Unlawful Discrimination

Landlords and letting agents must avoid unlawful discrimination during the letting process. This page covers:

the long-standing rules under the Equality Act 2010, and
the specific rules under the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 that ban certain kinds of rental discrimination in the private rented sector.

Equality Act 2010: the wider anti-discrimination rules

If you let or manage accommodation as a landlord or letting agent, you are usually covered by the Equality Act when dealing with tenants and prospective tenants.

Which protected characteristics matter when renting out a home?

For renting out or managing residential accommodation, the key protected characteristics include:

disability
race
religion or belief
pregnancy or maternity
sex
gender reassignment
sexual orientation

Two quick clarifications:

Age and marriage/civil partnership are protected characteristics under the Equality Act generally, but they are not included for discrimination in renting out a home.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission notes that marriage and civil partnership protection is, broadly, a workplace protection rather than one that applies to goods and services.

Be careful with anything that looks like an “age criteria” policy (for example “older persons’ housing”). Other rules can apply, so do not assume age-based restrictions are automatically fine.

Direct discrimination

Direct discrimination is treating someone less favourably because of a relevant protected characteristic, for example, refusing to rent to someone because of their race or disability.

Indirect discrimination (policies and practices)

Indirect discrimination is where a rule or requirement that looks neutral puts people with a protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage, and you cannot justify it as a proportionate way of achieving a legitimate aim.

Disability: reasonable adjustments and “reasonableness”

Disability discrimination has additional elements. In particular, there may be a duty to make reasonable adjustments to ensure a disabled person is not placed at a substantial disadvantage. That can mean changes to practices and, in some situations, changes to terms. Small changes to the property may be required by the landlord, for example, changing bath taps to quarter-turn or door knobs to handles for a person with a disability.

Exceptions (limited)

Housing law has some limited exemptions, for example, where you share accommodation in your own home. If you think an exemption applies, do not guess. Check it carefully and keep a short written note of what you relied on.

What happens if you get it wrong

Equality Act problems in housing are usually enforced through civil claims (often in the County Court). Remedies can include damages (including injury to feelings) and injunctions.

Renters’ Rights Act 2025: ban on “rental discrimination” (children and benefits)

From 1 May 2026, the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 creates a specific set of rules for the private rented sector in England. It targets discrimination based on:

children (where a child under 18 would live with the applicant or visit), and
benefits status (where the applicant is, or may be, a benefits claimant).

These rules apply to landlords and letting agents, as well as to anyone acting on the landlord’s behalf (directly or indirectly). That can include advertisers, people arranging viewings, and referencing or screening providers.

Which lettings are covered?

These conduct rules apply where a dwelling is “to be let” on an agreement that could give rise to a relevant tenancy. Broadly, that means an assured tenancy.

Some rules on tenancy terms also apply to regulated tenancies under the Rent Act 1977 (rare in practice).

What the Act prohibits

The Act is not limited to outright refusals. It also covers behaviour that quietly shuts people out of the process.

Directly blocking access to renting (children and benefits)

You must not, because of children or benefits status, prevent someone from:

enquiring whether the property is available
accessing information about the property
viewing the property
entering into a tenancy

This includes explicit statements (for example, “we do not take…”) and actions such as withholding information, failing to reply, or making viewings unreasonably difficult to arrange.

Indirect discrimination via policies and “PCPs”

The Act also prohibits the use of a “provision, criterion or practice” (PCP) that makes the protected group less likely to enter into a tenancy. That can include:

blanket filtering rules for applicants
standard scripts used by staff
referencing criteria (or the way they are applied)
“house rules” that put off particular households

Discrimination based on belief (even if wrong)

It can still count as discrimination if you act on an assumption, even if the assumption is wrong.

Children: what’s allowed and what’s risky

You must not discriminate on the basis that a child would live with or visit the applicant. That includes blocking access (enquiries, information, viewings, tenancy) and using PCPs that make families with children less likely to rent.

The “legitimate aim/proportionality” defence (children only)

For children, the Act allows a potential justification if the restriction is a proportionate way of achieving a legitimate aim (for example, safety, safeguarding, overcrowding risk, or licensing conditions). Blanket bans are risky. Often, you need to look at the household situation and ask whether a less restrictive approach would address the issue.

If you rely on this, keep a short note covering:

the legitimate aim
why the restriction is necessary
why less restrictive options were not enough

Insurance-based exception (limited)

There is also a narrow exception where the restriction is necessary to avoid breaching a term of an existing insurance contract, in situations where the Act’s insurance invalidation rule does not apply. In practice, this is often time-limited because policies get renewed or replaced.

Benefits: what’s allowed and what isn’t

You must not discriminate because a person is, or may be, a benefits claimant. That includes blocking access (enquiries, information, viewings, tenancy) and using PCPs that make benefits claimants less likely to rent.

No general “legitimate aim” justification for benefits

Unlike the position for children, the Act does not provide a general “legitimate aim/proportionality” defence for excluding benefits claimants at the letting stage (apart from narrow insurance-related carve-outs).

Affordability is allowed, but do it properly

You can consider income when deciding whether someone can afford the rent. The problem is when “affordability” becomes “no benefits” in disguise. In practice, that means:

do not automatically ignore or discount benefit income compared with other lawful income
make sure your referencing provider can assess benefits income where it is relevant and evidenced
apply affordability criteria consistently
record refusals in affordability terms (for example, “insufficient verified income against published criteria”), not by pointing to benefits status

Discriminatory terms become unenforceable

The Act also renders certain terms unenforceable (of no effect) to the extent they impose prohibited restrictions. This can include, to the relevant extent:

tenancy terms restricting children living at or visiting the property (subject to the limited children justification and insurance exceptions)
tenancy terms prohibiting the tenant from being a benefits claimant (subject to limited insurance exceptions)
superior lease or consent wording requiring downstream “no children/no benefits”
mortgage terms requiring “no children/no benefits”
and, over time, insurance terms (as policies are entered into, renewed, or extended after the relevant provisions take effect)

Enforcement and penalties

Local housing authorities can impose civil penalties if they are satisfied (on the balance of probabilities) that someone has breached the rental discrimination prohibitions.

Maximum civil penalty: up to £7,000 per breach
There can be further exposure for continuing breaches (for example, leaving a discriminatory advert up) and repeated breaches

The Renters’ Rights Act 2025 sets a formal procedure for these financial penalties. In broad terms, the local authority must serve a notice of intent, allow 28 days for written representations, and then serve a final notice if it decides to impose the penalty. There is a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal.

Compliance checklist

Advertising and listings

remove “no children” and “no DSS/no benefits” wording
avoid proxy wording used as a deterrent (for example, “professionals only” if it is really being used to screen out benefit claimants)

Enquiries and information

give the same availability and property information to all enquirers
avoid “silent filtering” (not responding) where the real reason is children or benefits

Viewings

offer reasonable viewing options to everyone
keep simple records if helpful (times offered, responses received)

Referencing and affordability

confirm your referencing provider can assess benefits income
apply affordability criteria consistently
keep a short note of the reason for refusal where relevant

Tenancy terms and upstream documents

remove or avoid tenancy clauses that prohibit children living/visiting or prohibit benefits claimants
do not treat superior lease or mortgage wording as a safe basis to exclude these applicants
treat insurer-imposed exclusions as high-risk and likely time-limited; keep evidence if you think an exception applies

Further guidance

Last Reviewed: