Landlord Consent to Alterations UK 2026 — Absolute and Qualified Covenants, Disability Adaptations, and Reinstatement

Absolute vs qualified covenants against alteration

The first step in any alteration request is to identify the type of covenant in the tenancy agreement:

• Absolute covenant: An absolute covenant against alterations (typically worded 'the tenant shall not make any alterations to the property') prohibits all alterations regardless of the landlord's consent. Where an absolute covenant exists, LTA 1927 s.19(2) does NOT apply — the statute only modifies qualified covenants. A landlord with an absolute covenant can refuse all alterations, including minor ones. However, where an absolute covenant exists and the tenant asks for consent, the landlord who grants consent outside the strict terms of the covenant may create a contractual licence that modifies the absolute prohibition
• Qualified covenant: A qualified covenant against alterations (typically worded 'the tenant shall not make any alterations to the property without the landlord's prior written consent') is modified by LTA 1927 s.19(2): where the alteration is an improvement (see below), the landlord's consent cannot be unreasonably withheld. The landlord can require payment of a reasonable sum for any loss or damage to the property, including diminution in value or costs of reinstatement — but cannot refuse the improvement outright if the refusal would be unreasonable
• The 'improvement' distinction: LTA 1927 s.19(2) applies only where the proposed alteration constitutes an 'improvement' to the property. An improvement is something that makes the property better or more valuable for the purposes for which it is held (from the tenant's perspective). Installing a new kitchen, improving insulation, adding a shower room, or replacing single-glazed windows with double-glazed units are all likely improvements. Cosmetic changes (painting walls a different colour) may not be improvements within the meaning of the Act
• Reasonable conditions the landlord can impose: Even where consent cannot be unreasonably withheld, the landlord can impose reasonable conditions on consent: requiring the use of approved contractors; requiring the work to be done to a specified standard; requiring the tenant to obtain all necessary planning permissions and building regulation approvals; and requiring the tenant to reinstate the alterations at the end of the tenancy (where reinstatement is reasonable). What is reasonable depends on the nature of the alteration and the potential impact on the property's value
• Unreasonable refusal — tenant's remedy: If a landlord unreasonably withholds consent to an improvement under a qualified covenant, the tenant can apply to the county court for a declaration that consent is unreasonably withheld and an order that consent be treated as given. The tenant can then carry out the improvement without liability for breach of covenant. Alternatively, the tenant may proceed without consent and argue that refusal was unreasonable as a defence to any breach of covenant claim

Disability adaptations — Equality Act 2010 s.190

The Equality Act 2010 creates specific obligations in respect of adaptations for disabled tenants:

• Section 190 EqA 2010 — consent not to be unreasonably withheld: Section 190 of the Equality Act 2010 (replacing the earlier disability adaptation provisions in the Housing Act 1988 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995) provides that where a tenant (or a person residing with or visiting the tenant) has a disability, and the tenant asks for consent to make a relevant improvement to the property, the landlord must not unreasonably withhold consent. Section 190 applies regardless of whether the tenancy agreement contains an absolute or qualified alteration covenant — it overrides the contractual position
• What is a 'relevant improvement': A relevant improvement is a change to a let dwelling which is likely to facilitate the enjoyment of the dwelling or common parts by a disabled person (the tenant or a person residing with or visiting the tenant). Examples include: installing a stairlift; widening doorways to accommodate a wheelchair; fitting grab rails in the bathroom; installing a level-access shower; adding a visual or vibrating doorbell for a hearing-impaired tenant; and installing accessible kitchen fittings. The improvement must be reasonably practicable — a landlord is not obliged to consent to changes that would fundamentally alter the character of the property
• Reasonable withholding of disability adaptation consent: Unlike LTA 1927 s.19(2) where the 'improvement' must genuinely benefit the property, under s.190 EqA 2010, the landlord can withhold consent only where it is reasonable to do so — and the bar is high. Reasonable grounds for refusal include: the adaptation is not reasonably practicable given the physical characteristics of the building (for example, a stairlift cannot safely be installed on a spiral staircase); the adaptation would cause substantial damage to the property; or listed building consent or planning permission cannot be obtained. Financial cost to the landlord is NOT a standalone reasonable ground for refusal
• Conditions on consent: The landlord can require that disability adaptations be reinstated at the end of the tenancy — but only where it is reasonable to do so. A landlord who requires reinstatement of accessibility features at the end of a long tenancy with a permanent disability is likely to be acting unreasonably. A landlord who requires reinstatement of temporary features (portable ramps, temporary grab rails) at the end of a fixed-term tenancy is more likely to be acting reasonably
• No consent required for minor improvements: Where the proposed disability adaptation is minor (not requiring physical alteration to the structure or fabric of the building), the tenant may not need the landlord's consent at all — for example, installation of a portable ramp or a handheld shower attachment. The alteration covenant only restricts structural or permanent changes

MEES and EPC improvement alterations

The MEES regulations require landlords to reach minimum energy efficiency standards — but achieving those standards may require alterations to the property that in turn require the tenant's cooperation:

• MEES works as alterations to the tenanted property: Many MEES improvement works (cavity wall insulation, loft insulation, heat pump installation, draught-proofing, internal wall insulation) involve physical alteration to the structure or fabric of the property. Where the property is let, the landlord must obtain access from the tenant (on 24 hours' written notice) to carry out MEES works. The tenant cannot unreasonably refuse access for essential repair and improvement works — refusal may constitute a breach of the implied tenant-like use obligation
• Tenant consent for structural MEES works: Some MEES works (for example, installation of new double-glazed windows, installation of a heat pump requiring external unit, or installation of solar panels) may require the tenant's cooperation beyond mere access — for example, where the tenant has rights over a garden or communal area. In these circumstances, the landlord should give reasonable notice of the proposed works, explain their purpose (improving EPC rating to meet MEES compliance), and request the tenant's cooperation. The tenant's obligation of tenant-like use arguably requires them to cooperate with reasonable improvement works
• Landlord alterations during a tenancy — quiet enjoyment: When a landlord carries out MEES improvements during a tenancy, the works must not breach the tenant's covenant of quiet enjoyment. Noisy, disruptive, or prolonged works carried out without reasonable notice or without providing temporary alternatives (for example, temporary heating during boiler replacement) may give rise to a claim for damages. Landlords should plan MEES works during void periods where possible and minimise disruption where works must be carried out during a tenancy

Tenant removal rights and reinstatement at tenancy end

At the end of the tenancy, the rules governing what a tenant can remove and what must be reinstated are distinct from the question of consent:

• Tenant's fixtures — the common law right of removal: A tenant who installs fixtures with their own money has a common law right to remove those fixtures at the end of the tenancy — provided the removal can be effected without causing substantial damage to the fabric of the property. The test is whether the item can be detached without destroying or injuring what is attached. A tenant-installed light fitting, shelving unit, or kitchen appliance can typically be removed; a built-in kitchen or a plastered internal partition cannot
• Reinstatement obligations under the tenancy agreement: Most well-drafted tenancy agreements require the tenant to reinstate any alterations carried out during the tenancy at the end of the term — returning the property to its original condition. The landlord's right to require reinstatement is enforceable — failure to reinstate can be deducted from the tenancy deposit (up to the deposit cap) or pursued as a debt claim in the county court. Reinstatement costs must be reasonable — a landlord cannot claim for betterment (upgrading what was there before)
• Where consent was given with a reinstatement condition: Where the landlord gave consent to an alteration on the condition that it be reinstated at the end of the tenancy, that condition is contractually enforceable. Even if the alteration added value to the property, the landlord can still insist on reinstatement if that was the agreed condition. A landlord who changes their mind and wants to retain the improvement (for example, a new bathroom the tenant installed) cannot insist on both the improvement AND reinstatement — they must choose
• Disability adaptations — no reinstatement in most cases: Where disability adaptations were installed under s.190 EqA 2010 and the landlord required reinstatement as a condition of consent, that condition is only enforceable where it was reasonable at the time. A landlord who retrospectively demands reinstatement of permanently installed disability adaptations from a long-term disabled tenant is likely to be acting unreasonably — and may face a claim under the Equality Act for indirect disability discrimination

Frequently asked questions