RTM company formations reached 986 in 2025, with 578 more in H1 2026

RTM company formations reached 986 in 2025, with 578 more in H1 2026, according to research by Placekeeper Management reported by Property Industry Eye. There is no new law behind those numbers. But they do suggest a higher risk of resident groups using existing rights to take over management in blocks where service charges, communication or major works are already disputed.

The relevant law remains the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, which allows qualifying leaseholders to acquire the Right to Manage through a statutory process. That matters for London in particular, given the capital's large stock of leasehold flats, mansion blocks and mixed-use schemes.

Why the figures matter for London landlords and agents

The immediate issue is operational, not legislative. A rise in RTM activity means landlords, freeholders and managing agents should expect closer scrutiny of how blocks are run. In practice, leaseholders considering RTM often focus on:

• service charge budgets and year-end accounts
• invoices and contractor records
• procurement decisions
• major works consultation
• complaint handling and resident communication

If those records are incomplete or difficult to retrieve, that is a vulnerability before any RTM notice is even served.

The source report did not provide a London borough breakdown, so it would be wrong to claim that any particular borough is leading RTM activity. Still, the issue is likely to be relevant across boroughs with large numbers of purpose-built flats and converted blocks.

Section 20 files are an obvious pressure point

Where major works or qualifying long-term agreements are involved, Section 20 consultation can quickly become a flashpoint. There is no new Section 20 rule in this report, but landlords and agents should review current and recent projects now, especially where costs have risen sharply.

Check whether:

• consultation notices were served correctly and on time
• leaseholder observations were logged and answered properly
• supporting paperwork can be produced quickly
• estimates, contracts and decision records are complete

If there is any doubt over consultation compliance, take legal advice promptly. Procedural mistakes can affect recoverability of service charges, so this is not an area for guesswork.

Why single-flat landlords should still pay attention

Even if you do not control management, RTM can still affect you as a leaseholder and landlord. A change in management may alter:

• service levels
• future budgets and reserve fund decisions
• the handling of consents and arrears queries
• planned works communication
• buyer and tenant perceptions of the block

For landlords with multiple flats in one development, the effect can be wider if handover delays or disputes disrupt normal block management.

The commercial risk for agents and freeholders

For managing agents and freeholders, RTM can mean lost management income, handover work, legal costs and reputational damage. The source report did not quantify those costs, so they should not be overstated. But the risk is real enough to justify treating RTM as a formal management issue where blocks already have repeated complaints or poor transparency.

Three sensible actions in the next 30 days

1. Audit service charge and major works files for blocks with recent disputes, high charges or ongoing works.
2. Confirm your RTM notice process so staff know who logs, reviews and escalates any formal notice under the 2002 Act.
3. Improve resident communication before budgeting and works decisions create fresh friction.

A short service charge update explaining current costs, upcoming works and how contractors were chosen can sometimes reduce the mistrust that helps RTM campaigns gather support.

There is no confirmed new government intervention in the reported figures. What is confirmed is a rise in RTM company formations; what happens next will depend on how individual blocks are managed and how resident concerns are handled.

This article is general information, not legal advice.