As the Renters’ Rights Act continues to reshape the private rented sector, a growing number of landlords are raising concerns about the costs associated with compliance, particularly where letting agents are charging additional administration fees to issue updated paperwork or tenancy documentation.

Over recent weeks, discussions across landlord forums and social media groups have highlighted reports of landlords being quoted anything from £200 to over £400 for what some describe simply as “updating paperwork” linked to the new legislation. Unsurprisingly, this has prompted frustration among some landlords who are already facing rising costs across taxation, regulation, maintenance and compliance.

However, as with many disputes in the lettings sector, the reality is often more nuanced than the headlines suggest.

The Renters’ Rights Act introduces new obligations and additional compliance requirements which agents may legitimately need to manage on behalf of landlords. Depending on the tenancy arrangement and management structure, this could involve updating documentation and procedures, reviewing tenancy processes, serving newly required information correctly and ensuring systems comply with evolving legal requirements.

In recent months, further clarity has also emerged around requirements such as the Government Information sheet needing to be served to tenants. For larger agencies, these changes may need to be applied across hundreds or even thousands of tenancies. That can involve significant time, training and operational resources. Agents also carry their own regulatory responsibilities and may face consequences if compliance is handled incorrectly.

There is no doubt that compliance has become increasingly complex, and agents themselves face legal and regulatory obligations which they cannot afford to get wrong. The key issue, therefore, is not simply whether agents can charge fees, but whether those fees are transparent, proportionate and properly explained to landlords.

Landlords should be able to understand:

+ what specific work is being carried out

+ why the work is necessary

+ whether the charge is covered by the existing agreement

+ how the fee has been calculated

+ whether the cost is proportionate to the service provided

In many cases, existing management agreements will not specifically reference the Renters’ Rights Act simply because the legislation and supporting guidance have evolved relatively recently. Agents are therefore having to adapt systems, documentation and compliance procedures quickly, often across large portfolios of properties.

Where substantial additional work is genuinely required, it is not unreasonable for agents to seek to recover some of those costs. However, landlords will still expect clarity around exactly what work is being undertaken, why the charges apply and whether they are proportionate.

Problems tend to arise where landlords feel costs have appeared unexpectedly, where explanations are vague, or where fees seem excessive relative to the work being carried out. At a time when many landlords are already anxious about the pace and scale of legislative reform, poor communication can quickly damage trust. Good communication is key. Agents should avoid vague descriptions such as “legislation update fee” or “compliance admin” without explaining what that includes. A short breakdown of the work involved can help landlords see the value of the service and reduce the risk of complaints.

The broader issue here is that periods of significant change inevitably create uncertainty across the sector. Landlords are trying to understand their obligations, agents are trying to adapt their processes and tenants themselves are often unclear about what the reforms mean in practice. In that environment, inconsistent approaches are almost inevitable.

This is why communication and transparency matter more than ever. Landlords should carefully review their management agreements and ask questions where additional charges arise. Agents, meanwhile, should ensure any compliance-related fees are clearly explained, justified and agreed in advance wherever possible. My understanding is that the government will be issuing further material information guidance in the coming months.

From a redress perspective, the focus will often be on fairness, transparency and evidence. If a complaint is raised, an agent may need to show that the charge was permitted under the agreement, that the landlord was made aware of it, and that the fee was reasonable in relation to the work carried out.

Ultimately, most disputes around fees are not necessarily about the existence of charges themselves, but whether people feel they have been treated fairly.

As regulation across the private rented sector continues to expand, professionalism, clarity and communication remain paramount to maintaining confidence and trust between landlords, agents and tenants alike.

Sean Hooker, head of redress, Property Redress.