A deputy will frequently be engaged to find a tenancy for their client in the private rented sector and often this will involve paying rent in advance to secure the tenancy. This is because the tenant does not have a regular income from employment, is often reliant on benefits or cannot pass the required credit checks.

On the 1 May 2026, the Renters’ Right Act 2025 (‘the Act’) comes into force and there will be new restrictions on landlords and agents taking rent in advance which will prevent deputies and landlords from agreeing large up-front payments to secure a tenancy.

What are the changes to rent paid in advance?

From the 1 May 2026, all existing assured shorthold tenancies will automatically convert to assured periodic tenancies meaning that these tenancies will no longer have fixed terms. Tenancies will continue as periodic “rolling” contracts until they are ended either by the tenant serving a notice to quit, the landlord proving a ground to recover possession or the parties mutually agreeing to end the tenancy. Amongst other changes, restrictions on landlords requesting rent in advance will apply to assured periodic tenancies.

The Act restricts landlords and agents requiring rent in advance at different stages of agreeing a tenancy. These stages can be broken down as follows:

1. Before the tenancy is entered into (signed by the parties) a landlord or agent cannot take any rent from the tenant. If they do, they risk enforcement action by the local authority. Deputies can therefore no longer pay or even offer large upfront payments before a tenancy is signed to secure the tenancy.
2. Between signing the tenancy and the tenancy starting. During this period the landlord cannot take more than 1 month’s “initial rent”.
3. Once the tenancy has started the landlord or agent cannot require the tenant to pay rent before the period for which it is due. For example, if rent is due on the 15th of the month the landlord cannot ask the tenant to pay before the 15th. The landlord cannot require the tenant to pay many months’ rent upfront.

The rent in advance changes only apply to assured periodic tenancies entered into on or after 1 May 2026.

What do the changes mean for deputies entering into tenancies on behalf of protected clients?

Tenancies entered into before 1st May 2026

• A deputy can enter into an assured shorthold tenancy agreement any time before 1 May 2026 and still offer to pay rent upfront both before the tenancy is signed and as a term of the tenancy agreement.

• An assured shorthold tenancy entered into before the 1 May 2026 will automatically convert to an assured periodic tenancy from the 1 May 2026. If the converted tenancy contains rent in advance provisions, then rent in advance can continue to be taken. The terms remain valid and enforceable by the landlord for the duration of the agreement even though the tenancy will have converted to an assured periodic tenancy on 1 May 2026. For example, where a tenancy entered into before 1 May 2026 requires the tenant to pay 6 months’ rent in advance, this will continue to be an enforceable obligation for the duration of the tenancy.

Tenancies entered into on or after 1st May 2026

• The landlord or agent cannot accept rent or an offer of rent before the tenancy is signed even if the tenant wants to pay this and pays voluntarily. The landlord or agent would have to return the payment or risk the local authority issuing a civil penalty.

• Once the tenancy agreement has been entered into and before it starts, a landlord or letting agent may take rent in advance but the amount they can take is limited to one month if the tenant is paying rent monthly, or 28 days if the rent period is less than one month, for example, weekly.
  
• Once the tenancy has started, a tenant may still choose to pay or offer to pay rent in advance in a lump sum, but the landlord or letting agent cannot require the tenant to make this payment and/or make this a condition or term in the tenancy as it will be unenforceable. Payment will be voluntary and deputies will need to consider the risk of making large upfront payments.

The changes to the tenancy structure and the ban on accepting large upfront payments is likely to result in landlords and agents being more risk averse when selecting tenants. They are likely to screen tenants more thoroughly by checking their credit history, financial record and/or insisting on guarantors. Deputies should be prepared to evidence the requested information.

The arrangement where a deputy is involved can already raise suspicion for landlords and some agents, as they are often not familiar with the concept of a deputy. Any delays or complexities that arise in providing information could cause the landlord to lose trust in the financial security of the tenant and to look elsewhere. Where tenants are unable to provide the requested financial information, landlords can simply choose to let to other tenants that are able to provide this information.

It is also important to note, that the reforms also ban rental bidding and prevent a landlord from accepting a rent higher than the advertised market sum. This means that a deputy cannot simply seek to secure a tenancy, by offering a higher rental sum at the outset.

Other changes in the Act aimed at preventing discrimination in the rental market do provide some helpful protection for clients of a deputy, which is that a prospective tenant cannot be refused on the basis that they are reliant on benefits income. Whilst this appears to be a welcome development in theory, it is unclear how this will be monitored in practice and there is no prohibition on a landlord taking a person’s income into account when considering whether a prospective tenant would be able to afford the tenancy.

Practical Tips

To overcome the above issues deputies may want to consider the following:

1. Can a guarantor be provided and, if so, by whom? The requirements for a guarantor are likely to differ depending on the referencing agencies used by agents and their individual policies. Some referencing companies and agencies will not accept a corporate guarantor such as a law firm, nor will they accept deputies who are acting in their professional capacity. Understandably, professional deputies are very unlikely to want to act as a guarantor in their personal capacity and they may not be insured to do so. A deputy could explore the possibility of a family member acting as a guarantor, but it may not be liability they are willing, or able, to take on.
2. The deputy may want to explore engaging a professional guarantor service. However, applications may meet the same referencing barriers as applying for a tenancy and, even if accepted, the service itself can be expensive. Each organisation’s terms and conditions should be checked in detail and at present, it is not known if any professional guarantor service is in a position to support a deputy.
3. A deputy should ensure enough funds are in place to meet the referencing requirements. In some cases, we have seen that a deputy has been asked to show they hold at least 3 years’ worth of rent. Where someone has suffered an accident, and the claim is ongoing, it will be essential for deputies to have sufficient interim funds to meet these requirements. Putting the litigator on notice of this need, as early on as possible will be crucial. In our experience, it has also been persuasive to set out on headed paper from the firm handling the litigation the position with the claim, the potential value, and the timescales for when the claim is likely to settle and/or when further funds are likely to be received.
4. A side letter of comfort: a further potential option that deputies may want to consider is offering a side letter to the landlord confirming an intention to pay rent in advance voluntarily during the tenancy. This may provide some comfort to landlords but would not be legally enforceable and any such term in the tenancy agreement itself would be void and contrary to the Act’s provisions. As above, the deputy would need to have some security for the rent paid up front, in case the tenancy needs to end earlier than expected. In practice, agents may be nervous about holding large upfront payments of rent in advance, given the changes introduced by the Act.
5. Providing references: deputies can seek references from previous landlords to demonstrate their previous rental payment history. It is also worth highlighting to agents and landlords that the fact a professional is involved in overseeing the tenancy and managing the payments should offer more security than an average tenant as they have a stable source of funds available and are not vulnerable to financial problems that often lead to arrears, for example, the loss of a job. It may be that over time where clients can show a history of paying rent upfront voluntarily, landlords will be less cautious about entering into tenancies with protected parties.

Conclusion

All of the above will make finding and securing a suitable tenancy for a deputy’s client more difficult, particularly while landlords and agents adjust to the new rules. Sadly,

it seems reforms designed to improve tenants’ rights will result in unintended consequences for vulnerable individuals making it harder for them to secure accommodation in the private rented sector. This is a developing area, and it may be that over time, these issues can be managed.

The above is a short guide on some of the issues we have encountered to date.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to reach out to Sarah Cummins and Nikki Basin at Anthony Gold Solicitors LLP on scm@anthonygold.co.uk and nba@anthonygold.co.uk