And there the Minister was, looming large on a huge screen overlooking a hot chandeliered ballroom in a quiet corner of Birmingham Airport. ‘The Minister’ was Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Levelling Up and of course housing too, peering out bemused over delegates like an all-seeing Orwellian Big Brother.

Nigel Lewis

The 1,000-odd people in the hall had bristled with anticipation before his virtual arrival while NRLA boss Ben Beadle sweated quietly on the podium, having clearly been less than certain Gove would log on.

I gather that it was a close-run thing – Rishi’s Cabinet meeting had overrun that morning and a meeting with Jewish leaders had taken its toll on his diary too – unsurprising given the horrors in Israel and Gaza unfolding at the moment.

Renters red tape

But now Gove had something more mundane to discuss – the belief that his nearing and much-debated Renters (Reform) Act, which will make life more difficult for both landlords and letting agents once it gets Royal Assent sometime next year, was a good thing.

Overall, most of the delegates didn’t seem too bothered by the extra red tape they would face. This includes national registration in England via the Property Portal; signing up to and paying for a redress scheme to deal with tenant complaints (something agents already have to, of course) and at some point (following a delay announced by Gove earlier that week) the abolition of Section 21 no-fault evictions.

This will make evicting bad tenants more difficult and expensive.

This will make evicting bad tenants more difficult and expensive going forward, whatever Gove says.

What really got the audience going, which is something the Housing Secretary didn’t mention until prompted by Beadle from the podium, was the issue of taxation. It’s clear most landlords are still hopping mad about George Osborne’s 2015 decision to phase out allowing landlords to claim their mortgage interest payments against personal tax, and the only time Gove got heckled was when he tried to defend it.

His was a familiar but odd argument – that it’s unfair to give landlords tax incentives when home buyers and in particular first-time buyers don’t get tax breaks.

And yet they already get help; many first-time buyers have purchased their homes through Help to Buy, which by any yardstick is a Government subsidy, and a significant proportion of home buyers don’t pay stamp duty at all on their property purchases, while landlords have to pay an additional 3%.

Shouty landlords

But despite the shouty landlords in the audience, Gove overall proved his prowess as a politician; unlike Sunak he has the common touch and can be self-deprecating when necessary but unlike piffle-paffle Boris, he talks well-argued sense on most subjects.

It’s easy to see why some people at the conference thought he might become the next Tory leader, assuming the party’s likely decimation at the next General Election. Remember Labour remains 20 points ahead in the polls.

But as one industry leader pointed out to me after Gove’s speech, he’s also good at talking the talk in front of audiences and editing his politics to suit them, as all politicians do.

Whether his mood music about giving landlords tax breaks and his soothing talk about the Renters (Reform) Bill being a bulwark against bad landlords and not something good landlords and letting agents need worry about, is true or not remains to be seen.

Just £10 extra

Recent research by his department claimed the legislation will cost landlords or letting agents just £10 a year more in additional administration, something most within the property industry consider to be more wishful thinking given that the extra cost of all evictions going to court will be considerable for many property managers.

And so Gove wished the conference farewell and, one assumes, some young parliamentary private secretary gopher hit the Leave button on his laptop.

“Well, that was fun, wasn’t it,” said Beadle, still grasping the podium. I guess it was, if the fine detail of crafting private rented sector legislation is your bag.

The post Gove’s government appeared first on The Negotiator.

Nigel Lewis

The most obvious for sales agents is that housing ministers love to talk about building more homes while the rump of Tory voters don’t want more homes built in their area. Successive Governments have tried to handle that by pretending to back both camps at the same time with predictable results – too few homes are being built.

For letting agents the most recent example of ideological idiocy is the Renters (Reform) Bill which, anyone with any level of thoughtfulness knows, will achieve the opposite of what it hopes to achieve, i.e. a better-quality private rented sector. The current Tory government, and several of those before it, have embraced the Shelter approach to housing – namely that most landlords who are given a free hand in the private rented sector will provide terrible homes.

It is clear that political ideology and on-the-ground practicality are colliding.

The answer to this of course is more legislation and for successive Tory housing secretaries and ministers to position themselves as ‘pro tenant’ and ‘anti landlord’. This makes sense politically – there are at least nine million tenants in the UK within the PRS many of whom the Tories would like to vote Conservative, while most of the country’s 1.5 million landlords probably already do.

No sense

But it doesn’t make sense for landlords, agents or in the long run tenants. Higher taxes, regular drubbings in the media and Parliament, plus greater red tape, will persuade enough landlords to leave the sector that it will shorten supply and jack up rents even more. This is already happening. And it’s not just over-statement by trade organisations like the National Residential Landlords Association or Propertymark; data from independent organisations including Savills and the Office of National Statistics show more landlords than normal are quitting the sector, not helped by spiralling interest rates for BTL mortgages.

It is clear therefore that political ideology and on-the-ground practicality are colliding. The annoying bit is that this makes it difficult for letting agents and tenants, both of whom need more properties within the PRS, but also the Government which has created a situation where rents are spiralling out of control particularly in London and the South of England.

I am not exaggerating here – the main rental indices including Rightmove, Goodlord and the ONS have all reported historic average rents across England and Wales, and at least two of them have cited the landlord exodus as a contributing factor.

BTR to the rescue?

The Tories say they have a solution to this – the build-to-rent sector. Billions of pounds are being poured into this kind of corporate accommodation and the sector’s advocates like to point out how its tenants get ‘professional’ property management, insinuating agents and private landlords are ‘amateurs’.

But it’s going to take decades before BTR makes an impression on the housing market. Even its keenest supporters agree there are only 80,000 completed, a similar number under construction and 110,000 in planning within a market of 4.5 million privately rented households – or 5%. Those completed represent just 1.7%.

It is also disingenuous of politicians to hang their hopes on this sector. BTR developments are land-hungry and despite protestations to the contrary, are largely affordable only for professionals in city centres.

I would urge Labour, who (it is very likely) will be running housing policy from next year onwards, to take a less ideological and more practical approach to running the private rented sector. It needs it.

The post Practicality, not politics appeared first on The Negotiator.

Breaches of these rules can cost businesses up to £500,000 in fines, prohibition on their business activities and serious damage to their commercial reputations. Not forgetting the potential liability of the company directors for the same eye-watering fines – and disqualification if the fines are not paid.

Yes, the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act (DPA) are important, but companies often overlook, or in lots of cases aren’t aware of the rules that they are most likely to fall foul of, The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (PECR).

Definition of direct marketing

‘Direct marketing’ is the communication by whatever means of advertising or marketing material which is directed to particular individuals. It covers any form of marketing when you are doing so to named people. It can be in any form, via phone, emails, texts, social media and so on.

Direct marketing covers any form of marketing when you are doing so to named people.

Andrew Swan

Many companies are doing, but not always aware that they are engaged in direct marketing, which could be contacting people who have previously indicated an interest in buying, selling or renting a property or other forms of sales.

‘PECR’ sets out what you can and can’t do when it comes to direct marketing. The regulations dictate what you must consider when telemarketing, like adhering to the rules of the Telephone Preference Service or people’s preferences for your marketing. Likewise, they tell us what you can do with electronic marketing, such as emails, and when you need consent.

Relevance to agents

Why is this of interest to the property sector? ICO investigations and enforcement are very often triggered by complaints being received about particular companies. These are directly from members of the public and through third parties, such as the Telephone Preference Service, a blocking service for unwanted marketing calls, and the 7726 Spam Reporting Service regarding unwanted text messages. The ICO will monitor the complaints being received and, if they are significant in volume, they may start a formal investigation.

However, they will also closely monitor the sectors that are being most complained about and pay particular attention to companies within them. As an example, they have recently been investigating a lot of companies in the energy and home improvement sector, which they called ‘Operation Tinago’.

This is because the sector generated a high level of complaints from its collective marketing activities and therefore came to the attention of the ICO. Some of the companies involved have received hefty fines, for example a company in Preston called Crown Glazing Limited has just been fined £130,000 for breaching PECR.

Agents targeted

The ICO publish its monthly complaint figures and it seems property and estate agents are creeping up the leaderboard. In May 2023, the sector generated 191 complaints to the ICO, which was mainly from email marketing. Whilst the home improvement businesses generated 440 complaints in the same month, the number is still high and places the property sector in the top 10 most complained about.

Given this unfortunate league table position, it may only be a matter of time before the ICO turns its attention on the sector and starts knocking on the doors of property companies and estate agents. If the figures do not improve for the property sector, it looks as if it is just as matter of time before it becomes the focus of the ICO’s attention and individual investigations will follow.

Keeping the ICO at bay

The easiest, quickest and cheapest way to protect your business is to get savvy and train your staff. One of the main problems I encounter when representing such companies is that they have not paid any attention to the rules and, in particular PECR. The ICO expect that they have provided relevant training to their staff and have suitable PECR policies and procedures in place, but very few companies ever do. Their lack of attention to the marketing rules can actually aggravate the situation and make matters worse.

The ICO requests a lot of information at the start of an investigation but the one sticking point for most companies always comes in the form of this request: “Please provide copies of any policies, procedures or training materials used to inform staff about PECR.”

Most companies struggle to provide such materials. How would you do? If you are doing any direct marketing at all, you should make sure that you understand the laws that apply. You should provide staff training and have relevant policies and procedures. If you don’t, you are more likely to get it wrong and have the ICO knocking at your door.

Andrew Swan is a a leading specialist solicitor in the UK, defending companies subject to regulatory investigation and enforcement, in trouble with the ICO. He offers training and advice on direct marketing laws.
www.andrewswanlaw.co.uk

The post Direct marketing? Watch your back… appeared first on The Negotiator.

Nigel Lewis

She asked for the deletion of the whole article on the basis that my article had published her name and address and by not deleting it had infringed her ‘right to erasure’, even though the article was based in part on a public document – in this case a First Tier Tribunal decision – which had named her along with the landlord. Her request was politely refused on the basis that it didn’t fall within the Information Commission Office’s rules for journalists – who have a much freer hand to publish a private individual’s personal information in the public interest. But what this illustrates, and should worry estate agents, is that more and more members of the public are becoming aware about their data rights. And that includes property data.

While retailers may be dimly aware of our preferences for food, clothes or tech, agents of all sizes – as well as the industry’s growing tech giants – hold a very wide range of information such as address, price history, mortgage details, the incomes of those that live there, property value, rent paid and much more.

Selling to data brokers

Talking to several industry insiders it is clear that it’s become increasingly common for information and photos created about homes to be kept for agents’ own use or sold on to data brokers for business gain. Given this is happening, do the highly ‘generalist’ nature of the GDPR data rules really fit the property industry adequately?

GDPR, and the rules it requires agents and all other businesses in the UK to follow, focus very much on the capture, storing and processing of personal information that can identify them – but does not cover information about the homes they live in. After all, there are specific laws and rules about how agents must treat their customers – for example how and when offers from potential buyers must be passed on. So why should there not be an industry-specific set of rules on how agents, portals and software companies handle data about homes supplied to them by their owners, landlords or tenants?

The property industry is risking its ‘Facebook moment’…

This issue is most obvious when you look at the big portals, all of which publish the details of how much properties have been advertised for in the past, and the Land Registry data on the final selling price. The current Zoopla TV advertising campaign sums up the argument succinctly – people feel uncomfortable discussing how much they paid for a property, so why not just go and find out online instead?

While most of the public seem happy with this arrangement, they might be less impressed that their historic and even current activity within the housing market is being captured and used to pass on leads to mortgage firms for a fee, for touting purposes and to be sold to non-property businesses such as white goods manufacturers?

Surveys – an area of concern

One argument is that where data has a role in ensuring the better operation of the industry – such as the freely available EPC online register and the lists of PRS landlords most council’s put online too – then it can be justified.

Nigel Walley of the Residential Log Book Association, points out another area of concern… surveys.

He claims that it has become ‘standard practice’ for the mortgage industry to enable the data within valuation surveys to be sold to data brokers.

“The surveying company retains the intellectual property for the survey and the brokers aggregate the data and sell it on to portals and other proptech companies,” he says. “No homeowner is given the option to keep the contents private, or to assume ownership of the data.”

Many agents may say that this has all been going on for a long time and to date no one has been outraged enough to cause a fuss.

But the property industry risks its ‘Facebook’ moment. This came for the social media platform when during the 2010 it became clear the platform had been involved in a ‘data harvesting’ exercise facilitated by UK firm Cambridge Analytica to capture people’s personal details and then use it to target them with political advertising via Facebook. It nearly brought down Facebook and the company was fined heavily while its CEO Mark Zuckerberg being given a public roasting during an official investigation.

I am not suggesting that such a scandal would ever envelop a company within the property industry. But if a public debate were to be ignited about what agents do with property data, some argue largely without consent, it could damage their already shaky reputation even more. Maybe it’s time to tighten up this area of data handling?

The post A data scandal looms appeared first on The Negotiator.

This appeals to those who personally and commercially resent anyone sticking noses into their daily lives – which is most of us really – but on the ground it is beginning to have serious consequences for letting agents.

System in trouble

I talked to Paul Shamplina, he of evictions specialist Landlord Action, who has serious misgivings about the way the Government is operating the courts system – and he’s joined by the mighty ranks of the Law Society and the UK’s solicitors’ trade organisations in this view. They have all been warning for some time that a lack of investment in the justice system overall is now coming home to roost in the County Courts, where discretionary evictions hearings are conducted. Not enough judges are being trained and hired, too few courts have the capacity to get bona fide evictions expedited and, in recent weeks, it’s clear the bailiff system is now in trouble.

Nigel Lewis

Shamplina says the court system is on the brink of a severe bailiff crisis with a growing number of court appearances and warrants being put on ice or cancelled, leaving many landlords and letting agents high and dry. Some landlords are waiting six months, and sometimes 12 months, to evict tenants. The Ministry of Justice has said somewhat bizarrely that the bailiff shortage is being caused by many court-employed bailiffs not having enough personal protection equipment (which is a polite term for stab vests) and who have consequently been told to stand down until it’s delivered. This may be true, but there are plenty of people within the bailiff community who think the suspension of activity is more likely to be a result of low investment in the courts, who pay these bailiffs and provide their equipment.

Some landlords are waiting six months and sometimes 12 months, to evict tenants.

Several leading operators report County Court bailiffs managing their work schedules by only attending the serving of a warrant or an eviction for short periods of time – so if a tenant proves tricky the bailiffs just… bail.

Powerless

This may all sounds like the ramblings of the muttering classes, but if the bailiff system grinds to a halt – which it is right now – it will mean more landlords and letting agencies being powerless to get rid of errant tenants who refuse to move on and continue to rack up rent arrears. It is also places the Government’s promised Renters (Reform) Bill under the spotlight – how can the Government abolish Section 21 notice ‘no fault’ evictions when the system that will have to pick up the slack as the new and improved Section 8 notices all go to court shudders to a halt.

This is what happens when a Government constantly relies on promised reforms and improvement of the housing sector, but then delivers it piecemeal or not tall all.

Two examples spring to mind. The much-heralded reform of our estate agency sector via ROPA and the promise to build more homes. The former has disappeared into some very long grass, while the latter has largely failed to materialise.

These things matter – for example the estate agency industry expended a lot of effort and debate over RoPA, not to mention the huge input and long hours of Lord Best, whom I told is not happy that Ministers have so far failed to come up with legislation to implement RoPA.

And letting agents and landlords not having confidence in a shaky evictions system, along with the changes coming down the line within the Renters (Reform) Bill, will do nothing to improve their lives nor increase supply into the private rented sector, which is much needed. As the almost monthly sky-rocketing rentdata proves.

I hope the next Government, whoever that might be, has the will power to overcome this foot dragging and get moving.

The post Court napping appeared first on The Negotiator.

Nigel Lewis

After a pause for thought, the best comparison I could muster was a Government deciding what to do about a rickety bridge. This river crossing had for many years served the traffic traversing it well without much need for action or debate. And then bridges became a hot potato as traffic increased and queues built up to use its water-resisting abilities.

But rather than build a new bridge, or maybe several new bridges, the Government decided to vastly increase the regulation of bridge maintenance and charge its operator higher taxes which, even the most commercially moronic could see, was not going to reduce the queues either side of the crossing or the creaks and groans coming from its sagging struts.

A bridge too far

And that is where we are now. Successive Tory Governments have attempted unsuccessfully to bypass their own ‘heartland’ voters and carpet the Home Counties with Redrow’s and Barratt’s finest bricks and mortar, thus diminishing supply as our population continues to rise.

As readers will be aware, this is not just a supply problem. Keen to appear to be the tenants’ champion, Gove and his ministerial compatriots have packaged the Renters (Reform) Bill to try and patch up our groaning and creaking housing sector. But it doesn’t solve the key problem. Landlords are powerful in areas where demand has continued for years to dwarf supply.

Some of its measures are required, I would hasten to add. For example, it’s about time local authorities were empowered and better funded to tackle rogue landlords and agents, and a national register of landlords has been needed for some time, as has a common basic ‘decent home’ standard for the PRS. But on the other hand, banning Section 21 – the key plank of the Bill – will achieve very little other than making it more difficult for landlords and agents to evict all but the most extreme cases of bad behaviour or rent debt.

The Renters (Reform) Bill is going to create daily operational and admin headaches for agents.

Agents reading this may shrug their shoulders and deduce that none of this broad-brush wonkery affects their small patch of Albion. But it already is and will do increasingly. The Renters (Reform) Bill is going to create daily operational and admin headaches for letting agents, increase their workload overall and ensure they do more work for landlords for the same fee. It will also hasten consolidation within the PRS as the small-portfolio landlords move into the safer and less heavily taxed short lets market, into commercial or wherever they think their retirement nest egg might do better.

Diluted fudge

My expectation is that the worst aspects of the Bill will be diluted in the greatest tradition of British legislative ‘fudgery’ and some of its self-defeating elements improved to make sense. Let me give you an example – the Bill promises to ban agents and landlords from ‘blanket’ banning tenants in receipt of benefits. From a social justice perspective this makes sense – it’s unfair and unpleasant to make life difficult for people already struggling in life. But the reason most landlords ban tenants like this is that they have little desire to get involved in the housing benefits and/or Universal Credit system.

Rather than make the payment of such benefits direct to landlords as standard, tenants on benefits are to be given the right to challenge and/or report agents for refusing them – although proving this going to be difficult for the redress scheme or schemes tasked with policing this system.

Were my friends down the pub convinced by my short but exasperated monologue? Possibly. But overall, I’d say the Bill is just another example of reforming legislation that sounds good on page three of The Sun newspaper, but in the real world will improve little for tenants at the bottom end of the PRS, and just create more red tape for those who manage properties across the whole of it. We need more and better-quality rented homes – build-to-rent anybody?

The post The Renters (Reform) Bill in focus appeared first on The Negotiator.

With much fanfare Housing Secretary Michael Gove trumpeted the “once in a generation” reforms across the airwaves hailing the desire to “deliver safer, fairer and higher quality homes”.

At its heart, ‘no fault’ evictions will be abolished to protect tenants and empower them to challenge poor standards.

But taking away with one hand, Gove also promised that responsible landlords will be able to recover their properties more easily from anti-social tenants.

The white paper

That White Paper – A faired private rented sector – published in June last year, had already paved the way for revised routes to regain possession; a new tenancy regime; no blanket ban for renting with pets; the adoption of the Decent Homes Standard in the private rented sector; a dedicated Housing Court; the cessation of arbitrary rent review clauses; no blanket bans on renting benefit recipients, or families with children and a new private renters’ ombudsman created to settle disputes between tenants and landlords quickly.

Michael Gove’s ‘once in a generation’ reforms aim to ‘deliver safer, fairer and higher quality homes’.

The Renters (Reform) Bill introduced to Parliament this month certainly delivers on those key areas. The Government’s 2019 manifesto commitment to abolish Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions will empower renters to challenge poor landlords without fear of losing their home.

But Gove says that the Bill will also protect over two million landlords, making it easier for them to recover properties when they need to – so they can sell their property if they want to, move in a close family member, or when tenants wilfully do not pay rent. Notice periods will also be reduced where tenants have been irresponsible – for example breaching their tenancy agreement or causing damage to the property.

The reforms strengthen powers to evict anti-social tenants, broadening the disruptive and harmful activities that can lead to eviction and making it quicker to evict a tenant acting anti-socially.

To make sure this all gels together, the new tenancy system will be introduced alongside a reformed courts process. And for the minority of evictions that do end up in the courts, the plan is for more of the process to be digitised and so reducing delays.

New landlords ombudsman

Meanwhile, a new ombudsman will provide quicker and cheaper resolutions to disputes, while a new digital Property Portal will enable landlords to understand their obligations and help tenants make better decisions when signing a new tenancy agreement. The aim behind this is to give confidence to good landlords, while driving the criminal minority out of business.

“Too many renters are living in damp, unsafe, cold homes, powerless to put things right, and with the threat of sudden eviction hanging over them,” says Gove.

“This Government is determined to tackle these injustices by offering a New Deal to those living in the Private Rented Sector; one with quality, affordability, and fairness at its heart.

“Our new laws will support the vast majority of responsible landlords who provide quality homes to their tenants, while delivering our manifesto commitment to abolish Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions.

“This will ensure that everyone can live somewhere which is decent, safe and secure – a place they’re truly proud to call home.”

The Bill is part of the Government’s mission to level up across the country and follows the wider housing reforms in the Social Housing Regulation Bill and Building Safety Act and has been met with mixed reaction. Ben Beadle, Chief Executive of the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA), was at pains to point out that the Bill is just the beginning. “The Bill in the end was largely in line with the White Paper but it is important to remember that this is the beginning of a new journey,” he said, taking to LinkedIn to stress his comments further afield.

It is not coming in today and now kicks off what NRLA is here to do – influence, cajole and improve the Bill to give confidence to the responsible majority in our sector. Ben Beadle CEO, NRLA.

“It is not coming in today and now kicks off what NRLA is here to do – influence, cajole and improve the Bill to give confidence to the responsible majority in our sector – something that I was very pleased to see the Secretary of State accept in his media rounds. The language from Mr Gove was a marked change. He needs responsible landlords let’s not forget that.

“Should we panic and make knee jerk responses in our lettings business? Of course we shouldn’t. Do we want to see changes? 100%. Are we geared up for sensible and rational argument with Michael Gove and Rachel Maclean [Minister of State at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities], absolutely.”

Indeed, debates, amendments and changes are no doubt all still to come.

Major breakthrough?

Others in the wider industry have heralded the Bill as a major breakthrough.

Martin Stewart, Managing Director of mortgage broker London Money, has campaigned tirelessly on the evils of the buy-to-let market and the negative issues it brings to the private rented sector.

“I never thought I would ever say this about the Government or their overall housing policy, but the Renters (Reform) Bill does, at first glance appear to be a wonderful piece of legislation, not only for tenants but for landlord’s as well,” he told The Neg.

“I say this as someone who has campaigned tirelessly for negative issues within the PRS to be addressed.

“I am pleased to see that landlords will find it easier to reclaim their properties off unsavoury or poor performing tenants. No one should be faced with financial hardship or be cut off from their asset through non-payment from a third party.

“It is a shame that we had to even have this Bill, but so bloated with cheap money and amateurish practices has buy-to-let become that eventually something had to be done.

“Someone asked me recently whether I thought the Government had an active anti-landlord policy? No, of course they don’t. But they will have had a number of separate policies that have collectively led us to where we are today and someone is very naïve if they think industry sectors don’t evolve over time with regulation and market forces. This is very true of the private rented sector today.”

Political debate heats up

The political heat on the property market has certainly intensified over recent weeks with more details published on what the main political parties would do to boost housebuilding and improve tenants’ rights. For its own part, the Renters (Reform) Bill is designed to tip the balance of power back towards tenants. According to the latest English Housing Survey the private rented sector has accounted for about one fifth of households in England since 2013-14 after nearly doubling in size since the early 2000s.

Beverley Kennard, head of lettings operations at Knight Frank, says it only seems fair that legislation should reflect the fact there are a growing number of renters in the country. But she’s also quick to point out that getting a property back to live in or sell should also be a landlord’s right. “There are many reasons why a landlord would want possession back of their property and this would now happen under a re-worked system,” she says. “We are also pleased to see the Bill will look to introduce new grounds for getting a property back, including rent arrears and anti-social behaviour, which should give landlords even more comfort.”

One issue of concern is that tenants may be able to serve a two-month notice at any time.

“There is still a long way to go with this Bill and the industry will challenge the government on how practical such an approach would be,” she adds, estimating it could take 18 months for the legislation to apply to new tenancies and a further 12 months for all existing tenancies.

“One thing the Government will be acutely aware of is how fast rents have been rising over the last two years due to a lack of rental properties. Landlords have left the sector after a series of tax changes in recent years means it has become more financially punitive for them, and the pain has been felt by tenants. They won’t want more landlords to follow suit as a result of these latest proposals. One fifth of households in England is a lot of voters.”

Tenant security

Dan Wilson Craw, Acting Director, Generation Rent, also highlights the one in five. “The Renters (Reform) Bill is a huge opportunity to improve the lives of the 11 million people who now rent from private landlords in England,” he says. “Arbitrary Section 21 evictions make it impossible for tenants to put down roots and report problems about their home with confidence. Abolishing them will take away much of the stress of renting and improve communication and trust between tenants and landlords. The new Property Portal and Ombudsman have the potential to make it much harder for criminal landlords to operate.”

Bringing fairness and greater transparency to the private rented sector should indeed be applauded. While the proposed reforms in the Renters’ Bill have been long awaited, they will bring much needed clarity to both letting agents and landlords as well as their tenants.

There’s still a long way to go as the Bill makes its passage through Parliament. And while it may just be the beginning, at least it’s a start.

‘NO PETS’ NO MORE

Dogs Trust has been campaigning for years for greater rights for responsible dog owners who rent. Around one in ten people contacting Dogs Trust to rehome their dog cite issues with accommodation, such as being unable to find suitable rental accommodation, forcing them to make the difficult decision to rehome their dog. And research conducted by Dogs Trust and Cats Protection reveals that landlords are currently split on whether they currently allow pets, with 46% saying they allow pets.

However, the number of tenants saying their tenancy allows pets is much lower than this, with just 30% saying their landlord would allow a dog in the property.

The same research reveals that, in over a third of cases where cats or dogs have not been allowed by a private landlord, the landlord did not proactively decide this based on the individual tenants or pets, but either followed advice or a used a standard template.

Owen Sharp, Chief Executive at Dogs Trust, says, “The new measures introduced today are a potential gamechanger for responsible dog [and cat] owners who rent. Dogs Trust has been campaigning on this subject for many years as we believe that the joy of pet ownership shouldn’t be exclusive to homeowners but open to private and social renters as well. For too long, people living in rented accommodation have not able to enjoy the benefits and companionship of a pet just because of the type of housing they live in.

“Allowing pets in rental properties is not just good for the tenants; there are advantages to landlords too as it could increase the length of time tenants choose to rent a property.

“Research by Dogs Trust and Cats Protection found that 26% of tenants would stay longer in a property if they were allowed to keep a pet.”

The post The great reformer appeared first on The Negotiator.

For tenants, they want to see more protection against eviction, rent rises and poor living conditions. Landlords on the other hand want to be able to take action against renters who refuse to pay their rent or don’t look after the property.

They want to see more protection against eviction, rent rises and poor living conditions.

The Government recognised these tensions within PRS and published its programme for change in the Renters’ Reform White Paper last June, which it has promised will be enshrined in a bill before becoming law this year. There were some sweeping changes in the White Paper including the abolition of Section 21 ‘no fault evictions’, and an end to fixed term tenancies. Now, MPs on the House of Commons’ Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee have responded with their verdict on the Government’s plan.

Section 21 to go

The committee supports the scrapping of Section 21 and also fixed term tenancies, although it says they should be retained for student lets. It says that if landlords are forced to use Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 instead of Section 21, then the pressure on the already creaking courts could become too great. This extra pressure could be made worse by landlords themselves being prosecuted by local authorities for failing to meet new Decent Homes Standards that the Government is keen on and has made a key part of its proposed PRS changes.

Michael Gove, driving PRS reform at DLUHC.

So, the committee backs the idea of new ‘housing courts’ dedicated to dealing with Section 8 cases, as well as DHS prosecutions and other housing-related issues. “The best way to improve the housing court system is to establish a specialist housing court, but the Government has rejected this idea, for reasons we find unsatisfactory,” the committee says.

New housing courts or at least reforms of the court system are supported by Chris Norris, policy director at NRLA, who says: “The committee is right to call for court reform to underpin the ending of Section 21, changes in plans for student tenancies and ensuring cases of anti-social behaviour are prioritised by the courts.”

Redress schemes

Timothy Douglas, head of policy and campaigns, at Propertymark, agrees and says he backs housing courts, but also the fast-tracking of possession claims for ASB and rent arrears. But Douglas does not believe that a single ombudsman for the lettings sector is the way forward, as the MPs propose. The Government wants to introduce an additional ombudsman for landlords, as well as the two existing schemes for letting agents, the Property Redress Scheme and the Property Ombudsman.

Douglas says: “It is concerning that the committee has recommended that the UK Government introduce a single ombudsman for the whole of the private rented sector without considering its impact. “Such a significant change needs thorough consideration of the implications on the system as a whole.

“Alongside letting agents, sales and managing agents are also currently legally required to belong to one of the existing redress schemes, therefore removing these schemes and replacing them with one for letting agents and landlords will have knock on effects for the housing sector which the committee has failed to realise.” He says, “a single-entry point for all housing related complaints” should be introduced, and for landlords to be added to the existing schemes.

Taxation and affordability issues

Both Douglas and Norris believe the committee has recognised the fundamental nature of some of the problems faced by the PRS. For example, the committee says that the impact of tax changes on the buy-to-let market need to be looked at by the Government. “We recommend that the Government review the impact of recent tax changes in the buy-to-let market with a view to making changes that make it more financially attractive to smaller landlords,” it says.

Also, the MPs want the White Paper to reflect the “affordability crisis” in PRS with rents that are already high, rising even further. They make a concrete suggestion to help with affordability; “We call on the Government to recommit to delivering the affordable homes the country needs, particularly the 90,000 social rent homes we have previously concluded are needed every year.”

Norris says: “As the committee rightly notes, the biggest challenge faced by many renters is that there are not enough homes to rent. All the protections in the world will mean nothing for tenants if the homes are not there in the first place.

“That’s why the Government should accept the committee and the NRLA’s call for a full review of the impact of recent tax changes in the sector.”

Douglas echoed the demand from the committee and NRLA for action on tax measures, repeating the call for a review. And he says, “It is encouraging that the committee shares our concerns that the private rented sector is shrinking. As the committee rightly notes, the biggest challenge faced by many renters is that there are not enough homes to rent. “

All the protections in the world will mean nothing for tenants if the homes are not there in the first place.” He says there is a need for more social house building “to improve investor confidence, tackle affordability and increase supply”.

Douglas also wants to see a more joined-up approach across government to ensure the issues within PRS are tackled effectively. He calls for “a wider approach that incorporates the six government departments that interact with the private rented sector to create a long-term strategy for the future of renting. “For us to find a long-term solution, we must look holistically at the scale of the challenge and be realistic about the level of reforms needed.”

Benefits claimants and pets

There were some other recommendations from the MPs’ committee that have not prompted a reaction from industry experts, such as its comments on action against landlords who refuse benefit claimants. The Government wants to make it illegal for a landlord to prevent benefit claimants from taking a tenancy, but the committee says this unrealistic.

“Landlords who do not want to let to benefit recipients will simply choose not to do so,” it says. A much better solution, the committee says, would be to increase local housing allowances so housing benefit covers the rent more effectively.

Similarly, the committee believes it would be very difficult to make landlords accept tenants with pets against their wishes. The Government must “explain in what circumstances it would be acceptable to force landlords to accept pets, especially where those landlords have had previous negative experiences of tenants with pets,” the committee says. The MPs are not convinced that a workable solution to this issue can be found, especially as the Government has to come up with a definition of what ‘unreasonably withholding consent’ actually means in practice.

Tenants need to know their rights for any of the Government’s changes to PRS to work, the committee concludes, and more needs to be done to ensure renters understand what their rights are. This should start, the MPs say, by updating the ‘How To Rent Guide’ and making it a requirement for every tenant to be provided with a copy.

The post PRS regulation update appeared first on The Negotiator.