From 1 May 2026 the marketing stage of a let property in England is governed by a tight set of statutory rules that did not exist before. Chapter 6 of Part 1 of the Renters' Rights Act 2025 (sections 56 and 57) requires every advertisement to state a specific rent and prohibits any above-asking bidding. Section 8 of the Act voids in-tenancy advance-rent terms. Section 9 prohibits pre-tenancy advance-rent collection. Together with the existing Tenant Fees Act 2019 prohibited-payments framework, the marketing-stage perimeter is materially narrower than the pre-2026 norm and is policed by a £7,000-per-breach civil-penalty regime under section 57.

For the broader statutory framework see our companion pages on Section 21 abolition and the reformed Section 8 process, periodic tenancy default and AST conversion, the Section 13 rent-increase route for post-tenancy rent rises, and the clause-by-clause tenancy template audit. For the enforcement layer covering civil penalty defence and FTT-PC appeals see our civil penalty and banning order defence guide. For the firm-commercial portfolio-disposal angle on landlords weighing exit see our portfolio disposal RRA 2025 tax implications page. For the cap-versus-revenue framework on marketing-stage operating costs see our HMO licensing fees deductibility guide.

Section 56: The Stated-Rent Ceiling

Section 56 of the RRA 2025 imposes two interlocking duties on every 'relevant person' (defined to cover the prospective landlord plus any person acting directly or indirectly on the landlord's behalf, which captures letting agents, property managers, sub-contracted marketing channels, and friends-and-family-as-agent arrangements):

  1. Advertisement requirement: a letting cannot be advertised or offered unless the rent payable under the letting is a specific stated amount, and the advertisement states that amount. Rent-on-application, rent ranges ('£1,500 to £1,700'), and 'from £X' formulations are non-compliant.
  2. Bidding prohibition: the landlord and any relevant person cannot invite or encourage any person to offer to pay rent exceeding the stated amount, AND cannot accept any offer from any person to pay rent exceeding the stated amount. The prohibition runs on both the solicitation side and the acceptance side; an unprompted above-asking offer is not a defence.

The single exception to the advertisement requirement (carved out in section 56 itself) is the 'to let' sign at the property: a basic sign indicating the property is available to let does not need to state the rent. Every other channel (Rightmove, Zoopla, OnTheMarket, OpenRent, Facebook Marketplace, agent shopfront card, printed flyer, direct website, social media advert) must include the specific stated rent.

Section 57: The £7,000 Per-Breach Penalty Regime

Section 57 establishes the financial-penalty regime for breach of section 56. The local housing authority can impose a civil penalty up to £7,000 per breach. The structural features:

  • Per-breach maximum: £7,000. A single non-compliant listing across one channel is one breach; the same property listed non-compliantly on three portals can be three separate breaches.
  • Repeat-within-5-years uplift: a landlord or agent with a prior section 57 penalty within the preceding 5 years faces an enhanced penalty on the second occurrence.
  • Joint and several liability: where the breach involves both the landlord and the letting agent (or any other relevant person), the local authority can pursue any or all of them for the same breach. The legal liability sits jointly and severally; the contractual allocation between landlord and agent is a separate matter (covered below).
  • Procedural framework: notice of intent, 28-day representations window, final notice, 28-day appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal Property Chamber. The procedural mechanic is the same as for the broader section 15 + Schedule 5 penalty regime covered in our civil penalty defence guide linked above.

Section 8: In-Tenancy Advance-Rent Prohibition

Section 8 of the RRA 2025 inserts a new section 4B into the Housing Act 1988. The mechanic: any term of an assured tenancy providing for when rent is due is of no effect insofar as it provides for rent to be due in advance. The pre-2026 standard 'rent payable monthly in advance on the first day of the month' formulation is now void as to the 'in advance' element; the rent is due on the rent day, recovered through the standard arrears procedure if unpaid.

The section 4B prohibition applies to tenancies entered into on or after 1 May 2026. Pre-existing assured tenancies that converted to periodic on 1 May 2026 under SI 2026/421 reg.2 carry the conversion across with their original rent-payment terms intact, but the advance-rent element of those terms ceases to have effect from the conversion date. The permitted exception under section 4B(8) (cross-referencing Schedule 2 of the Tenant Fees Act 2019) is the 'permitted pre-tenancy period' during which initial rent can be collected via the holding-deposit mechanism. Excepted tenancies (social housing from private registered providers, homelessness accommodation) sit outside the section 4B prohibition.

Section 9: Pre-Tenancy Advance-Rent Prohibition

Section 9 of the RRA 2025 amends the Tenant Fees Act 2019 by inserting new sections 5A and 5B. The mechanic: landlords and letting agents are prohibited from inviting or encouraging offers of pre-tenancy rent payments, and from accepting such offers (directly or through third parties). The prohibition runs on both the solicitation side and the acceptance side, like section 56.

The pre-2026 'security payment of 6 months rent' or 'first and last month upfront' patterns are now unlawful in their own right. The permitted pre-tenancy payments are unchanged from the TFA 2019 framework: refundable holding deposit (one week's rent maximum), refundable tenancy deposit (5 weeks' rent for properties with annual rent under £50,000; 6 weeks at or above), and the first rent due at tenancy commencement under the standard section 4B-compliant rent-payment clause. The narrow weak-referencing case (international students without UK credit history; self-employed applicants with limited employment evidence) cannot be solved through pre-tenancy upfront rent; the operational alternatives are rent guarantee insurance, a guarantor, declining the application, or accepting at the standard pre-tenancy payment level with enhanced scrutiny.

The Compliance Checklist for Portal Listings and Direct Marketing

The audit should be done across every marketing channel the landlord or agent uses. The check below is the per-listing minimum.

  1. The listing states a specific rent amount in figures (not a range, not 'on application', not 'from £X').
  2. The rent figure is the rent that will actually be charged if the property is let (not a starting figure subject to above-asking selection).
  3. The advertisement does not invite, encourage, or imply that above-asking offers will be considered.
  4. The advertisement does not require, request, or imply that pre-tenancy advance rent will be expected.
  5. The listing does not stipulate any pet-related fee, pet bond, or pet damage insurance condition (per the F-11 corrected pet-rights position in our pet rights page).
  6. The listing does not stipulate any 'admin fee', 'check-in fee', 'inventory fee', 'reference fee', or any other charge outside the TFA 2019 prescribed-payments list.
  7. The deposit cap is correctly stated (5 weeks for annual rent under £50,000; 6 weeks at or above).
  8. The landlord identity and (once the PRS Database commences) the dwelling's unique identifier appear on the listing.
  9. Where the landlord uses multiple portals + direct-website + printed-card channels, each channel has been checked against the same stated rent.
  10. Where a letting agent is involved, the agent's listing and the landlord's direct listing (if any) both carry the same stated rent.

Three Common Pre-2026 Marketing Patterns Now Non-Compliant

Illustrations of the most common pre-2026 listing patterns that need to be retired.

Pattern 1: 'Rent on application' for premium properties

Pre-2026: 'Premium 3-bedroom mews house in Knightsbridge. Rent on application. Suitable for discerning corporate tenant or international family. Multiple-month advance payments considered.'

Post-1-May-2026 issues: 'Rent on application' breaches section 56 advertisement requirement. 'Multiple-month advance payments considered' breaches section 9. 'Suitable for international family' may be at risk under separate discrimination provisions (Chapter 3 of Part 1).

Compliant version: 'Premium 3-bedroom mews house in Knightsbridge. £8,500 per calendar month. Deposit 5 weeks of rent (£9,808). Available to let under an assured periodic tenancy. Tenant referencing required.'

Pattern 2: 'From £X' on mid-market

Pre-2026: '2-bed flat in Manchester city centre. From £1,400 per month. Open viewing Saturday 10am to 2pm. Best offers welcome.'

Post-1-May-2026 issues: 'From £1,400' breaches section 56 advertisement requirement (no specific stated rent). 'Best offers welcome' breaches section 56 prohibition on inviting above-asking offers. The open-viewing pattern is permissible but the tiebreak between competing applicants cannot be on above-asking rent.

Compliant version: '2-bed flat in Manchester city centre. £1,500 per calendar month. Open viewing Saturday 10am to 2pm. Applications received on a first-qualified basis subject to standard tenant referencing.'

Pattern 3: Multi-property building listed as a range

Pre-2026: 'New conversion of 6 luxury apartments in central Birmingham. 1 to 2 beds. Rents from £1,200 to £1,800 per month depending on size and floor. Contact agent for individual unit details.'

Post-1-May-2026 issues: Range advertisement breaches section 56 even where individual unit rents could be quoted on request. The 'contact agent for details' workaround does not cure the listing-level breach because each unit needs its own stated-rent listing.

Compliant version: Six separate listings, one per unit, each with its own stated rent: 'Unit 1A: 1-bed, ground floor, £1,200 per calendar month'; 'Unit 2B: 1-bed, second floor, £1,350 per calendar month'; and so on. The administrative overhead is modest; the compliance exposure of the range listing is not.

The Joint-and-Several Liability Mechanic Between Landlord and Agent

The default position under section 57 is that the landlord and any other relevant person (including the letting agent) are jointly and severally liable for a breach. The local housing authority can pursue any or all of them and is not required to allocate fault between them at the enforcement stage; the burden of demonstrating that a particular breach was the agent's conduct and not the landlord's authorisation falls on the landlord at the representations stage or the FTT-PC appeal.

The contractual fix sits in the management agreement between landlord and agent. The agreement should include:

  • A specific covenant from the agent that all advertising and marketing of the landlord's properties will comply with section 56 (stated rent) and section 9 (no pre-tenancy advance rent solicitation).
  • A specific covenant on TFA 2019 prohibited-payments compliance in the agent's tenant-facing fee schedule.
  • An indemnity from agent to landlord for any section 57 financial penalty imposed on the landlord that flows from agent conduct, plus the landlord's reasonable legal costs in dealing with the enforcement process.
  • A reciprocal information-sharing duty: the agent must notify the landlord of any local-authority notice of intent under section 57 within a defined short window (typically 48 hours) so the landlord can engage with the representations stage.
  • A right to terminate the management agreement on a section 57 final penalty (or a defined number of notices of intent) without penalty to the landlord, to allow the landlord to switch agent following a compliance failure.

The contractual structuring does not change the statutory joint-and-several position vis-a-vis the local authority; what it does is allocate the eventual cost between landlord and agent in a defensible way and give the landlord an exit route from a non-compliant agent relationship. Sessions advising landlords with existing management agreements (most of which were drafted pre-2026 and do not address the section 57 regime) should ensure the agreement is updated as part of the broader RRA 2025 compliance refresh.

Tax Treatment of Marketing-Stage Spend

Marketing and re-listing costs are revenue operating expenses of the rental business under the wholly-and-exclusively rule in ITTOIA 2005 s.34 (cash basis) and s.272 (accruals applying trading-profit principles). The legal basis is the standard PIM2080 (revenue expenses) and PIM2120 (legal and professional fees) framework in HMRC's Property Income Manual.

CostCap or revenueDeductible?Notes
Letting agent fees (initial let; renewal)RevenueYesTypical 8% to 12% of first year rent for initial let; 5% to 10% for renewal
Portal-listing fees (Rightmove / Zoopla / OnTheMarket / OpenRent direct)RevenueYes£50 to £150 per listing per cycle
Printed-card / shopfront / flyer advertisingRevenueYesModest sums; bundle with agent fees where applicable
Professional photography + floorplanRevenueYes£150 to £400 per property; one-off per major refurbishment cycle
EPC re-commissioning at marketing stageRevenueYes£60 to £120; required where existing EPC has expired
Tenant referencing + Right to Rent checkRevenueYes (landlord cost; cannot be passed to tenant under TFA 2019)£25 to £50 per applicant
Re-listing costs after a failed first listingRevenueYesEach iteration deductible
Section 57 financial penalty (£7,000 max)n/aNo (regulatory penalty, BIM38500)Underlying compliance-cost deduction is unaffected
Legal fees defending a section 57 notice (representations + FTT appeal)RevenueYes (revenue-shape: operational lettings dispute)Same framework as civil penalty defence costs
Management agreement update with agent (one-off)RevenueYes£200 to £500 typical; covers the section 57 indemnity and joint-liability allocation

The deduction is taken in the year of payment under the cash basis (default for landlords with gross rental income under £150,000) or matched to the period the expense relates to under accruals. The structural read across the marketing-stage cost stack: total per-property cost across the listing-to-let cycle is typically £400 to £800 for a self-managing landlord using portal-direct listing, or 8% to 12% of first year's rent for a managed-let through an agent. Both are fully deductible against rental income; at higher-rate income tax (40%) the net cost is 60% of the gross figure.

One Coordinated Programme

The pattern across the RRA 2025 reform is the same one set out in our other Wave 3 pages on the Act: the substantive duties stack into a single coordinated compliance programme (Decent Homes Standard + PRS Database + Ombudsman + tenancy-template refresh + marketing-stage compliance), and landlords who treat them as separate obligations facing separate deadlines tend to do more work for less compliance certainty than landlords who treat them as a single connected programme.

The marketing-stage compliance work covered in this page is the most front-loaded part of the programme: every listing live on 1 May 2026 or after is subject to section 56 and section 57 immediately. The PRS Database (Chapter 3 of Part 2) and the substantive Decent Homes Regulations (Part 3) have not yet commenced as of 23 May 2026, but the marketing-stage rules have. Landlords whose listings have not been audited against section 56 are running the £7,000-per-breach exposure each day each non-compliant listing remains live. The audit is operational, the fix is straightforward, and the deductible cost of remediation (legal fees on the management-agreement update, agent re-briefing time, portal-listing edits) is modest. Doing the work in May or June 2026 is materially cheaper than dealing with a first-listing-cycle enforcement notice.