Following the Housing, Communities and Local Government (HCLG) Committee’s publication of its response to the Government’s draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill at the end of May – which urged the Government to accelerate the introduction of the proposed reforms – Westminster Hall debate was held on 2 July 2026 to consider the specific issue of managing agents.
Florence Eshalomi, Chair of the HCLG Committee, opened the debate, moving the motion inviting the House “to call on the Government to use the final Bill to legislate for the regulation of managing agents”.
Ms Eshalomi used her fifteen minutes to discuss the committee’s findings on the draft Bill, while acknowledging that “Colleagues from across the House will be all too familiar from their inboxes with the “wild west” of managing agents”.
She claimed that the biggest issue and source of frustration for so many homeowners and leaseholders in the leasehold system is the quality – or lack of it – and service provided by their managing agents.
Ultimately, she explained, the problem with many of these managing agents is that they are taking advantage of a captive market. They effectively have a monopoly on individual estates, meaning that they are able to treat homeowners with sheer contempt. In the words of one leaseholder we heard from, homeowners are left feeling “like cash cows”.
She confirmed that the committee had surveyed over 7,000 homeowners and found that regulation was the No. 1 action that homeowners wanted the Government to prioritise as part of their leasehold and commonhold agenda.
She then moved on to calling for a regulator – with teeth, as self-regulation does not work when there is no real enforcement. Quoting Lord Best’s evidence to the committee: “being qualified doesn’t necessarily make people behave properly; you still need a code of practice and enforcement”.
She concluded her speech by saying that an effective regulator would be one that will issue meaningful sanctions against agents that treat homeowners like a revenue stream, including, for the worst offenders, the removal of their licence to operate. With an independent regulator in place, she hoped that all homeowners would see a real change in the short term, and she urged Members across the House to support the motion.
A total of 24 back-bench members then contributed to the debate, all in support of the motion and many providing extreme examples of managing agents’ malpractice from their own constituents.
Matthew Pennycook, HCLG Minister, responded on behalf of the government, but was light on commitments. He stated that he takes very seriously the Committee’s recommendation of a new independent regulator, and that he was not going to stand at the Dispatch Box and rule one out. But he will set out the government’s overarching position on the regulation of estate, letting and managing agents “in due course”.
Florence Eshalomi finished the debate saying she hoped that the Minister would see the cross-party support for the motion and confirming she will keep the issue on the agenda.
The motion was subsequently resolved:
That this House welcomes the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee’s First Report of Session 2026-27, Pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill (HC40); notes the Government’s commitments to cap ground rents and to bring forward legislation in this Session to support the uptake of commonhold in place of leasehold; further notes the concerning practices of some property managing agents who fail to act in the best interests of homeowners; and calls on the Government to accept the Committee’s recommendation to legislate to create a body with enforcement powers to regulate property managing agents.
Mark Chick is the Joint Head of our expert Landlord & Tenant team.
If you have a query concerning leasehold property, then please contact the experts at Bishop & Sewell’s Landlord & Tenant team by emailing leasehold@bishopandsewell.co.uk or call on 020 7631 4141.
The above is accurate as at 14 July 2026.
The information above may be subject to change. The content of this note should not be considered legal advice and each matter should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
