Penalties for letting without a licence: £30,000 fines, rent repayment and banning orders

· 8 min read

Letting a property that needs a licence without one is a criminal offence. Most landlords know there is a fine. Fewer know that the fine is only the first of four separate consequences, that they stack, and that the largest of them is usually not the fine.

1. The offence itself

Two sections, depending on which licence you needed:

  • Section 72 — having control of or managing an HMO that is required to be licensed under Part 2 and is not.
  • Section 95 — the equivalent for a house required to be licensed under Part 3, which is selective licensing.

Both are summary offences. On conviction the court can impose an unlimited fine: the previous level 5 cap of £5,000 was removed for offences committed on or after 12 March 2015 by section 85 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.

Both sections provide a defence of reasonable excuse, and a duly made licence application is treated distinctly from no application at all.

2. The civil penalty — up to £30,000

Section 249A of the Housing Act 2004, inserted by the Housing and Planning Act 2016, lets a council impose a financial penalty of up to £30,000 as an alternative to prosecution. It cannot do both for the same offence.

Three things landlords get wrong about this figure:

  • It is a maximum, not a tariff. Councils publish penalty policies with matrices weighing culpability, harm, the landlord's track record and the size of the portfolio. A first, promptly-remedied breach by a small landlord does not attract £30,000.
  • It is per offence, not per tenant. Where several properties are unlicensed, each is capable of being a separate offence.
  • There is a right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), and penalties are reduced on appeal often enough to be worth taking seriously.

3. Rent repayment orders — up to twelve months' rent

This is usually the larger number, and the one landlords least expect.

Under sections 40 to 52 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, a tenant or the local authority can apply to the First-tier Tribunal for a rent repayment order where the landlord has committed certain offences — including controlling or managing an unlicensed HMO under section 72, and an unlicensed house under section 95.

The tribunal can order repayment of up to twelve months' rent. Where the tenant applies, the money goes to the tenant. Where the council applies, it goes to the council, and it can do so where the rent was paid by housing benefit or the housing element of universal credit.

A conviction is not required. The tribunal must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offence was committed, but the landlord need never have been prosecuted.

On a property let at £1,400 a month, twelve months is £16,800 — payable in addition to any civil penalty.

4. Banning orders and the database

For repeated or serious offending, sections 14 to 29 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 allow a council to apply to the First-tier Tribunal for a banning order prohibiting a person from letting housing, engaging in letting agency work, or both. The minimum period is twelve months. Breaching one is itself a criminal offence carrying up to 51 weeks' imprisonment.

A banning order offence also triggers entry on the database of rogue landlords and property agents under sections 28 to 39.

5. Section 21 and possession

Under section 75 of the Housing Act 2004, no section 21 notice may be given while an HMO required to be licensed is unlicensed; section 98 does the same for Part 3 houses.

Since the Renters' Rights Act 2025 abolished section 21 for new and existing tenancies from 1 May 2026, this matters less prospectively than it did. It remains relevant to historic matters, and the broader point survives: an unlicensed property is a property whose possession routes are constrained.

How they stack

The council chooses between prosecution and a civil penalty. It cannot do both. But a rent repayment order is separate from either, and a banning order is separate again. A single unlicensed property can therefore produce a £30,000 civil penalty and a twelve-month rent repayment order arising from the same facts.

The cheapest thing you can do

Check whether a licence is needed before you let, not after. Our council licensing index covers every council in England and Wales with the designated areas and dates, and the free compliance check takes about thirty seconds. Working out whether you need one is covered in do I need a property licence?

Common questions

What is the maximum fine for renting out an unlicensed property?

A council can impose a civil penalty of up to £30,000 under section 249A of the Housing Act 2004 as an alternative to prosecution. If it prosecutes instead, the court can impose an unlimited fine — the previous £5,000 cap was removed for offences committed on or after 12 March 2015. The council cannot both prosecute and impose a civil penalty for the same offence.

Is the £30,000 penalty per property or per tenant?

Per offence. Where more than one property is unlicensed, each is capable of being a separate offence with its own penalty. It is not calculated per tenant, and £30,000 is a statutory maximum rather than a standard amount — councils apply published penalty matrices weighing culpability, harm and track record.

Can tenants claim back rent if the property was unlicensed?

Yes. Under sections 40 to 52 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 a tenant can apply to the First-tier Tribunal for a rent repayment order of up to twelve months' rent where the landlord controlled or managed an unlicensed property. A criminal conviction is not required, though the tribunal must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offence was committed.

What is a banning order?

An order made by the First-tier Tribunal under sections 14 to 29 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 prohibiting a person from letting housing or engaging in letting agency work. The minimum period is twelve months, breach is a criminal offence carrying up to 51 weeks' imprisonment, and it triggers entry on the national database of rogue landlords and property agents.

Does having applied for a licence protect me?

Partly. Sections 72 and 95 of the Housing Act 2004 provide a defence of reasonable excuse, and a duly made application is treated differently from none. It does not retrospectively license the earlier period, and a rent repayment order can still be sought in respect of it.

Sources

Figures about our own council records are computed when this page is built, so they cannot drift from the database. Information tool, not legal advice.

Read next

Do I need a property licence? A step-by-step check for landlords7 min readSelective licensing explained: what it is, who needs it, and how to check7 min readAdditional HMO licensing explained: the scheme that catches small shared houses6 min read

Check a specific property. Look up your council's licensing position across all 318 councils, or run the free compliance check — five questions, no sign-up.