebody to move in within a couple of weeks, but you could still have almost two months’ rent to pay on your existing property.
Furthermore, its believes as many as 40% of tenants do not know that they now have to give 2 months notice, rather than the original 1 month.
The result can be an uncomfortable choice: lose the new property, or accept an overlap where you’re effectively paying for two homes.
Landlords and tenants can agree in writing to shorten the notice period, but the existing landlord isn’t generally obliged to do so. If you’re a tenant looking for some more information on the changes, head over to Shelter.
For landlords: more warning when a property becomes vacant
From a landlord’s perspective, the two-month notice period has an obvious advantage, it gives considerably more time to prepare for a change of tenant.
A landlord receiving notice potentially has weeks to arrange an inspection, discuss any required works, organise marketing and start planning for the next tenancy.
In theory, this should help reduce void periods.
However, we have found this isn’t the case. Previously, a landlord receiving one month’s notice could have relatively little time to prepare, particularly if substantial work was required before the property could be re-let.
Two months provides a much larger window.
There is also greater certainty around the tenant’s intention to leave. Once valid notice has been served, the landlord and agent can begin planning for the property to become available.
But landlords have lost certainty elsewhere
The additional notice has to be viewed alongside a much bigger change, landlords no longer have the certainty of a fixed tenancy end date.
Under the old system, a landlord granting a twelve-month tenancy broadly knew that the tenant had committed to that period. Under an Assured Periodic Tenancy, a tenant could potentially give notice 2 months after moving in.
A landlord might spend hundreds or even thousands of pounds preparing a property, paying for referencing, compliance work, inventories and letting costs, only for the tenancy to last considerably less time than expected.
This is particularly relevant for landlords whose properties have high tenant-acquisition or preparation costs.
The trade-off is therefore interesting: landlords generally receive more notice when a tenant decides to leave, but they have less certainty about how long the tenancy will last in the first place.
Has it increased tenant turnover?
This is one of the most important questions, but it is still too early to answer confidently.
The reforms have only been operating since May 2026.
It is logical that removing fixed terms could increase mobility because tenants are no longer contractually tied to a property for six or twelve months.
However, the two-month notice requirement works in the opposite direction by making an immediate move more difficult.
The true effect on average tenancy lengths will probably only become clear once we have a full year or more of data under the new system.
Landlords now need to think differently about reletting
The reforms also change how landlords and letting agents should manage notice.
A two-month period shouldn’t simply be treated as eight weeks of waiting.
Once notice is received, agents can begin planning immediately.
That might include discussing access for viewings, assessing likely maintenance requirements, obtaining certificates where necessary and agreeing a marketing strategy.
Handled properly, the additional notice could significantly reduce the period for which a property produces no rent.
The objective should increasingly be to move from one tenancy to the next with the smallest practical gap.
Security has shifted in the tenant’s favour
The two-month notice rule can’t really be considered in isolation from the abolition of Section 21.
Tenants now have substantially greater control over how long they remain in their home.
A tenant who complies with their tenancy obligations can no longer simply be given a Section 21 notice because the landlord wants the property back. A landlord seeking possession must rely upon an applicable statutory ground.
The tenant, meanwhile, can decide to leave by serving the required notice.
That represents a fundamental change in the balance of the landlord-and-tenant relationship.
For tenants, it provides greater security of tenure.
For landlords, it means tenant selection has arguably become even more important. Once somebody moves into a property, the landlord has considerably less flexibility to bring that tenancy to an end simply because the arrangement is no longer convenient.
Is the new system better?
There isn’t a straightforward answer.
For tenants, the removal of fixed terms provides significantly more freedom and security. Nobody needs to remain in an unsuitable property simply because they signed a twelve-month tenancy.
But requiring two months’ notice can make moving between rental properties surprisingly awkward, particularly where the next landlord wants somebody to move in immediately.
For landlords, two months’ notice provides a useful opportunity to prepare and re-let a property, potentially reducing void periods.
But that benefit comes alongside the loss of fixed terms and Section 21, meaning landlords have considerably less certainty over both the duration of a tenancy and their ability to recover possession.
Perhaps the biggest lesson from the first few months is that flexibility will increasingly require cooperation.
The legislation establishes the default position, but landlords and tenants can agree a shorter notice period in writing. Where an outgoing tenant wants to move quickly and a landlord can secure a replacement tenant, reaching an agreement may often leave everybody better off.
The rental market has undergone one of its biggest changes in decades.
Whether the new system ultimately results in shorter tenancies, fewer void periods, greater tenant mobility or unintended consequences will become clearer over the coming year.
For now, both landlords and tenants are still learning how to operate within a very different rental market.
If you require some advice on how best to move forward with your tenant or rental property don’t hesitate to contact us or give us a call on 01925 633011
