RRA Enforcement
VOLA finds the new RRA statutory guidance of 13 November 2025 clear and comprehensive. We see no reason for local authorities to deviate from it, or to refer to any other guidance at the point in the enforcement process where it becomes relevant.
However, we regard the adoption by some local authorities of an unofficial model civil penalty policy distributed by ACEHO as inappropriate. We have particular concerns that it has significant potential to lead to improper enforcement practice – that is, practices inconsistent with the Sentencing Council's General Guidelines and the new statutory guidance.
RRA Enforcement
a VOLA position statement.
Context:
The Renters Rights Act 2025 grants new powers of enforcement to local authorities and increases the maximum civil penalties for a range of housing/tenancy related offences.
On 13 November 2025, the government published related statutory guidance for certain offences under: Protection from Eviction Act 1977; Housing Act 1988; Housing Act 2004; Housing and Planning Act 2016; Renters’ Rights Act 2025.
These changes imply published local authority enforcement policy documents require amendment.
The Association of Chief Environmental Health Officers, ACEHO in collaboration with Justice For Tenants has produced “Model Civil Penalty Policy” documents that are more detailed and prescriptive than the statutory guidance. These have been distributed widely to local authorities. A number of local authorities appear to have adopted the ACEHO's model policy.
The Sentencing Council's General Guidelines remains applicable.
VOLA Position:
The enforcement role of local authorities is critical to a healthy and professional private rented sector.
VOLA finds the new statutory guidance of 13 November 2025 clear and comprehensive. We see no reason for local authorities to deviate from it, or to refer to any other guidance at the point in the enforcement process where statutory guidance is relevant.
We note a number of local authorities have updated their local enforcement policies mirroring closely the new statutory guidance in full. That should not present any practical problems so long as it is kept up-to-date in the case that the statutory guidance is later amended.
We have reviewed the content of one of ACEHO's model policy documents and observed elements where it is not clear that enforcement practices following this document would be consistent with both the new statutory guidance and the Sentencing Council's General Guidelines. That is, it appears to have significant potential to lead to improper enforcement practice.
In the adoption of a local civil penalty policy that overlaps so extensively with the statutory guidance, there is also the risk that when the calculation of a civil penalty is appealed to First-tier Tribunal, the local authority may be inclined not to bring the relevant statutory guidance to the Tribunal's attention, affecting the fairness of that judicial process.
VOLA is strongly of the opinion that it is inappropriate for local authorities to lean heavily on non-governmental pro-forma documents such as ACEHO’s rather than paying close attention to the statutory material directly where that exists. We are against the adoption by local authorities of the ACEHO model civil penalty policy. Local authorities should base their civil penalty policies directly on the statutory guidance and the Sentencing Council’s General Guidelines.
References and Useful Links:
• Civil penalties under the Renters' Rights Act 2025 and other housing legislation
• Sentencing Council: General guideline: overarching principles
• ACEHO branded Model Civil Financial Penalty Policy
Document History:
• Version: 0.1.4
• Authored by: S. Fletcher [Sub-editing – Oliver Wilkinson]
• Approved by VOLA Board on: <this is a draft version>