Guides and reviews for people who run small UK firmsNewsletterHow we reviewAbout us
Advertisement

Home › Letting agents › Compliance and safety

Compliance and safety

Can we turn down an applicant on benefits or with children? The same-income test, worked through for letting agents

Since 1 May 2026 agents cannot refuse applicants for benefits or children, but can test affordability. One income test for all, worked through.

A family with young children sitting on a living room floor

Since 1 May 2026 it has been unlawful in England for a landlord, or anyone acting for them, to treat an applicant worse because they have children or receive benefits. Many agents have taken that to mean they can no longer decline anyone on a low income. That is not what the guidance says. The agent still has the final say on who gets the home, but the reason has to be affordability, applied evenly.

What the guidance covers

GOV.UK defines rental discrimination as conduct that makes a person "less likely to rent a property (or prevent them from renting it) because they have children or get benefits." It applies to landlords and to "anyone acting on your behalf, like letting agents, referencing services, friends or family members", for assured tenancies other than social or supported housing.

The specific things it lists are:

  • not giving information about the property, such as availability or the number of bedrooms;
  • refusing a viewing, or making one difficult;
  • refusing to rent, or offering worse terms to put someone off.

It applies even when the assumption is wrong, for example when you wrongly think an applicant has children.

What you can still do

The guidance says landlords may consider income to judge affordability, but must "set the same income requirement for all prospective tenants and treat all forms of income equally". That includes state benefits and pensions. Local authorities are told to check that the landlord "has accounted for all forms of income, including state benefits and pension, and treated them of equal value."

Guarantors are allowed if you ask for them from everyone, but not only from applicants who receive benefits. Referencing is not banned either, but a referencing process that ignores benefit income is a discriminatory practice.

The same-income test, worked through

Our example rule is deliberately simple. Rent is £950 a month and the agency asks for annual income of at least 30 times the monthly rent. That is a business choice, not a legal figure.

Applicant Income source Annual income Meets £28,500?
A Wages £28,800 Yes, by £300
B Universal Credit and child benefit £28,800 Yes, by £300
C Pension £28,800 Yes, by £300

If the same rule were run on wages only, B and C would fail with the same money coming in: 2 of 3 rejected. The first treatment passes the guidance; the second is the pattern it describes. Keep one written line in the file for each applicant: the rent, the threshold, the income counted and the result.

Children and the occupancy exception

A landlord may restrict children living in a property only where this is a "proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim". GOV.UK gives retirement housing, student housing and genuine safety concerns as examples and says "a financial aim alone, such as to lower business costs, is not legitimate." The guidance says there is no equivalent exception for benefits. We could not confirm from the pages we read how an agent should record a safety-based refusal; take advice before relying on this.

Adverts and viewings

"No DSS" and "no children" lines have to go. Our guide to 12 phrases to find and fix on your website lists the usual ones, and the rental bidding ban guide covers what an advert must say about the rent. At first contact, give every enquirer the same information and offer the same viewing slots. Where a landlord's insurer excludes tenants on benefits, GOV.UK says such a term "only has effect until the insurance ends or is renewed."

The penalty

GOV.UK says a landlord "can be fined up to £7,000 for each offence". The council guidance adds that a breach continuing more than 28 days after notice adds another £7,000, and that a repeat within five years is penalised again. One unresolved advert left up past that notice could therefore reach £14,000. One earlier government guide mentions higher sums for repeat breaches (up to £40,000), but the 6 May 2026 page does not, and we could not confirm which applies. Anyone acting for the landlord may be found liable, so check who carries it in your management agreement. Our tenancy checklist shows where in the applicant stage to put the income check.

Where Overlyft fits

Overlyft can set up an AI assistant that scans your adverts, portal templates and enquiry replies for wording that screens out benefits or children, and drafts the one-line affordability record for each applicant from the figures you enter. A person decides every applicant; the assistant only flags and drafts.

This is general information for England, not legal advice.

Where this comes from: GOV.UK, Rental discrimination under the Renters' Rights Act 2025 (updated 6 May 2026); GOV.UK, Rental discrimination: a guide for landlords; GOV.UK, Guide to the Renters' Rights Act; all read 2026-10-06. The 30 times rent rule is our example, not a legal figure.

AL

AEO Lookup editorial team

We write practical guides for people who run small UK firms, and we check every fact against its source on the date shown. Read how we review, or tell us if something has changed.

More for letting agents