Have You Ever Wondered Who Benefits from Property Legislation? Let’s Look

We have written at length about legislation and regulation which is understandable; they can have a serious impact upon the private rented sector (PRS). ‘Regulation’ is commonly cited in stories about landlords quitting as the principal reason.

However, as with nearly everything in life – and the PRS is part of life – the truth is much more nuanced. Not all property legislation exists simply to punish landlords, and not all landlords are adversely affected by regulation.

As property professionals, we are well aware of the impact of legislation and in this piece we’re going to ask the question, “who benefits from property legislation?”

To illustrate this, we’re going to use three current examples. Let’s see if we can make some sense of the gordian knot that is regulation within the PRS.

Awaab’s Law

We’ve written about this previously in Awaab’s Law and the PRS, so you can find the background and details there. In short – it puts a statutory duty on social and private landlords to identify and rectify damp and mould within a tight timescale.

Scotland is ahead of England & Wales in applying this to private landlords, introducing measures via the The investigation and commencement of repair (Scotland) Regulations 2026.

This regulation enforces the ‘10-3-5’ rule for dealing with damp and mould. 10 days to investigate, 3 days to report the results and 5 days to begin remedial work where required.

The Scottish Government will publish guidelines on the 1st September 2026 ahead to the regulations taking effect on the 6th October 2026.

Who benefits from this property legislation? Quite explicitly it is tenants whose properties are blighted by damp and mould. The regulation places obligations on landlords, but it’s not punitive.

As we have been known to say when discussing this, “it’s just enforcing good stewardship”. No one should have to live with damp and mould, and the fact that this law was required at all is unfortunate.

This is, however, an example of the law and regulation being used to ensure that basic standards and levels of comfort are maintained.

Right of first refusal

On the 10th April 2026, ahead of the Scottish parliamentary elections, SNP leader, John Swinney announced that his party would introduce a scheme to give tenants first refusal if their landlord decided to sell the property they were living in.

In addition, there would be a period during which the tenants could decide, and presumably find a mortgage.

Unfortunately, John Swinney rehashed and relied on inaccurate statements when announcing the policy, specifically;

“That is made all the more difficult when private renters find themselves having to leave their home because the owner has decided to sell up. As well as forcing people to upend their whole lives, it also has serious financial implications.”

As readers of our blogs know, selling a tenanted property does not automatically make the tenants homeless.

Swinney also made reference to tenants having the right to buy at “a fair market rate”. Since then, there have been no further details or consultations, so we really don’t know what this means.

As an aspirational policy, it sounds good, however who’s really going to benefit should this find its way into law?

The clear implication is that the tenants benefit by dint of being able to buy the property they currently live in. Ok. Not all tenants want to buy – many do – but not all of them.

Then there is the expression “fair market rate”. What exactly does that mean? An estate agent’s valuation? A surveyor’s valuation? A passerby’s valuation? Thus far nothing has been decided.

Will the landlord be legally obliged to accept the offer to buy if the tenants can offer the ‘fair market rate’? That sounds – dubious. What happens if the landlord thinks that the property is worth more or prefers to sell elsewhere?

Removing ADS from the purchase of tenanted properties would probably have a greater positive effect on the availability of housing than this crowd-pleaser, based as it is on an questionable understanding of the PRS.

We will all have to wait to see if and how this policy develops. In our opinion it’s a policy proposal which grabs headlines, but is unlikely to have any significant impact on the state of housing in Scotland.

Mansion tax

This is an idea which has found favour across the UK, but with differences north and south of the border.

In Scotland, the current proposal is to levy additional Council Tax rates on properties from £1m – £2m, and on properties worth over £2m. This proposal is currently open for open for consultation.

In England, any such tax will apply to properties over £2m, and the funds raised will go into the national coffers. In contrast, Scotland is proposing that Local Authorities will keep the additional funds.

The Scottish Government has stated that the lower value (£1-2m) will attract an additional charge of £720 per annum, with properties over £2m facing an additional £3,600. This in addition to the current Band H rates payable on these properties.

The issues which have already been raised surround the number of properties affected and the amount of money likely to be raised as a result.

Propertymark has suggested that the current proposals in Scotland will affect around 15,000 properties out of a total of 2.7 million country-wide.

Again, based on the pre-consultation estimates, the Scottish Government expects that this measure will raise between £12m – £16m, with a likely cost of around £5m to collect.

Council tax in Scotland currently collects £3.5bn per annum.

So, it appears that the Mansion Tax is unlikely to make a significant difference to council finances, and those benefits will accrue unevenly across the country, depending on the distribution of eligible properties.

Its introduction may also have an impact upon impact upon foreign investors looking to invest in Scotland’s property market.

Cynically, we might suggest that the beneficiaries here are the politicians, who can be seen to be ‘doing something’, even though that ‘something’ may not necessarily have a significant or noticeable impact.

Advice from the property pros

Property Legislation and regulation do many things; some good, some bad and some utterly forgettable.

The examples we’ve given here touch on many of these issues – Awaab’s law is generally regarded as both good and necessary, but in an ideal world it wouldn’t be needed, landlords would be on top of these issues without encouragement.

Right of first refusal and the Mansion tax fall into a more nebulous category; they offer apparent benefits, but it’s not clear that they will stand up to rational scrutiny, or that their benefits will be felt by the public.

All legislatures pass laws which look good and make politicians feel good, but which deliver little in reality. This is just the nature of the system. Being seen to do something is almost as important as actually doing something effective.

On the other hand, legislation such as the Renters Rights Act, whose provisions are mirrored here in Scotland, makes genuine and probably lasting changes. The benefits may not affect everyone’s day-to-day life, but they address real issues.

In summary…

Although we’ll sometimes hear complaints from landlords questioning who benefits from property legislation, some is badly needed to correct problems which have existed for many years and to ensure that standards are maintained.

Awaab’s law is exactly such an example. First refusal and the Mansion tax? The jury is still out. Neither are law yet and there will be much discussion and consultation to be had before they find themselves committed to the statute book.

For both of these, the devil will be in the detail, hopefully addressing some of the issues we’ve highlighted. Until then, we cannot in honesty say exactly who will benefit.

Legislation and regulation are inevitable, but they seldom arrive unannounced. Well informed landlords and investors will be aware of what’s coming long before such regulation takes effect.

Insofar as we have any specific advice on this subject it would be to stay informed and if you’re minded to, get involved with organisations which aim to engage with law-makers to get your views heard.

If your concerns run towards more prosaic concerns of the buy-to-let market, we’re always willing to discuss the PRS, the state of the market and how we might help you on your property investment journey.

Many thanks for reading!

Written by Chris Wood, MD & Co-founder of Portolio

Written by Chris Wood, MD & Founder of Portolio

Get in touch on 07812 164 842 or email [email protected]