The Renters Rights Act: Are no fault evictions really going away?

On May 1^st 2026 the highly anticipated Renters Rights Act will see the first of its reforms come into force. Upon the introduction of the Renters Rights Bill to the House of Commons in September 2024, Minister of State for Housing and Planning, Matthew Pennycook, said that the Government “want to see tenants benefit from these reforms as quickly as possible” with the aim of delivering on a “manifesto commitment to overhaul the regulation of the private rented sector”. Perhaps the most significant of overhaul of all, and the one that the majority of eyes will be on is the removal of Section 21 as `no fault evictions but we argue might be more accurately described as ‘no reason evictions`. A Section 21 notice being served by a landlord currently allows them to evict their tenant for no reason so long as they give 2 months’ notice. Within the past year alone, the Vauxhall Community Law and Information Centre has dealt with around 50 cases of claims for possession under Section 21.

So, while the removal of Section 21 is definitely a welcome one, and should certainly be celebrated, concerns linger. Amongst these concerns is the fact that a Section 21 notice can still be served until April 31^st 2026 and court proceedings can still be made until July 31^st 2026. It is only after May 1^st that landlords will need to provide a reason for evictions of tenants.

What are Ground 1 and Ground 1A evictions?

There are concerns that new grounds, Ground 1 and Ground 1A, could act as replacements for Section 21 notices. It would be more reasonable to apply the ‘no fault eviction` label to these new grounds, as while they do have reasons unlike Section 21, they remain ‘no fault` of the tenant. Instead, the grounds allow the landlord to repossess the property for the purpose of selling it or living within it. These grounds cannot be used within the first 12 months of a tenant’s agreement and the landlord must provide 4 months’ notice of their intent to use these grounds, providing greater level of protection, though not fully adequate, for tenants. Additionally, landlords may not market or re-let their property for 12 months after using either Grounds 1 or 1A.

A Ground 1 possession allows the landlord to repossess a dwelling-house as the only or principal home of the landlord, landlords spouse/civil partner, immediate family (parent, grandparent, sibling, child, grandchild), or child or grandchild of the landlord’s spouse/civil partner. Under this Ground, the rule on the 12-month mortarium on putting the home on the market or re-letting does not apply according to Section 16E (2) in the event that the tenant or licensee is any of the people that the landlord may give the house to as a principal home. This means, that the landlord can repossess a property to immediately let it out to a member of family.

A Ground 1A possession allows the landlord to repossess a house if they intent to sell it or to grant a lease of the house for a term of more than 21 years. There are however, restrictions on what type of landlord can use a Ground 1A possession with the following being prohibited from using it, specifically social landlords or housing trusts.

We have noticed a number of concerns regarding these Grounds and changes. Principle among them being enforcement. What safeguards are, or will be, in place to prevent a landlord from “intending” to sell their home but instead putting it on the rental market if the purchase were to fall through. From this, we can ask how far into the sale of a property must a landlord be before informing their tenant that they will be using Ground 1A. This leaves the tenant in a limbo-like position while awaiting the sale of the property they reside in. And, after going through a length process to find a new residency, a process which can cause stress both mentally and financially, what action could the now former tenant take if they were to discover the sale did not occur and their former home is now back on the rental market.

Within the law centre, we have seen cases where landlords attempt to seek possession of a property for the purpose of living within it under Ground 1. One particular case saw the landlord state that they had a ‘verbal agreement’ with our client, the tenant, where he told the client that he wanted to move back into the property during refurbishment. He did not provide this Ground 1 notice at the start of the tenancy either orally or in writing. The landlord continued to accept rent from the client until she complained about a leak, after which the landlord informed the client that she would need to move out. It was later revealed that the landlord wanted the property back due to rent arrears and not due to wanting to live in it, while later contradicting the story further by stating that he wanted the property back due to the complaint about disrepair. Throughout this case, we saw evidence of how a Ground 1 repossession of the landlord wishing for themselves or a close family member to live within a property may not be the truth of the matter. With the end of Section 21 and instead a renewed reliance by landlords on Ground 1 and Ground 1A, we find it likely that more cases such as this will appear.

In the above case, rent arrears was later used to attempt to justify the eviction of the tenant. But we must consider that often rent arrears evictions also fall under a category of `no fault evictions`. Consider a case where a tenant has fallen into rent arrears as a result of losing their job through no fault of their own and thus being unable to pay rent. In such circumstances, can it be said that they are at fault for their arrears. As such, we would also classify the new Ground 8 (3 months’ or 12 weeks’ rent arrears) and Ground 10 (any rent arrears) possession grounds as potentially being `no fault evictions`.

Given that legal aid is already limited due to LASPO, what steps will the Government be taking to ensure that tenants can take on their landlord in these cases. We know that since 2019, the number of housing legal aid providers within Liverpool has shrunk from 9 to 4. At the same time, there has been significant increases in demand for housing legal aid due to a variety of factors, including the ongoing cost of living crisis, increasing cases of homelessness (in 2023 there were 1,245 households living in temporary accommodation, this had risen to over 1,700 by July 2025), the skyrocketing cost of temporary accommodation which has risen by more than 11,000% since the pandemic. Part of this problem is the increase in private rental costs within the city, with an increase of 10% from 2023 to 2024 per month despite the average household income per head being just £16,069 (which sits over £5,000 short of the national average). With all of these problems continuing to be prevalent, we are concerned about how these changes to the law will further complicate legal challenges as well as the time it will take for precedent to become clear on enforcement and holding landlords accountable through these Grounds. These problems will likely lead to higher incurred costs for our housing team while simultaneously not actually addressing the core reasons for the significant increase in demand, instead focusing on preventative measures e.g., the removal of Section 21.

And so, while the Government promised that the Renters Rights Act would see tenants benefit from reforms bringing about the end of `no fault evictions`, from what we can see these forms of evictions will in fact continue, not in the form of Section 21’s `no reason evictions` but rather in the form of Grounds 1, 1A, 8 and 10 where tenants may not be at fault but rather the landlord has a `reason` for pursuing possession of a property.