A guide to rent repayment orders under the Renters’ Rights Act

Rent repayment orders (RROs) are becoming a growing area of risk for landlords, as tenants and local authorities become more aware of their rights to reclaim rent where housing law hasn’t been followed. 

In some cases, tenants can recover up to 24 months’ rent where a landlord has committed certain housing-related offences. This shift significantly increases both the financial exposure and enforcement pressure on landlords. That’s why it’s important landlords understand these measures to avoid costly penalties and make sure tenants are treated fairly. 

What is a rent repayment order? 

A rent repayment order is a legal order that allows tenants or local authorities to recover rent where a landlord has committed certain housing offences. Applications are made to the First-tier Tribunal, which must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that an offence has occurred. A criminal conviction isn’t required for a claim to succeed. 

Local authorities can also bring claims where housing costs have been paid through universal credit or housing benefit. 

Purpose of rent repayment orders 

RROs are designed to strengthen compliance in the private rented sector by giving tenants and local authorities a direct route to recover rent where housing law has been breached. 

In practice, they exist to: 

• Discourage landlords from committing housing offences  

• Compensate tenants where unlawful conduct has occurred  

• Improve overall compliance standards across the sector  

• Provide a practical enforcement tool without relying on criminal prosecution  

What offences can lead to a rent repayment order? 

1. Letting an unlicensed HMO
   Letting a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) without the required licence is one of the most common triggers for a rent repayment order. Licensing is a core legal requirement, and failure to comply is treated seriously.  
2. Breach of selective licensing requirements
   In areas subject to selective licensing, landlords must obtain a licence before letting a property. Operating without one can result in enforcement action and rent being reclaimed.  
3. Failure to comply with an improvement notice
   Where a local authority requires repairs or safety improvements through an improvement notice, non-compliance can lead to financial penalties, including a rent repayment order.  
4. Failure to comply with a prohibition order
   A prohibition order restricts the use of a property due to safety concerns. Continuing to let or occupy the property in breach of such an order is a serious offence. 
5. Illegal eviction or harassment
   Unlawfully evicting a tenant or subjecting them to harassment is a criminal offence under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977.  
6. Violence for securing entry
   Using or threatening violence to gain entry to a property is a serious offence under theCriminal Law Act 1977. 
7. Breach of a banning order
   Letting or managing a property while subject to a banning order is prohibited and can lead to a rent repayment order.
8. Misuse of a possession ground
   Providing false or misleading grounds to regain possession of a property, such as claiming an intention to move in when this is not genuine, can trigger enforcement. 
9. Letting within restricted periods
   Re-letting or advertising a property within 12 months of relying on certain possession grounds (such as “moving in” or “selling”) may lead to penalties.

Who can apply for a rent repayment order? 

You may apply if: 

• You are (or were) a tenant in the private rented sector  

• The offence occurred within the last two years  

• The offence took place during your tenancy (with limited exceptions)  

Key points: 

• You do not need to still live in the property  

• It does not matter who physically paid the rent  

• You cannot claim the portion paid via benefits (but councils can) 

How much can you claim? 

The maximum award under a rent repayment order is up to 24 months’ rent. 

This is the upper limit and is not limited only to repeat offences, although repeat or serious breaches are more likely to result in the maximum award. 

The exact amount is determined by the First-tier Tribunal and will vary depending on the circumstances of each case. 

The tribunal will consider:  

• The seriousness of the offence  

• The landlord’s conduct  

• Any steps taken to remedy the breach 

• The duration of the breach  

• The tenant’s conduct (where relevant) 

Impact of the Renters’ Rights Act 

The Renters’ Rights Act significantly strengthens the Rent Repayment Order (RRO) regime to improve enforcement, widen accountability, and increase financial deterrents for non-compliance.  

• Expanded liability across the ownership chain: RROs are extended to include superior landlords and company directors. This is intended to ensure that criminal rent-to-rent arrangements and other complex ownership structures can be properly held to account, rather than liability sitting solely with the immediate landlord 

• Longer application window: The time limit for tenants or local authorities to apply for an RRO after an offence is extended from 12 to 24 months. This change aims to make it easier to bring claims and reduce the risk of cases being time-barred 

• Stronger penalties for repeat offenders: Where a landlord has previously been subject to enforcement action for a specific offence, they will be required to pay the maximum RRO amount if they commit that offence again. This is designed to significantly strengthen deterrence against repeat non-compliance 

• Increased financial penalties: The maximum amount that can be ordered under an RRO is doubled from 12 to 24 months’ rent. This increases the financial impact of non-compliance and is intended to make RROs a more effective enforcement tool for both tenants and local authorities  

Case study: Stevan Gorgievski rent repayment order  

Steve Gorgievski is a landlord, who relied on a rent guarantee company to manage his property and secure an HMO licence. 

When the company entered liquidation, it became clear that no valid licence had been granted. 

The landlord argued there were indicators suggesting the property was licensed, including documentation displayed in the property and information showing that a licence application had been made to the local authority. However, the Upper Tribunal found that an incomplete application record could not reasonably be interpreted as an active licence, and that responsibility ultimately remained with the landlord. 

Despite arguments about tenant behaviour and property condition, the tribunal ordered repayment of £21,770 (around 60% of the rent), following a previous decision that had been set aside on appeal. 

This case highlights a key principle in rent repayment order claims: delegating management or relying on third parties does not remove legal responsibility for compliance. 

Find out more from our partner, LandlordZONE in their news release: “Landlord’s tale of woe fails to prevent hefty Rent Repayment Order”. 

Final thoughts 

Rent repayment orders are now a central feature of the UK’s housing enforcement framework. They not only penalise non-compliance but also empower tenants to take action where the law has been breached. 

For landlords, a proactive approach to compliance is essential.
For tenants, RROs provide a meaningful route to recover rent and challenge poor practice. 

Strong compliance supports a fairer, safer, and more accountable rental market.