Renters Rights Act hits Planning Guidance and other news

A short week means a short blog post!

Whilst we are waiting for the English Devolution & Community Empowerment Act 2026 to be published, I thought I would highlight some updates to National Planning Guidance that have been published this week.

The throughline for all of them: The Renters Rights Act!

Enforcement and Post Permission Matters

On 6 May 2026, MHCLG updated the NPPG on Enforcement and Post Permission Matters, to include the following paragraph:

Build to Rent National Planning Policy Guidance

Earlier today, the NPPG on Build to Rent schemes also got a Renters Rights Act inspired overall – with paragraphs 002, 006, 009, and 010 all getting an update.

Paragraph 002 has been amended to highlight that rent increases for affordable private rent units within a Build to Rent Scheme will need to follow the same rent increases procedure under the Renters Rights Act as market rent units within the development.

Paragraph 006 has been amended to add the following (very important) text:

“The Renters’ Rights Act 2025 changes the types of tenancy agreements that can be used, and how and when landlords can seek possession of their property. You can find out more about the changes at Changes to private renting.

The Act makes provision to ensure that where section 106 obligations agreed before 1 May 2026 restrict the letting of residential premises to an abolished tenancy type, developers/landowners will not be found in breach of their obligations if they let on an assured periodic tenancy.

Build to rent operators will not be able to evict tenants because they no longer satisfy the income threshold for affordable rent. In cases where the scheme operator becomes aware that the tenant breaches the income threshold, the operator should be able to deallocate that property as an affordable rent property, increase the rent to full market rate using the section 13 process, and allocate another equivalent property, depending on the specifics of their existing section 106 agreement or planning conditions, to fulfil their quota. An example of how a property may be considered equivalent is if it has the same number of bedrooms, but it will be for the local authority to decide what is acceptable.

There may be a delay between the deallocation of one property and the allocation of another as the operator waits for an equivalent property to become vacant. The operator may fall below the affordable housing level agreed in their section 106 during this period. In these circumstances, the operator should notify and work with the local authority to agree a reasonable period and approach to allocate an alternative unit recognising the specific circumstances that may make reallocation challenging. The local authority will monitor the operator’s overall levels of affordable housing through annual returns to ensure the scheme operator is making every effort to comply with their section 106.

It should be noted that where planning conditions related to affordable housing exist, landlords can seek possession of their property using Ground 6B when necessary to comply with a local authority planning enforcement notice or injunction.

Planning authorities may want to review eligibility criteria and unit specifications included within existing section 106 agreements to ensure that scheme operators are able to legally comply with their obligations following the implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act. Changes will not need to be made in relation to permitted tenancy types as the Act has made provision for this.

If a property is no longer designated as affordable private rent, the planning authority should also consider whether any existing section 106 obligation needs to be modified.”

The bits in bold are my emphasis.

Paragraph 009 has also been updated to highlight the fact that Build to Rent Landlords may not be able to evict tenants that no longer meet income thresholds for affordable private rent units and advises that s.106 Agreements should plan for, and anticipate, this scenario.

Paragraph 010 has been completely replaced, and now reads as follows:

I also promised some other news in the headline for this edition.

Well, yesterday the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in Roxlena Ltd v The Ramblers’ Association & Ors [2026] EWCA Civ 534 .

Roxlena is a public rights of way case, in which the Court of Appeal was asked a fascinating question: What does the requirement in s.31(1) of the Highways Act 1981 that deemed dedication requires use by the public “as of right and without interruption for a full period of 20 years” actually mean?

To be really specific about it, what constitutes an “interruption” to otherwise qualifying periods of use.

Now, I promised to keep this short, so I am not going to get into the facts. Instead I am going to leave you with the answer to that question, courtesy of Lord Justice Lewison, who states in paragraph 60: