Property agent regulation: licences and leasehold fee caps planned

The property agent regulation package, announced on 29th September 2026, is more than another leasehold reform headline. For agents, the bigger change is an express commitment to an independent regulator able to set codes of practice and take licences away. For leaseholders, the proposed fee caps would add a predictable ceiling to charges that are already subject to existing statutory controls.

None of the new regime is operating today. No regulator has been named, no licence fee or application deadline has been announced, qualification levels have not been fixed, and the Government has not set a commencement date.

Licensing could be the bigger change

Under the property agent regulation plans, the Government says agents will have to obtain a licence and hold “appropriate qualifications”. The regulator would set codes of practice covering standards such as conduct and complaint handling, with power to remove licences where required standards are not met.

That closely resembles the architecture proposed by Lord Best’s Regulation of Property Agents Working Group in 2019, which recommended agency licensing, individual licensing for reserved activities, qualifications, codes of practice and an independent regulator. But today’s announcement does not say that the 2019 model is being adopted wholesale.

The department’s release itself does not define “property agents”, but the BBC’s report of Rayner’s conference announcement adds an important clarification: it says the planned regulator will cover estate agents, managing agents and estate managers.

That gives the property agent regulation plans more substance, but questions remain over letting agents as a distinct category, block and online agents, commercial property agents, and which individual employees will need a licence or qualification.

Territorial scope is also unresolved. Estate agency has a UK-wide statutory framework, while letting-agent regulation is devolved. Wales already licenses letting and management activity through Rent Smart Wales, while Scotland operates its own letting-agent register and code. Earlier RoPA proposals deliberately treated different activities differently across the UK.

Rayner’s conference language was notably sharper than the departmental announcement. The BBC reported her saying decent businesses were undermined by “cowboys, crooks and con artists”. She said some leaseholders were “powerless against the vested interests that only take, while giving nothing back in return” and promised legislation to “rein these cowboys in”.

Propertymark has long supported statutory regulation. Its standing RoPA position says: “A coherent, overarching framework of regulation is essential.” It had not published a specific response to the 29th September announcement when we checked, so that should be read as established policy rather than a fresh reaction.

RICS has also backed stronger regulation while arguing that existing professional regulation should be recognised. It has urged Government to use established frameworks to improve “cost-effectiveness, expedite implementation, and prevent duplication of efforts”. Again, we found no separate RICS response to today’s announcement.

What property agent regulation means for agents now

For businesses following property agent regulation, the immediate position is straightforward: there is no new licensing application to make today.

• There is no new Government property-agent licence to apply for today
• No regulator, application deadline or licence fee has been announced
• Qualification levels and recognition of existing qualifications remain undecided
• No grandfathering or transitional arrangements have been published
• The precise agent types, job roles and territorial scope are not yet confirmed

For anyone working in agency, the sensible response to property agent regulation is preparation rather than panic. Firms can review existing qualifications, complaint procedures and professional-body requirements now, but there is no basis yet for buying a new licence, enrolling staff on a Government-mandated course or assuming a particular qualification will be accepted.

Existing duties remain in place while the property agent regulation framework is developed. Estate agents continue to operate under the Estate Agents Act 1979, consumer law and redress requirements, while letting and managing agents face existing requirements that vary according to activity and nation.

The gap between qualifications and enforcement is important. In evidence quoted in the Commons in July, Lord Best said: “being qualified doesn’t necessarily make people behave properly; you still need a code of practice and enforcement”. Today’s announcement now commits to all three elements.

Permission fees are not currently unregulated

The fee-cap proposal is separate from property agent regulation, although both were announced together. The second part of the package targets fees for permissions and administration. Rayner described some of these as “rip off” fees. Government guidance gives examples including consent to sublet, alter or renovate a property, or keep a pet. The latest announcement also identifies fees for supplying documents such as building safety certificates and for notifications such as a change of mortgage provider.

Those charges already sit within a legal framework. Schedule 11 to the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 treats charges for lease approvals and information as administration charges. A variable administration charge is payable only to the extent that it is reasonable, and liability or amount can be challenged at tribunal.

Rayner gave two eye-catching examples at Labour conference. The BBC reported her saying she had heard of leaseholders being charged £250 for permission to keep a pet and £400 to change a front door. Those figures are examples of charges she criticised, not proposed statutory caps. The consultation will still have to decide which fees fall within the new regime and what maximum amount, if any, applies to each one.

For property businesses, that distinction matters. Property agent regulation concerns who may operate, the standards they must meet and how they can be sanctioned. The fee-cap proposals concern what can be charged in particular leasehold and managed-estate situations. Managing agents may therefore sit at the intersection of both reforms, but the legal mechanisms are separate.

A July 2026 parliamentary answer about pet approvals by Right to Manage companies made the position unusually clear: permission and administration charges “should only be used where necessary and should cover only any reasonable costs incurred”.

The proposed cap would therefore not create the first protection. Its practical value would be greater certainty, replacing some case-by-case arguments over reasonableness with a known maximum for selected charges. The Government says it will consult on both the scope of the caps and the amount for each item. No figures have been published.

Freehold estates are deliberately included

The proposed powers will also extend to privately managed freehold estates, where homeowners can be charged for consent to make changes to their homes. This is sometimes wrapped into the wider “fleecehold” debate, but permission fees should not be confused with recurring estate management charges for roads, landscaping or communal areas.

The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 already contains a future framework for administration charges on managed freehold estates, including reasonableness and tribunal protections. Significant parts remain prospective and require commencement or secondary legislation.

The landlord angle needs care

In leasehold legislation, “landlord” can mean the freeholder, a superior landlord or another party entitled to enforce the lease. It does not automatically mean an ordinary private residential landlord letting a property to a tenant.

That means today’s announcement should not be reported as though every buy-to-let landlord will suddenly face capped pet or alteration fees. The clearer landlord impacts are where a landlord owns a leasehold flat and must pay the freeholder for consent to sublet or alter it, or where the landlord uses a letting or managing agent that later falls within the new regulatory regime.

Private consent is not planning permission

There is also a useful Planning Geek distinction. Permission from a freeholder, management company or estate manager is a private-law requirement. Planning permission and permitted development rights operate separately.

Getting planning permission does not normally remove a lease restriction or restrictive covenant. Equally, paying for private consent does not grant planning permission where planning permission is independently required.

What happens next

Property agent regulation is now an explicit policy commitment, not a commencement notice.

A statutory licensing and independent regulatory regime will require primary legislation to create the duties and enforcement powers. The Government also says it will legislate to give the Secretary of State power to cap selected permission and administration fees. The broad new cap-making power is therefore not in force today.

Once Parliament creates an enabling power, detailed caps could then be set by secondary legislation, subject to the procedure written into the eventual Act. Existing legislation already contains narrower regulation-making powers for some leasehold and freehold administration matters, so the precise legislative route will depend on what charge is being targeted.

The next stage of property agent regulation will determine the regulator’s identity, licence costs, qualification levels, transitional arrangements and commencement dates, all of which remain unanswered. That uncertainty is now the key point for agents: the direction of travel is much clearer than it was yesterday, but the compliance rulebook has not yet been written.