If you've ever been told a property isn't available to benefit claimants, or been turned away from a viewing because you have children, you already know how discrimination works in the private rental market.
"No DSS" listings were banned by courts under the Equality Act in 2020, but the practice continued in subtler forms: "working professionals only", income thresholds that excluded benefit income, and referencing criteria designed to screen out families.
From May 1st, 2026, the Renters' Rights Act makes this a statutory offence with serious financial penalties.
Rental discrimination is when a landlord or letting agent treats you differently because of who you are or your personal circumstances. In the context of the Renters' Rights Act, it specifically means treating a tenant or prospective tenant unfavourably because they have children or because they receive benefits.
Sometimes it’s obvious, sometimes it isn’t. A landlord who tells you outright that they don't let to families is discriminating. But so is a landlord who suddenly stops responding to your messages after you mention your child, or a letting agent whose referencing criteria are designed to quietly filter out anyone on housing benefit.
What matters under the Act is the effect, not the intention. If the outcome is that you were treated less favourably because of your children or your benefits status, that's discrimination, whether the landlord meant it that way or not.
Sections 33 and 34 of the Renters' Rights Act make it unlawful for a landlord, or anyone acting on their behalf (letting agents, referencing services, property managers), to discriminate against a person because they have children or because they receive benefits.
The definition is deliberately broad and covers anything that makes a person less likely to rent a property, or prevents them from renting it, because of their children or benefits status. That includes withholding information about a property or its availability, preventing someone from viewing it, refusing to grant a tenancy, and applying different terms or conditions.
Decisions based on something the landlord believes to be true count as discrimination even if the belief is wrong. If a landlord refuses a tenancy because they think a prospective tenant receives benefits, for example, that's discrimination, whether or not the person actually does.
The Renters’ Rights Act contains several provisions that cover the full lifecycle of the tenancy, from advertising all the way through to during the tenancy.
There are some affordability exceptions to the discrimination rules. Landlords are still allowed to set income requirements, and they can refuse a tenancy if a prospective tenant’s income, from all sources, doesn't meet a reasonable affordability threshold. That's not discrimination.
What they can't do is treat benefit income differently from earned income. If the affordability requirement is that rent should be no more than 35% of gross income, benefit income counts toward that figure on the same basis as a salary. A landlord who sets the bar at £30,000 earned income and refuses a tenant whose £30,000 includes £12,000 of Universal Credit is unlawful discrimination under the new rules.
If a prospective tenant can demonstrate they meet the stated affordability requirement and are still refused, the local authority should investigate whether the refusal was motivated by benefits status.
There’s also one narrow exception for children. A landlord can restrict children from living in a property if they can demonstrate that the restriction is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The aim must be genuine and must not itself be aimed at discriminating against families.
The most common examples are retirement housing and purpose-built student accommodation. Even where the exception applies, the restriction must be the minimum necessary to achieve the aim.
A general preference for tenants without children is not a legitimate aim, nor is a belief that children cause more wear and tear or could cause damage to the property. A concern about noise in a shared building is also not a legitimate aim on its own.
Discriminatory terms don't just become unenforceable for new tenancies. The Act reaches back into existing agreements, leases, and financial products.
Local authorities in England are responsible for the enforcement of the Act’s anti-discrimination provisions. If a local authority decides, on the balance of probabilities, that a landlord or agent has breached them, it can impose a civil penalty.
Government guidance sets the starting point for a first offence at £6,000. The penalty can be higher for serious or repeated breaches, and where multiple people are responsible for the same conduct (for example, a landlord and their letting agent), they can be fined jointly and are jointly and severally liable.
As with many aspects of the Act, enforcement will vary between councils. Alarmingly, evidence presented to the London Assembly Housing Committee in January by Generation Rent found that in the three years to 2024, over a third of London councils didn’t prosecute a single criminal landlord, and 14 of 32 London boroughs were not listed on the GLA's Rogue Landlord Checker. The government announced £18 million in "new burdens funding" to help councils prepare, but local authorities have already stated it doesn't go far enough.
The advice for tenants is therefore the same as with the rent bidding ban: keep evidence. If a landlord or agent refuses you a viewing, changes terms, or withdraws an offer after learning about your children or benefits status, save the messages, screenshot the listing, and report it to your local council's private rented sector enforcement team.
The Renters' Rights Act discrimination provisions only cover two specific characteristics: having children and receiving benefits. These are not protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, which is why separate legislation was needed.
The Equality Act 2010 continues to apply to the rental market in parallel. It protects tenants and prospective tenants from discrimination based on race, sex, disability, religion or belief, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, marriage and civil partnership, and age. A landlord who refuses to let to someone because of their ethnicity, for example, is breaking the Equality Act regardless of what the Renters' Rights Act says.
Under the Equality Act, a tenant brings a claim through the county court or, in some cases, through a tribunal. Under the Renters' Rights Act, enforcement sits with local authorities, who can impose civil penalties directly. A single act of discrimination could breach both: a landlord who refuses a tenancy to a single mother receiving Universal Credit because she has a child is breaching the Renters' Rights Act (children), and if the refusal is also connected to her sex or pregnancy status, the Equality Act may apply too.
In addition, disability discrimination under the Equality Act includes a duty to make reasonable adjustments. If you're disabled and your landlord refuses to allow modifications to the property, or refuses an assistance animal, that's an Equality Act issue, not a Renters' Rights Act one. The two Acts don't overlap on disability; the Equality Act provides the stronger protections in this scenario.
If you've been turned away from a property because you have children or receive benefits, report it to your local council's private rented sector enforcement team. Shelter's helpline is available on 0808 800 4444. Citizens Advice can help online or through your local bureau. The Equality Advisory Support Service (EASS) helpline on 0808 800 0082 can advise on Equality Act claims.
The Act specifically covers discrimination against tenants because they have children or because they receive benefits. This is separate from the Equality Act 2010, which covers discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, pregnancy, age, and marriage or civil partnership.
No. From May 1st, 2026, refusing a tenancy because a prospective tenant receives benefits is unlawful. Landlords can set affordability requirements, but they must treat benefit income on the same basis as earned income. A referencing process that automatically fails applicants receiving Universal Credit or housing benefit is discriminatory.
No, with a narrow exception for accommodation where restricting children is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, such as retirement housing. A general preference for tenants without children is not a legitimate aim.
Local authorities can impose a civil penalty starting at £6,000 for a first breach. Penalties can be higher for serious or repeated breaches. Both the landlord and their letting agent can be fined for the same conduct.
Keep evidence. Save messages, screenshot listings, and note any conversations. Report it to your local council's private rented sector enforcement team. Shelter (0808 800 4444) and Citizens Advice can help you understand your options. If the discrimination falls under the Equality Act as well, the Equality Advisory Support Service (EASS) helpline on 0808 800 0082 can advise.
.png){kind=small}