How do the new HHSRS rules affect landlords?

What do you need to know about the latest version of the Housing, Health and Safety Rating System?

By Tom Entwistle, LandlordZONE

On 16 September 2026 the latest iteration of the HHSRS was introduced quietly by the government. It updates its official landlord guide to the reformed Housing Health and Safety Rating System. It aims “to clarify guidance” three months after the new rules took effect. 

This latest change is a small edit but a useful prompt for us landlords to take a step back from the June HHSRS headlines which I covered at the time, and look at what has actually changed for landlords managing properties day to day.

Two distinct pieces of regulation have been running in tandem in a lot of the media coverage, and at least one widely repeated claim about how the new £7,000 penalty works needs some correction.

This article covers the reforms that have affected England only. HHSRS operates under separate arrangements in Wales. It is intended as general information for landlords and letting agents and does not constitute legal advice. Landlords facing an improvement notice, prohibition order or civil penalty should take advice from a qualified housing lawyer. 

Two reforms, not one

It is easy to read “the 2026 HHSRS reforms” as a single package but that’s not the case. Two separate legal instruments came into force within a day of each other in June, and this has led to some confusion as to what landlords actually need to do.

The first of these instruments is The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/571), in force from 23 June 2026. It amends the 2005 Regulations that sets out how local authority inspectors score and categorise hazards. This is the measurement change with fewer hazard categories, a simpler scoring system, new terminology.

The second instrument is a new section 6A of the Housing Act 2004, inserted by Schedule 4 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, in force from 22 June 2026. This is the enforcement change which gives councils a standalone power to fine landlords up to £7,000 for a Category 1 hazard. This was on top of existing enforcement tools.

These directives arrived one day apart and interact with each other in practice, but they answer different questions. One about how a hazard is scored, the other about what a council can do once it has found a hazard. But the evidential tests attached to each differ accordingly.

What changed under the new scoring reform?

Under SI 2026/571, the existing 29 prescribed hazard descriptions used since 2006 were consolidated into just 21. Some of these mergers are very straightforward. A new Indoor Air Pollutants category now covers carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic compounds, previously assessed separately. 

A new Domestic Hygiene category combines food storage, sanitation, pest exposure and waste disposal. People Falls on the Level are now consolidated into several previously distinct trip-hazard categories.

The old A-to-J lettered bands are gone. These are replaced by three numerical bands. 

A high score (1) (a score of 1,000 or above – the direct equivalent of the old Category 1 hazard, triggering a mandatory duty to act). A medium score (2) (100 to under 1,000) and a low score (3) (under 100), the latter two carrying only discretionary enforcement. 

The four harm classes have been renamed. These are Classes I to IV which become Extreme, Severe, Serious and Moderate This is a labelling change that does not alter what each class captures.

The fire hazard definition has also been broadened, now expressly covering fire risk from uncontrolled fire and associated smoke or fumes, explosions, or structural collapse caused by fire or explosion. 

Landlords with older properties or properties that have been converted or extended are the ones most likely to see a different outcome with fire risk than under the previous rules.

None of these changes alter the underlying safety standard a property is supposed to meet. The government’s aim, reflected in its landlord and agent guide, is that the review makes the system easier for inspectors to apply consistently. 

The £7,000 penalty, correctly explained

This is where some of the June and July coverage has been confusing, describing the new civil penalty as something a council can issue “immediately, without a prior warning”. That is an oversimplification which needs correcting. 

Section 6A does not let a council short-circuit the process. Before imposing a penalty, the authority must first have taken formal enforcement action over the Category 1 hazard. This is typically an improvement notice or a prohibition order. It must then serve a notice of intent, setting out the proposed penalty and the reasons for it, and allow the landlord 28 days to make written representations. 

Only after that period closes can the council decide whether to proceed and, if so, issue a final notice. This also carries a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), generally within 28 days.

What has actually changed with the latest rationalisation is that the penalty can now accompany that first formal notice, rather than only following a landlord’s failure to comply with an earlier one. 

Under the previous regime, there was a reasonable expectation that an informal approach, a conversation and an initial visit would come before any formal notice. That expectation is now gone. 

The first formal contact a landlord now gets with the council over a serious hazard can carry a financial penalty attached to it. That is the real change from the previous system.

Draft guidance also indicates that a single underlying defect causing more than one hazard, for example, a broken boiler causing both excess cold and damp and mould, may attract one combined penalty rather than a separate penalty for each. 

Where the council is satisfied that multiple consequences stem from the same root cause, a single penalty will apply, but where a genuinely separate deficiency exists, this can attract its own separate penalty.

The enforcement in practice

New powers given to councils will only matter if they are used and collected. The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) obtained data under the Freedom of Information Act and reported on LandlordZONE in July, is a useful insight into how much should be read into the headline figures.

According to this information source, HHSRS inspections rose 7% to 91,620 across English councils between 2023/24 and 2024/25, but of the roughly £30 million in housing-related fines issued to landlords over the same period, only around one-quarter had actually been collected.

That gap between fines issued and fines recovered predates the June reforms and reflects long-standing issues with, and constraints on, local authorities’ enforcement resources, rather than anything in the new rules themselves. 

All of this is no reason to treat the £7,000 penalty as toothless. Most councils will do their best to collect these fines, and the central government has promised to help in this respect by providing more funding for these resources. 

Who is exposed?

The 2026 reforms have changed little by way of where the real hazard risk is concentrated. NRLA’s own guidance, citing English Housing Survey figures first published in 2019, and still the most recent breakdown of its kind, puts falls (54 per cent), excess cold (24 per cent), fire (6 per cent) and damp and mould (4 per cent), as accounting for 88 per cent of all Category 1 hazards in the private rented sector. 

Falls on stairs remain the single most common failing. Handrail provision, stair lighting and carpet condition are the usual causes of these accidents and are rarely expensive to put right. Excess cold and damp and black mould formation are related closely and result from poor insulation and ventilation and low temperatures in rooms, resulting in a low EPC rating. See Domestic private rented property: minimum energy efficiency standard - landlord guidance

Documentation is what decides outcomes

Whether or not a penalty is ultimately imposed under section 6A depends on whether the council considers it was “reasonably practicable” for the landlord to have removed the hazard. The test is based on evidence, and this is where the practical value of good record-keeping becomes vitally important. 

A landlord with a full documented history of thorough periodic property safety checks, prompt responses to all reported issues, and a clear repair timeline is considerably better able to argue that a hazard was addressed as soon as they became aware of it. 

Given this, landlords will be properly prepared to make a persuasive written representation during the 28-day window. Resorting to memory and oral evidence simply will not cut it. You don’t need to show perfection. You simply need to show reasonable awareness through regular inspections and reasonable action – it’s the common sense reasonableness approach that counts.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

See also:

LandlordZONE Government to crackdown on dangerous rental homes

Gov. Crackdown on dangerous rented homes as new £7k fines kick in

LandlordZONE Property inspection boost fails to result in tougher enforcement

[Main image credit: RDNE Stock Project]