Lettings agencies are starting to consolidate ahead of the fee ban.

ARLA Propertymark chief executive David Cox claims that consolidation in the sector could be behind a fall in landlord properties being listed during 2017.

His observation came as ARLA Propertymark and NAEA Propertymark assessed the state of the market in 2017 and looked ahead to next year.

In lettings, ARLA Propertymark’s data shows that supply of rental properties was at its highest in January when it stood at 193. On average in 2016, the number of properties available per branch was 180 compared with 188 from January to October this year.

The number of buy-to-let landlords selling their properties peaked in March and April when agents reported a 33% spike in the number of landlords selling up.

In August, the number of tenants experiencing rent hikes peaked at 35% before falling to 27% in September.

Tenants were the most successful at negotiating rent reductions in March with a rate of 3.6%. In 2016, the most successful month for rent reductions was December when 3.1% successfully negotiated deductions.

Cox said: “It was always going to be an interesting year, following the announcement of the letting agent fee ban in last November’s Autumn Statement.

“I think we’re starting to see a consolidation of some agencies in the industry as the fee ban looms, which could explain why the number of properties under management has increased.

“Landlords are becoming more selective about their property investments in light of last year’s Stamp Duty changes.

“Mortgage interest relief is starting to bite which is why we saw an increased number of landlords selling up. It’s likely that as we move into 2018, tenants will continue to see rent increases as supply starts to reduce, demand continues apace, and legislative changes increase costs for landlords.”

Meanwhile, sales to first-time buyers hit a four-year low in 2017, NAEA Propertymark agents claim, despite actual lending figures suggesting an increase.

Data from NAEA Propertymark, based on its housing reports between January and October, found that the proportion of sales to first-time buyers among members dropped to 25% across the year.

This is down from 28% in 2016 and just above the previous low of 23.7% in 2013.

The low figure seems to contradict data from banks showing first-time buyer lending has been increasing this year.

For example, in August the number of approvals for first-time buyers was up 14% and last month trade body UK Finance said first-time buyer activity had helped the market gain momentum so far in 2017.

NAEA Propertymark chief executive Mark Hayward said this could be down to a lag in mortgages approved and those actually lent and used for a purchase.

The membership body’s figures also highlighted a spike in demand and supply in the first months of the year.

Demand spiked in January and February at 425 house-buyers registered per branch and was higher across the year compared with 2016, with an average of 380 prospective buyers registered per branch in contrast to 365 on average over the course of last year

Supply of housing peaked in February with 44 properties available to buy per branch. Year on year, supply has not shifted, averaging at 39 properties available per branch in 2016 and 2017.

February and June saw the highest number of sales agreed, with an average of 11 per branch. In 2016, the number of sales agreed peaked in March, with ten per branch.

On average, the number of sales agreed was up in 2017 with an average of nine per branch every month, compared to eight in 2016.

Hayward said: “2017 has been a busy year for the property market, and the Budget announcement to abolish Stamp Duty for first-time buyers has given them some optimism.

“Looking to next year it will be interesting to see what impact the Stamp Duty change had on the market, and if it really does help first-time buyers get on the ladder.

“We still only have a limited supply of housing available and policymakers need to think about how to help others in the chain such as second steppers and those that would downsize in order to free up more larger homes suitable for families.”