The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has come under renewed pressure following reports that two separate letting agents warned her she required a licence to rent out her Dulwich home — advice she apparently ignored before letting the property for £3,200 per month.

According to the Mail on Sunday, both Knight Frank and Harvey & Wheeler advised Ms Reeves and her husband that their South London home required a selective licence under local housing rules. Despite this, the property was subsequently rented without one.

Contradicting earlier claims

Emails revealed last week showed detailed correspondence between Harvey & Wheeler and Ms Reeves’ husband discussing the need for a licence — apparently contradicting the Chancellor’s earlier assurance to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer that she was unaware of the legal requirement.

A spokesperson for Knight Frank told the newspaper:  “It is standard procedure to notify all clients of their legal and regulatory obligations when letting a property.”

The latest disclosures appear to undermine Ms Reeves’ version of events and have led to fresh calls for the Prime Minister to order a full investigation.

Political and legal fallout

Shadow Treasury Minister Gareth Davies said:  “Each day brings fresh questions about Rachel Reeves’ account. This latest revelation casts serious doubt on her claim not to have known about the need for a licence. The Prime Minister must now get to the bottom of this and order a full investigation without delay.”

Sir Keir has already reprimanded the Chancellor for failing to check her correspondence before asserting her innocence, but maintains there is “no need for further sanction” at this stage.

Southwark Council response

Southwark Council has confirmed that it will not take enforcement action against Ms Reeves. Under normal circumstances, landlords who fail to obtain the correct licence can face fines of up to £30,000 or even prosecution under the Housing Act 2004.

A council spokesperson said:  “Enforcement action such as fines are reserved for those who do not apply within that time or where a property is found to be in an unsafe condition.”

The Labour-run council, which holds 48 of 63 seats, added that landlords identified as operating without a licence are typically given 21 days to apply before further steps are considered.

Wider implications for landlords

The controversy has reportedly prompted a surge in calls from tenants seeking to reclaim rent from unlicensed landlords. According to the Daily Telegraph, legal charity Justice for Tenants — endorsed by Southwark Council — has seen a sharp rise in enquiries about Rent Repayment Orders since the story broke.

Al McClenahan, outreach lead for the charity, said:  “Our helpline has seen a significant increase in calls from tenants who’ve discovered their landlord is unlicensed following the news about the Chancellor. 

Many of these callers are mistaken — their property isn’t covered by licensing rules — but a substantial number do live in areas with additional HMO or selective licensing and could be entitled to reclaim up to 12 months’ rent.”

Commentary

While the political focus is squarely on the Chancellor, this episode also underscores a broader issue: many landlords remain uncertain about their local licensing obligations. As licensing schemes proliferate across England, especially through additional and selective designations, the risk of inadvertent non-compliance continues to grow — even among those with professional management in place.