Skip to main content

News story

May 9, 2022

Ensure equality in residential tenancies

For residential landlords, identity checks on prospective tenants can be challenging and the penalties harsh for getting it wrong; but trying to avoid tenants with complex immigration status is not an option, as this opens the way to claims of unlawful discrimination.

The obligation to conduct so-called ‘right to rent’ checks were first imposed on landlords, or their agents, under the Immigration Act 2014, and later updated in the Immigration Act 2016. The aim was to prevent individuals without lawful immigration status from accessing the private rented sector. The checks apply to all prospective tenants over the age of 18 for a new residential let, whether via a private landlord, lettings agent or an owner-occupier renting to lodgers.

Since the initial checks were set out, the requirements have regularly been updated to reflect changes in the process and digitalisation of services. Most recently a new set of requirements came into force on 6 April 2022, outlining both online and manual right to work checks, depending on the status of the tenant. This includes changes to the way in which the Biometric Residence Card (BRC), Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) and Frontier Worker Permit (FWP) can be used to evidence a holder’s right to rent.

Previously landlords could accept a physical BRP, BRC or FWP as valid proof if it showed an expiry date within the term of the tenancy, but now this must be checked using the Home Office online service. Home Office online checks are also required for individuals who have only digital proof of their immigration status in the UK.

The checks can be extremely complex for some non-UK citizens and a recent House of Commons review of the regulation of private rented housing found 25% of landlords were unwilling to rent to non-British passport holders. But any landlord thinking to avoid their obligations, by deterring prospective foreign tenants or favouring those who are apparently British, could find themselves subject to action under anti-discriminatory measures and the Equality Act 2010.

Landlords who discriminate on the basis of a protected characteristic, such as race or racial grounds, including ‘colour, nationality, and ethnic or national origins’ could find themselves facing a claim for an uncapped level of damages if a prospective tenant with the right to live in the UK is rejected on these grounds. Or if a landlord publishes a discriminatory advertisement or instructs their agent to discriminate, the Equality and Human Rights Commission can bring proceedings.

When faced with all the small print and knowing there are fines or even imprisonment, for incorrectly carrying out right to rent checks, a landlord may think it simpler to look for a tenant who is more easily checked out, but that path is equally risky.

To avoid discrimination, every prospective tenant should be treated exactly the same way, so no one is discouraged or excluded, either directly or indirectly, because of a known or perceived protected characteristic. The right to rent checks should also be undertaken consistently, whether or not a landlord believes someone is a British citizen.

Getting guidance and regular updates on how to manage the checks is ideal, as things can change all the time. As well as the new requirements from 6 April, we recently saw the government release special rules regarding the right to rent checks for Ukrainian nationals escaping the conflict.

It’s also a good idea to adopt the Government checklist and follow the code that is set out, as that will demonstrate best practice and provide a statutory excuse against liability if you are found to have rented to anyone disqualified by reason of immigration status.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Double jeopardy of digital asset inheritance planning amid probate delays
    Hidden digital assets and mounting interest on inheritance tax bills are creating a costly double risk for families dealing with estates following the death of a loved one, as probate delays continue to impact thousands across England and Wales, addi


    Read more
  • Deal or no deal? Keeping negotiations on track
    How to keep commercial deals on track with Heads of Terms, NDAs and exclusivity, improving efficiency, reducing risk and avoiding delays.


    Read more
  • Rights and wrongs: How AI is reshaping Employment Tribunal claims
    AI may be a familiar presence in the workplace, but it’s now starting to appear somewhere less expected: the Employment Tribunal (ET). Grayson Stuckey explores this trend – and what it means for employers.


    Read more
  • Renters’ Rights Act: why process and paperwork matter more than ever for landlords
    The Renters’ Rights Act has now passed into law, marking one of the most significant shifts in the private rented sector in a generation. Most of the new measures will take effect in May 2026, with a national landlord database to follow later in th


    Read more
  • Understanding the Roles of Executors and Trustees
    When making a will, you place significant trust in those appointed to carry out your wishes. Executors and trustees are key roles, often held by the same people, but their responsibilities differ. Understanding these roles and their obligations helps


    Read more

What they say...

  • W Sandover, April 2026
    Boundary Wall dispute “Although (for complex, not relevant) reasons, this matter never reached the point of either negotiations or a court case, Barker Gillette staff provided us with excellent support. I would certainly go back to them in the

  • Client, April 2026
    Excellent suppy “Karen Cole supported me through a difficult time with warmth and professionalism. She made the entire process as smooth as possible, responding quickly to communication and giving clear advice. I would highly recommend Karen to

  • Client, April 2026
    So helpful! “Pippa Marshall listened and offered supportive, practical advice. She was very friendly, easy to talk to and did not pressure me to make any costly decisions during my free 30-minute consultation. I would definitely recommend Pippa

  • Nika Franke-Matthecka, April 2026
    “We had an excellent experience working with Michael Davies and his team on the sale of our property. They were efficient, knowledgeable, and highly diligent throughout the entire process. Communication was always prompt and clear, which made w

  • Paul Woodman, March 2026
    Will writing “Excellent service from start to finish. Efficient and good value. Charlotte was very professional, knowledgeable and understanding.”

Read more
Send this to a friend