Article 5: Compliance Barriers to Possession – Deposits, the PRS Database, and Regulatory Control
Introduction
One of the most significant innovations of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 is the introduction of statutory compliance barriers that must be satisfied before a court can grant possession. These requirements represent a shift from procedural formality to regulatory accountability.
Under the new regime, it is no longer sufficient to establish a ground for possession. Landlords must also demonstrate that they have complied with specific statutory obligations, including deposit protection and registration on the Private Rented Sector (PRS) database.
Deposit Protection as a Precondition
The requirement to protect tenancy deposits under the Housing Act 2004 is not new. However, the RRA 2025 elevates its importance by linking compliance directly to the ability to obtain possession.
A court may not grant a possession order unless:
- The deposit has been protected in an authorised scheme, and
- The scheme’s requirements have been complied with.
Notably, the Act allows for late compliance, meaning that landlords can remedy failures before the hearing. However, this does not reduce the importance of compliance; it simply provides a limited opportunity to correct errors.
The PRS Database Requirement
Section 90 of the RRA 2025 introduces a new and potentially far-reaching requirement: landlords must ensure that both:
- Their landlord profile, and
- The relevant property,
are registered on the PRS database.
Failure to meet this requirement prevents the court from making a possession order. This applies regardless of the strength of the underlying ground.
This provision marks a fundamental shift. Compliance is no longer a regulatory expectation—it is a legal condition precedent to enforcement rights.
Exceptions for Anti-Social Behaviour
The Act recognises the need for flexibility in urgent cases. Accordingly, the compliance requirements do not apply where possession is sought under:
- Ground 7A (serious anti-social behaviour), or
- Ground 14 (anti-social behaviour).
This ensures that landlords can act swiftly in cases where tenant behaviour poses a risk to others.
Case Law Context
The courts have historically grappled with the relationship between compliance and possession. In Trecarrell, the Court of Appeal demonstrated a willingness to allow landlords to remedy defects.
However, the RRA 2025 signals a shift towards stricter enforcement. By embedding compliance requirements directly into the statutory framework, Parliament has reduced the scope for judicial discretion.
Practical Implications
For landlords, the introduction of compliance barriers necessitates:
- systematic record-keeping,
- regular compliance audits, and
- robust internal processes.
For tenants, these requirements provide an additional layer of protection, ensuring that landlords adhere to regulatory standards before seeking possession.
Conclusion
The integration of compliance requirements into the possession process reflects a broader trend towards regulatory accountability. Landlords must now treat compliance as an essential component of their legal strategy, rather than a peripheral obligation.