This is a question to the blog clinic fast track from Robert, who is a landlord in England.
As landlords (2 ‘in common’ landlords, 4 Properties) we are doing due diligence on compiling a full set of compliant documents, taking them through into RRA 1 May.
One example – A fixed-term tenancy completes on 31 March 2026. We assume it rolls over into Periodic 1 April to 30 April, then RRA Periodic 1 May.
Coming from history (agents), only one of us (the lead landlord) is named as Landlord on the Tenancy agreement.
We believe it is/will be mandatory in the RRA for both to be listed. We need to add a landlord to the agreement.
We are searching for the correct compliance – agents and NRLA are giving different answers.
We have landed on – Addendum then Section 3 and 48 then resend upgraded Deposit Certificates.
If so, when, during the sequence above ?
Answer
You are quite right in saying that your fixed-term tenancy, which ends on 31 March, will convert to a statutory periodic AST (under the current housing regime) on 1 April 2026. It will then convert to an assured periodic tenancy under the Renters Rights Act 2025 on 1 May 2026. This is when stage one of the reforms will come into effect.
However, as regards the named landlord, I think you are worrying unnecessarily.
Where a property is jointly owned, it is legally permissible for one co-owner to be named as the landlord in the tenancy agreement. The named co-owner will be granting the tenancy on behalf of both owners. The tenancy will bind them jointly.
The tenant is entitled to rely on the contractual document. They cannot challenge the tenancy simply because they discover (perhaps by doing a Land Registry search) that the property is actually owned by two people rather than one.
The Renters Rights Act
I cannot find any provision in the act or in the draft written statement regulations which changes the law in this respect and requires all joint owners to be named as the landlord.
The legislation requires that the tenant be provided with the landlord’s name and an address for service (in accordance with section 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987). It does not, so far as I can see, require disclosure of the full legal or beneficial ownership of the property.
If one individual is the contracting landlord, that satisfies the statutory requirement.
Section 48 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987
Section 48 is all about the landlord providing an address in England or Wales for service of notices. It does not require the identification of all joint owners.
Section 3 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985
Section 3 applies only where there has been an assignment of the landlord’s interest. If both of you have always owned the property and there has been no transfer of the reversion, section 3 is not engaged.
Accordingly, there is no obligation to serve a section 3 notice in this situation.
Deposit protection
If the deposit was properly protected and the prescribed information was correctly served in the name of the contracting landlord, in my view, there is unlikely to be any defect solely because the other co-owner was not named in the tenancy agreement.
Re-issuing prescribed information unnecessarily can create potential technical arguments. So is probably best avoided unless absolutely necessary.
An addendum
I don’t think this is necessary. The named landlord is the owner of the property (albeit jointly) and is legally entitled to grant the tenancy in his own name on behalf of both owners.
And finally
As I say above, I think you are worrying unnecessarily about this.
The law does not require disclosure of the full ownership structure. Provided the tenancy has been properly granted, the tenant cannot challenge it simply because there are additional co-owners behind the scenes. The statutory framework does not provide that tenants are entitled to examine or approve the internal ownership arrangements of their landlord.
I would leave things as they are.
However, note that you will in due course need to serve the new statutory written statement required under the Renters Rights Act on your tenants.
This has not yet been published by the government (so does not need serving at the time of writing), but is expected to inform tenants of the legal changes under the Act and their legal rights as tenants.
It is also probably too early to be compiling fully “compliant” documentation. The final version of the government’s tenancy agreement and written statement regulations has not yet been published, and further regulations are expected in March. These may affect what landlords are required to provide.
My Landlord Law service will be providing compliant documentation for members in due course, once all the government regulation has been published.
Thank you Tessa, very responsive and well presented.
I would appreciate Deposit protection clarification from your response
My wife and I have been (joint, then common) landlords 25 years. We have provided full and timely Deposit certificates with prescribed information.
We organised that my wife would manage the certificates.
I am the named landlord for one property tenancy, but the certificate is provided in my wife’s name. Do we need to ask The Tenancy Deposit Scheme to add my name. We would then reissue the updated certificate.
Thanks. Robert
If the tenancy is in your name then the deposit certificates should really be in your name too. If you start having different names for different documents, it creates confusion and could cause problems if you ever need to evict.
If you are going to keep the tenancy in your sole name, I would suggest that all the deposit documentation should be in your sole name too. However there is no actual law that says that the deposit certificates must be in the name of the landlord and it is arguable that another person, for example the agent, could deal with this on the landlords behalf.
If the deposit was NOT protected could the tenant sue both joint owners, including the one not named on the contract?
Is it lawful for the unnamed owner to act as an assistant to the named landlord and basically make a nuisance of themselves by behaving as if they are a co-landlord? It’s not uncommon for tenants to have this kind of difficulty with interfering family members of landlords.
On your first point, I suspect the tenant could sue both, but am not 100% certain.
On your second point, the unnamed co owner has no contractual relationship with the tenant so my view is that they are not entitled to be involved unless they are acting as agent for the named landlord.
Thanks Tessa for the responses and also updating these along the way.
Looking forward to your March Webinar on documentation especially with digitisation, online courts, MTD and landlord database on their way. We concur having this simple and clear is worth the effort.
In our case and your advice we have talked about better aligning landlord data on both the tenancy agreement and deposit certificate, involving name change or addition. There are 4 properties we need to work on.
We have progressed as follows. We consider two routes.
1. Update the Deposit Certificate through (for example) DPS, adding a landlord.. Outcome – the certificate has both landlords listed. Tenancy agreements can have one or both landlords. Then reissue the certificate
2. Update the tenancy agreement, adding a named landlord. Outcome – all landlords are on certificates (from #]1) and tenancy agreements.
#2 has been a journey ! Adding a landlord.
Agents don’t know, or waiting ‘until RRA directs’
One agent issued a Section 48 only
NRLA 3 different responders – 3 different answers. (letter to the tenants, a Section 3 and 48, a new tenancy agreement – not keen). This landed on Addendum, then Section 3 and 48.
On review what do consider ? Thanks. Robert
It’s up to you. But if the tenancy is validly granted and the deposit properly protected, you should be cautious about creating new paperwork unless there is a clear legal necessity.
Thanks Tessa and John. Much appreciate the responses.
I believe the Tenancy agreement is validly granted and the Deposit certificate is properly protected with DPS (and served correctly), it’s the connectivity, as we husband and wife have been allocating the work between each other.
One agent has experience in changing both, and I will revert after discussion with their approach.
They use Addendums (NRLA also include Sections 3 and 48), to make tenancy agreement changes (named landlord).
Also as we have learned already, DPS will change Patricia’s surname from married to maiden name, and add mine. Seems the processes are there. We are then lined up with Land Reg ownership.
We note your caution, and include this in the consideration, about clear legal necessity. Thank you. Really good.
Getting there.
Robert