Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » Buying and selling property

Good riddance to bad landlords!

Christina Jordan
by Lovemoney Staff Christina Jordan on 20 May 2009  |  Comments 57 comments

Sweeping changes are afoot in the private rented sector for landlords, tenants and letting agents, as the Government takes a whip to rogue landlords.

A new landlord licensing scheme is to be launched and all letting agents could be regulated, in a series of measures aimed at improving the private rented sector in the UK.

The proposals were announced last week in the Government's response to The Rugg Review, which was published last year and included a range of recommendations to protect tenants, drive out bad landlords and ensure best practice in the sector.

The Government has now begun a period of consultation on a number of proposals that, if introduced, could have a significant impact on both tenants and landlords.

What are the new proposals?

  1. A national register of private landlords could be introduced. All landlords will have to ensure their properties meet certain criteria, and that they deal fairly with tenants, in order to remain on the list. If the property is not up to scratch in terms of energy efficiency or health and safety, for example, they could be struck off. The proposal is designed to drive out 'bad landlords', according to the Government.
  2. Written tenancy agreements will also be made mandatory, as it is currently still legal to have a verbal rental agreement. But the Government says that, with a written and transparent agreement, both landlord and tenant have a clear record of their rights and responsibilities.
  3. Access to the Assured Shorthold Tenancy framework has been extended to cover properties with annual rental income of up to £100,000. The threshold was previously just £25,000, so this means that more properties will now fall within the Assured Shorthold structure, which offers protection and transparency to tenants and landlords.
  4. Compulsory regulation of private sector letting and management agents has been proposed -- a hugely significant move. The compulsory regulation would require all agents to adhere to a code of conduct, including decent home standards, and have measures in place to protect the landlords and tenants they deal with. These will include client money protection, professional indemnity insurance and independent complaints procedures.
  5. There will also be greater protection for tenants whose landlords default on a buy-to-let mortgage. The Government wants to help tenants who are caught up in a repossession case through no fault of their own by ensuring they get a full two months' notice.  And it is urging landlords and lenders to give tenants adequate time to make alternative accommodation arrangements.
  6. There will be a strong focus on how local authorities work with the private rented sector. The Government is proposing a number of measures to improve this work, including better training of staff.
  7. Finally, it is also trying to encourage institutional investment into the private rented sector by creating opportunities to invest on a large scale for the long term.

Who do these measures affect, and how?

Good news for tenants

Tenants are the biggest winners from the new proposals which are designed to offer them much greater protection.

The landlord registration scheme will mean that, as a tenant, you will know that your landlord is meeting basic standards on their properties before you sign up, like keeping up with repairs and protecting tenant deposits.

The register should also push rogue landlords out of the market, although the National Landlords Association has argued that this may not happen in practice. It argues that such a scheme has already existed in Scotland for three years but that a quarter of properties remain unregistered.

The proposed measure to give tenants at least two months' notice if their landlord is facing repossession is also welcome. It should ensure that, in the future, no tenant ever goes home to find that, because the landlord has defaulted on the mortgage, the locks have been changed by the lender!

This is a serious concern for many at the moment - 1,700 buy-to-let properties were repossessed in the first three months of this year and 3.09% of all buy-to-let loans are in arrears of three months or more.

Landlords face tighter controls

Many landlords will probably not be too pleased with the proposals. The registration scheme will mean increased red tape and costs, and it may or may not offer tangible benefits to most landlords.

Indeed, it has already been argued that the collection of rental property addresses and information for the register is overly intrusive at a time when the last thing good landlords need is added regulation.

However, landlords could benefit from the mandatory regulation of letting and managing agents, which will be forced to deal fairly and transparently with both tenants and landlords. Plus there will a system of redress for those who feel they have not been well treated by letting agents via an independent complaints process.

Personally, I think the Government's response to the Rugg Review gives good landlords little to fear. Any bad eggs however, will either have to shape up - or ship out.

Tough times for letting agents

At the moment anyone can set up a letting agent with no qualifications and no code of conduct to adhere to. Some bodies offer voluntary membership schemes but around half of letting agents don't belong to any of them.

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors has strongly welcomed the proposed mandatory regulation of agents and said that the measures need to be acted on swiftly. Action needs to be taken to 'end the scourge of unregulated agents and protect vulnerable consumers', it stated.

There's not many people, apart from letting agents, that would contest their regulation although there will clearly be red tape and cost implications, which will ultimately be borne by clients - whether landlords or tenants.

Overall though, the Government's response to the Rugg Review has shown its commitment to improving the private rented sector (which accounts for 14% of all housing stock) while introducing 'light touch' regulation. Quite rightly, it has focused on protecting vulnerable tenants who are at risk because of a very small minority of rogue landlords and letting agents.

But what do you think? Do you agree with what the Government wants to do? Share your thoughts using the comment box below!

Compare buy-to-let mortgages with lovemoney.com

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (57)

  • Pond321
    Love rating 3
    Pond321 said

    I have been in rented accommodation for over 15 years. I have rented from private landlords and letting agents. I have never had a problem with a private landlord – they have always been excellent. However, EVERY letting agent I have dealt with has proved to be both incompetent and fraudulent. The sooner the government regulates letting agents the better.

    Report on 20 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  2 loves
  • tray
    Love rating 0
    tray said

    In my experiences of letting property over the last 20+ years it's the landlords who need extra protection not tenants, although I do agree with Pond321 letting agents are a waste of time and money in the great majority of cases,never use them myself these days

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Tiger Moth
    Love rating 2
    Tiger Moth said

    The landlord registration scheme will mean that, as a tenant, you will know that your landlord is meeting basic standards on their properties before you sign up, like keeping up with repairs

    I would have thought most tennants would visit the rental property that they were interested in, before signing a letting agreement. If you can not recognise: 'damp', poor decoration and grotty furniture that is rather sad.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Foghorn59
    Love rating 0
    Foghorn59 said

    'Light Touch Regulation"? Who are they trying to kid. I have a flat in a block on the south coast which became surplus to my requirements when I inherited the family home which I now share with my brother. I have kept the flat on, but unfortunately I am now unemployed, with no income coming in and unable to claim Jobseekers' Allowance because of the equity on my flat counting as savings.  The only way I could cover my costs while out of work is to rent the flat until I am in a position to sell it.

    But what am I faced with before I can even do that?

    Compulsory Energy Performance Certificate- costing at least £60. This however serves little useful purpose; issues such as Cavity Wall Insulation are beyond my control as they are the responsibility of the freeholder and of course affect the whole block.

    Tenancy Deposit Scheme. More red tape- and no doubt costing more as well

    Requirement to buy fire retardant furniture- more money I need to find before I've even started to get an income from my (mortgaged) property.

    Having lived previously in rented accommodation myself, I'm well aware that there are 'bad' landlords out there- but 75 per cent of those I've dealt with have been excellent, friendly and quick to deal with problems.

    Why is this government once again using a sledgehammer to crack a nut? Where's the help here, in such difficult times, for the small landlord or those just wanting to rent out a single property- not make their fortunes from multiple properties? If this legislation is to be passed, there should at least be help and a provision for small landlords. For example, the cost of energy assessments and fire-retardant furniture should be available as a loan from local councils until the first rent payment is received.

    Where government efforts would be far-better focussed, however, is on reforming or even abolishing the archaic concept of leasehold ownership of residential properties. From personal experience and that of numerous others, this sector of the housing market is riddled with unscrupulous "Managing Agents", exorbitant or even non-existent block insurance policies, unfair charges and sub-standard properties. This needs urgent action.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • NZJenn
    Love rating 5
    NZJenn said

    I have to agree with Tray.

    It seems that our tenancy agreement is virtually worthless when you need it. We let out our house after my husbands job moved abroad.

    Our last tenants paid the rent over three weeks late (for the duratio of the tenancy), destoyed parts of our property and "rennovated" our property for us (we had spent three years doing the place up before they moved in) and 4 months after they moved out we are still trying to get our share of the deposit back to fix everything they broke (including kicking down our front brick wall and fence). But as they don't want to pay what they owe (they've offered 1/6 of what we are looking for) we have to decide whether or not to go to tribunal which we have been warned heavily favours the tenants - oh and the tenants are trying to charge US labour for the work they did!!!

    Our current tenants have decided not to pay the rent this month but can we do anything about it? Not according to our agents.

    I'd support a tenants register, so you can check what they are actually like rather than having to rely on the references they provide, which are easily made up by friends and family.

    I'm trying to talk my husband into selling the house as the time spent dealing with the constant problems with crappy tenants just isn't worth it, especially as we have no plans to return to the UK to live.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bagaholica
    Love rating 1
    bagaholica said

    There is no point having extra rules and regulations unless you can follow through.

    I think there are lots of students in rented accommodation that would fail many of the regulations already in place.

    What is being done to ensure that these landlords are encouraged to provide better accommodation? All the help regarding insulation and TRVs on radiators etc doesn't apply to students in private rented accommodation. The tenants may well see what is there but they may not have a lot of choice. Complain and they may find their home condemned.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • panachee
    Love rating 0
    panachee said

    More unnecessary regulation from a control freak government. Nanny state!!

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • cj63
    Love rating 2
    cj63 said

    I agree with NZJenn that we need a register of rogue tenants so that we good landlords can be protected.

    I thankfully have only had one bad tenant who moved out and left my flat with stains on the carpets where tea/coffee had been split, stained dining room chairs, a broken computer stool and a kitchen that needed a thorough clean. Even then I treated him fairly by using the cheapest quote to have the carpets cleaned and recovering the dining room chairs myself.

    I do agree that Letting Agents need to be more regulated as they can do as they please and have no legal responsibility for any errors, its the landlord that is responsible. I did use an agent for my first tenancy as a new landlord but now manage the property myself and keep up with current regulations by membership of the National Landlords Association.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Paula240
    Love rating 0
    Paula240 said

    It is amazing to me that the 3 yrs experience of the system in Scotland has not been taken into account.

    1. Linking it to the Antisocial Behaviour legislation so the Landllord of mis-behaving tenants can be identified - Brilliant idea, except Landlords have no protection or powers within tenancy Law. No sanctions are used against Landlords who fail to register, not surprisingly the rogue Landlords will fall in this group, carry on business as usual. No benefit to taxpayer, tenant or good landlords- the majority.

    2. Charging an administration fee - Agreed the costs have to be covered

    In Scotland, the number of private Landlords was so hugely underestimated that some Landlord have waited in excess of 2 years to be licenced.

    3. Licensing results in contact details for the Landlord or agent being available on a publicly accessible register, in relation to each specific property. Yet a co-ordinated Police Raid on those connected with drugs dealing can result in property damage via the front door being burst through and no-one contacts the Landlord to alert him/her.

    All of the benefits that were supposed to result from Landlord Registration have not materialised, in my opinion. I expect more was heard from the tenants of rogue landlords because of the distress and upset it causes but that does not reflect the lasrge majority of people, myself included who were extremely grateful for the availability of private rental property at the time I needed to use it.

    Landlord Registration in Scotland, I would say serves no purpose, is an additional cost to Landlords and has not improved the sector for tenants. Perhaps the rest of the country will have an improved version, I would suggest landlords need to have a strong co-hesive representation on this.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Lysinore
    Love rating 0
    Lysinore said

    This government is in danger of destroying the private rental sector and this would have a dire effect on the entire letting market.

    Like many other landlords, I have been willing to accept potential tenants who are in receipt of Housing Allowance (previously Housing Benefit). However, I have now had cases where the tenant receives the allowance and does not pass this on the the landlord.

    I have heard of a case where the landlord contacted the relevant local authority as the tenant was 2 months behind with his rent and it was agreed that the payments would be paid direct to the landlord. The tenant subsequently contacted the local authority and was able to persuade the local authority to continue to pay the rent to him! This landlord has had no rent for this property for 6 months!

    The rental market will deteriorate further as the number of homeless people grows and landlords fall behind with mortgage payments because tenants refuse to pay their rent.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mick James
    Love rating 25
    Mick James said

    This is the last moment to increase the regulation of letting--there's currently a more than adequate supply of rental housing which leaves ample scope for negotiation between landlords and tenants.

    The government should remember that the dark days of Rachmanism were actually caused by regulation driving decent landlords out of the market, creating a shortage of rental property and leaving the field to rogues.

    As for the extension of the EPC to

    rentals, it serves no useful purpose--it's just a means of creating income for all the people the government has suckered into training as HIPs inspectors. 

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mytret
    Love rating 0
    Mytret said

    The introduction of readily available finance in the form of Buy to let mortgages is probably the main reason why the Housing market is in the state it is in today. Prior to this a property owner would have sold his own house or flat before he bought the next but because pensions were not performing and finance was readily available many owner occupiers hung onto the first to rent out and keep as a pension substitute. This should never have been allowed to happen because in the long term property is not a better investment than everything else. Unfortunately as more people flooded into this "no brainer" property values rocketed and the whole thing became a self fulfilling prophecy - they could not go wrong!?

    Private landlords were doing so well that they didn't have time to vet tenants or carry out necessary maintenance as they were racing around trying to buy the next one for their portfolio. Since the downturn in the market they just cant afford to carry out maintenance and repairs so the work is still not done. Consequently the condition of our housing stock deteriorated rapidly.

    Before the introduction of Buy to let for the masses the average rental would probably have been around 10% of capital value and this is the minimum sort of margin that a landlord requires to be economical. Any less than this and the landlord needs to cut corners and this is the problem we are faced with.

    Buy to let landlords have in many cases bought properties that could never have returned more than 3% - 4% and they were relying purely on the hope of a capital gain to fund their venture. Now the bubble has burst.

    The problem therefore is not so much one of unscrupulous landlords but landlords in financial trouble having to cut corners. This should never have been allowed to happen but now that it has the only way out is to let the market take its course and if landlords are not able to act in a reasonable manner and cover their costs they should be forced out of the business sooner rather than later to enable the market to return to a status quo.

    The current policy of keeping bank rate at an all time low is only serving to prolong the agony and extend the instability of the system

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • gardener
    Love rating 25
    gardener said

    I wonder whether this means my lovely rental home will finally be allowed to be cavity wall insulated? And my windows and door draught-proofed? So far my landlord ( a national well-known charity) refuses this on grounds of unproven technology and detrimental effects on houses of insulation...

    I live in hope!

    I have had good and bad landlords/ladies, but I don't think legislation would have made any difference (one kicked me out after my husband left, another one stole my antique planters, this one also claimed we produced 1000's litres of waste in the septic tank within 3 weeks of moving in, whilst in fact she had diverted the rainwater pipes into the septic tank. All fun & games!

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • ladylandlord
    Love rating 0
    ladylandlord said

    As usual the tenants will be protected even more than they already are, and the landlord has to bear more costs which are not re couped. Again, absolutely no protection for landlords whose tenants do not pay their rents. Our tenants are credit checked, referenced if private, if dss, they have a bond and the council places them. So far this year alone, I have lost over £7,000 in un paid rent and had one property trashed. This due to the damage will cost a further £3,000 to put right along with the property being empty, not earning any money. Landlords do not even have the protection of the court and law when they are granted posession and eviction takes place, as yes we can be awarded the back rent in stage payments, but when the tenant leaves during the night prior to eviction, you cannot trace the tenant, therefore the court granted arrears of rent disappears along with the tenant. With all of the referencing - checks - etc, there is nothing to stop a tenant from moving into a new home, trashing it, not paying one penny of rent, then moving out. Landlords are powerless to remove the tenant, we have to wait until we ar two months down on payments, then we can start procedures to court action, again costing us, another month down, then posession, another month down, with no protection whatsoever. Debt agencies do not take on rent arrears, only for corporate rents. The tenants are laughing all their way to the next property......   

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    You'll never get the likes of Shelter, lcoal councils' environmental health departments or the anti-landlord zealots in Parliament to admit it, but the Rugg Review was in general a highly favourable report on the UK private lettings market. In interviews Julie Rugg said she was pleasantly surprised by how well the market worked, the quality of properties on offer, and the behaviour of private landlords. Arguably the private lettings market on average offers a higher standard and more varied range of property than you will find to buy, and it's certainly better than council housing. If I were a tenant I would far prefer to deal with a private landlord who has a personal interest in the property than some faceless bureaucratic work-shy employee of the local council.

    Most of the proposed changes are mild and largely sensible: the £25K restriction on ASTs is a hangover from the 1988 Housing Act, letting agents need regulating, the 2 months protection for tenants with defaulting landlords is just a knee-jerk response to media hype, and the requirement for written ASTs is sensible given we are now in a world of ludicrous over-documentation: landlords having to pay for inventories, landlords having to photograph every square inch of their properties if they are ever to make a claim against a damage deposit, and so on.

    What I really object to is the proposed registration of landlords, like paedophiles having to join the Sex Offenders Register. This register means that councils, government and HMRC will know every landlord in the country and what properties they own. They will be able to make a never-ending series of demands to improve the properties on "health and safety" grounds, and charge landlords hefty fees for annual inspections by environmental health officers, fire safety officers, the police and so on. Once they know who you are, they will keep on getting you for something.

    This might sound like paranoia, but I've always avoided my local voluntary registration scheme like the plague. The reason - all the works they require you to do. They want locks on every ground-floor window, and five-lever locks on all doors. They want fire protection measures between the kitchen and the rest of the house, which in my case meant tearing out perfectly good Victorian staircase panels and replacing them with fireproof panels which looked awful. They require you to replace all your lovely old Victorian doors with fireproof modern ones with intumescent strips and self-closers, which completely changes the feel of the house because all doors have to be kept shut and you have to heave against the self-close mechanism as you open the doors to move around the house. They require you to put extractor fans into every bathroom and the kitchen, even though there's a perfectly-adequate sash window that can be opened and has been used for this purpose for a hundred years. The list goes on and on. At the limit, councils like Oxford are thinking of making rented houses into a planning issue, so that once they know you have tenants, you have to get plannign permission for this and the property will be a designated property type, like a cafe or hotel. The danger here is that once designated, you won't be able to change the propetrty back to owner-occupation: it will be defined as a House of Multiple Occupation (HMO) in planning terms, so you will only be allowed to sell the house to another landlord, with inevitable effects on its value because you won't be able to sell the house to a normall family!

    Taken individually each measure might seem sensible for any owner-occupier to do, but together they make the house feel institutional and in houseshares, like a set of bedsits, and I think they make the house much harder to sell on, because. The council always uses the argument that registration will provide greater confidence for tenants, who are, of course, always "vulnerable", but in my experience tenants are not interested in these measures - they want somewhere that feels like a potential home, not a barracks.

    Finally it is striking that once again, it is landlords who are largely being penalised. Councils already have innumerable powers to deal with unhygenic or unsafe properties, and there is loads of protection available in the form of gas safety inspections, furnishings legislation, deposit protection and so on. Yet the number of "rogue landlords" being prosecuted is vanishingly small. Why should yet more legislation help, if councils can't find many people to prosecute now? It's also so unfair: where's the legislation requiring owner-occupiers to insulate and draught-proof their houses, or to have safe furnishings and annual gas inspections? Where's the legislation protecting landlords against rogue tenants? I am owed £6000 by a middle-class former tenant who earns £80K a year and sends his children to private school, but never kept up with the rent. Trying to get any money off him is impossible: the courts take forever, and judgements against him are unenforceable because he keeps changing his address and even though I know his NI number I can't have charges made against his salary because he's self-employed. If the government made the slightest effort to help people who are owed money and make debt-repayment much easier, it would reduce the disparity in treatment between landlords, who are endlessly penalised, and tenants, who generally get off scot-free if they misbehave. One day we may see Christina Jordan writing an article called "Good riddance to bad tenants!", but don't count on it.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bazza1212
    Love rating 0
    bazza1212 said

    I am really pleased that our LABOUR government has got to grips with the rental sector,I recently had a situation where I could have died..my gas fire was faulty,giving off carbon monoxide..the fire had not been checked for years..I was feeling ill most of the time..until a mate of mine mentioned about the possibility of CO gas..I informed my landlord,he just laughed it off..my mate then told me to ring the gas supplier..they also were not interested,after making more enquiries I was advised to buy a CO detector,which I did..This little unit saved my life..the CO levels were high,this was the cause of my sickness,and headaches..The landlord when informed acted very quickly to remedy the matter...thank god for regulations,thank god for our LABOUR government..

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • snowman
    Love rating 0
    snowman said

    Here we go again. another piece of useless legislation that will simply make it more difficult to exist in the UK and what is it supposed to achive. Well it will actually achive a big fat Zero as far as the Tenant is concerned except make it more difficult to find accomodation and while all of the arguments go back and forth about better standards and rouge landlords most people will miss the big picture.

    This piece of legislation actually has nothing to do with housing or tenats, its about control taxes and revenue.

    1: Landlords will have to pay to register and have their property inspected, (if the local authority have the time to get to you)

    2:The register is for the tax authorities to keep a check on who is paying their tax and declaring all properties.

    3: The energy inspection is not about energy but a detailed internal inspection to ensure that all improvements are notified so that hykes in council tax can be implimented

    4:More local authority jobs for the boys (as if we didn't have enough civil servants, excuse the word servants, it should be jobswoths.)

    Most landlords are good, honest, hard working and helpfull, so lets stop knocking them or you may find that there are no properties available for you to live in.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    Mytret - where's your evidence that BTL created the property boom? And why are you blaming landlords for the lax lending policies of banks like Northern Rock? Arguably they shouldn't have taken up the money on offer, but the same could be said of all the owner-occupiers who borrowed at the same time, and greatly out-numbered BTL investors. Why are you not blaming owner-occupiers?

    If BTL was banned as you suggest, we would not have the strong and healthy private rental market we have at the moment. Do you not remember the years before 1988, when it was incredibly difficult to find property for rent and the available properties were of very poor quality because landlords had no competition and the good ones had been driven out of the market by the ludicrous old rent control laws? Almost the only options were council housing (single people effectively banned as families and single parents get it all) or buying a house, which was as difficult then as it is now. Now that we have a better rental market, it's far easier to move around the country in search of jobs, and young people have a much better quality of property available when they are saving to buy their own home. Rented property also makes it easier for immigrants to find a place to live, and generally it seems to have improved labour flexibility and mobility across the UK, and economic performance.

    Finally I do agree that rental returns are too low, and some landlords are suffering financially and need to be driven out of the market. I think this is already happening, but it does mean you are saying you think rents should rise, and that there should be fewer rental properties available. Quite how one squares this with the government seeking to encourage institutional investment in property, I don't know. Institutions have generally steered clear of property rentals because the returns are poor, landlords are not well protected against rogue tenants, and it's all just too much trouble to clear blocked drains and deal with disputes between tenants - commercial property investment is just so much easier, with fixed rent reviews, long-term tenancies, and the tenants taking responsibility for property maintenance. BTL is just private investors taking up the slack, because property is one investment that owners understand and feel they can manage and improve through their own efforts, unlike almost any other investment that I can think of that is a realistic prospect for the average citizen.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • duvetdemon
    Love rating 3
    duvetdemon said

    I am delighted that these things are proposed. Landlords who bought when the going was good, reaped the benefits and didnt have the sense to plan, often have little regard for their tenants.

    One thing which I really welcome is more regulation for managing agents who presently dont have any standards to work by - the law and system can be adapted largely for the freeholder. The many people who have bought flats and properties leasehold on a freehold developement with shared services can be really screwed over should an irresponsible freeholder wish to.

    There are some shocking landlords out there. We once had a tenanted property next door with a leaking roof. The landlord refused to do anything for the tenants, and the leak caused damage to our property. The landlord would only fix the problem after months of wrangling, and not the damage to either property - we had to replaster in our property at our cost and the very poor family next door remains in what can only be described as squalid conditions. Similarly my aunty who lives next to a tenanted property has had similar conditions - the next door property has a leak in the basement which the landlord wont fix because he doesnt have the money. The tenants are living with water in their basement - the landlord locked the stairs to the basement so they cant access it but the problem remains. Its damaging my aunties property and she keeps having to get her basement pumped out. Who has the money to sue, and if the landlord doesnt have any money they'll just declare bankruptcy and the problem will take longer to fix.

    Landlords are not always responsible for the properties they own, and this leads to areas with high no of rental properties often falling into disrepair. Should they fall far enough the council (and our money) then has to step in with 'renewal' and 'regeneration schemes'. ANy legislation would be long overdue.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MrsTrellisOfNorthWales
    Love rating 18
    MrsTrellisOfNorthWales said

    Will these new regulations also see an end to the scandalous practice of forcing a tenant to use a landlord's "approved" insurer? This can affect not just those in rented accommodation, but also owner-occupiers who pay ground rent or chief rent.

    This happened to us a few years ago, when the lease on our property was acquired (following the death of the original landowner) by an unscrupulous company, one of whose sister companies was an insurance broker. This company then exploited a loophole in the law which would have forced us to change our buildings insurer to one of their choosing - no doubt at a price to match. The only way we could escape this was by buying out the freehold.

    I agree that there are many honest landlords out there - but this crowd were just in it for the money. They provided absolutely nothing in return.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • tommydog
    Love rating 0
    tommydog said

    I rent houses out on a room by room basis (HMO). Over the last 3 years of being in business I have complied with every regulation going. However, it is often the tenants which need educating. I have a great working relationship with all of them now but have been stung by tenants who I couldn't reference check properly. E.g criminal behaviour, previous drug or antisocial convictions. Some of my tenants are vulnerable and I make sure they have clean, decent and safe accommodation but when I rent a room in a shared house to someone who has lied on their application form or not disclosed their past properly, legislation ties my hands until I can evict them legally. In the meantime, it puts everyone else at risk. I'm all for regulating rip off letting agents, but a register of bad tenants is also a must as most landlords don't go for a CCJ on rent arrears and transparency on criminal convictions is not available.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • silveryminx
    Love rating 0
    silveryminx said

    Whilst I am not sure that these changes are the right ones (I would not want to see good landlords penalised) something has to be done to tighten up on bad landlords.

    My own past expereince is not good. Very regularly entering the premises without prior agreement, breaking in when I effectively restricted access (with prior notification not a problem) I felt like being stalked by someone who had the key to my home, invaded - and it was the female tenants who complained the most about that one, odd things going missing. 3 months to fix a downstairs window - 12 months to sort out a leaking toilet, deteriorating walls not dealt with, phoning at all hours, knocking the door at all hours without notice, leaking roof not fixed for months, leaking ceiling not fixed for week - massive hole between my living room and an upstairs bathroom, gas certificates not done every year, untilities with other properties in the building not split correctly as putting two of something in would cost money so one tenant bears the cost of anothers usage.

    The local authority would have gladly kicked the guy into touch if they could but they did not have the authority or the resources to deal with it properly. These sorts of landlords make cheap cosmetic improvements to get tenants in rather than do proper maintenance, then refuse to spend the money to fix things when the rot starts to show through, They need to be dealt with and unfortuantely like alot of things in life good landlords willl be penalised for the sake of a few rogues but they need to be dealt with somehow

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • happymand
    Love rating 0
    happymand said

    This is typical - more work for the Landlords! What about the tenants who don't pay their housing benefits to the Landlords?! I have a tenant on Benefit and he was paid the Benefit but did not give it to me - I had to wait until he was at least 8 weeks in arrears and then it took several weeks for the Revenues to process the paperwork before I then got the rent paid direct to me! Meanwhile arrears accrued and if I was to take him to Court then it would have cost me even more money - which would have been added to the debt but it was more than likely that the Judgment would have been for my tenant to pay me a pittance a week off the arrears for several years! The system is unfair on landlords!

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • McLeodC
    Love rating 13
    McLeodC said

    Anything that helps drive bad landlords and bad lettings agents out of the market has to be good news for tenants - and ultimately for good landlords and agents, who also suffer from the cowboys. Stricter enforcement of standards and safety is long overdue - tenants can't be expected to know all the regulations or to spot every hazard, and may not always be able to afford to turn down a substandard property if the rent is cheap.

    Quid pro quo - what's now needed are regulations that drive bad tenants out of the market!

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    All costs will eventually be passed down the line to the tenants, and those on low incomes will claim more money back from the Gov't in various forms, eg child tax credits, IS, JSA, council tax rebates, etc etc.

    What it means is that those of us on OK salaries pay YET AGAIN for those on lower wages who couldn't be bothered to better themselves or get an education or get a decent job (or a job at all !)

    So it makes it a system where the reasonable off pay for yet another hoard of 'officials' to do lame and unproductive work, whilst indoctrinating people that what ever information the Gov't asks for, we have a responsibility to hand over without question.

    The only logical eventuality is a system where the Gov't knows everything about everyone and almost what they are thinking. The only step further to that is renaming the Gov't to 'Big Brother' and we all know the rest.

    I can perfectly understand that there are a few unsavoury landlords about, but why effectively punish everyone because there are a few who don't play fairly, as these are the very people who will try to avoid all regulation anyway (eg in Scotland)

    Waste of time, money and will not achieve the design aim.

    What more can you expect from this desparate and pathetic Government?

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • margprice13
    Love rating 0
    margprice13 said

    Great ! So recently when I gave some of my tenants a ( 21 day ) notice not only did they not have to leave ( Law on their side ) not pay their months notice not paid for their damage not moved their furniture or rubbish, when they finally did go we are now giving them further fuel for the fire. Well here goes another solicitors bill + more court costs with no income while I sort it all out & why ? because they are hard done by !  The council due to lack houses are keen to get new Landlords on board for DHSS & do vet the property. Additionally the property / mortgage situation has seen increased needs but a fall in reveue in some area's due to unsold property available. I now have my calcultor rent + then let me see minus tax mortgage maintenace cost new energy cert insurance with legal saftey certs legal contract set up costs rent collection & administration costs + the normal cost of refurb & decoration ( if you are lucky )  not counting any damage & so it goes on. I was sure the legal scales balanced or do they ?

    Not all tenants are bad but not all landords are bad either so get the scales back out & give us some help for the service we provide, a roof over people head when they need it. We want decent rental property & people who will respect & take care of it. Give us safe gaurds & help as well !

    My old tenants moved out & in to a council house giving me 2 days notice when I was holiday for 2 weeks, they had not been evicted.

    MP13

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • chasbmw
    Love rating 5
    chasbmw said

    It very easy foo rental returns to increase, it just needs the capital values of the properties to decrease to such a level that the BTL business model is workable again,

    For BTL to work you need decent yields to pay for maintenance, voids and all the other costs of being a landlord, those who bought proerties on the back of 4% and lower yields must be hurting, no wonder they don't want to maintain their properties.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • naterbox
    Love rating 12
    naterbox said

    I totally agree that we need a register for bad tenenats. I've had a nightmare with tenants who don't pay, despite getting benefit. I now have an agent, who is supposed to collect the money monthly, but I had to inform them when the current tenant got into arrears. Even now they are incapable of working out the debt. I don't live in the area, having inherited the property from my parents. I've tried doing without an agent (I ended up reporting the first agent to NAEA, he was so incompetant), but still ended up with a debt. I long for a tenant who is capable of paying rent regularly and on time.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Palefire
    Love rating 10
    Palefire said

    The rogue landlords that let out scruffy little flats in damp dirty old buildings to dss tennants, such as one unscrupulous person around the Glossop, Hollingworth area near Manchester, will not register and will not be discovered unless someone informs on them. My sister in law was unfotunate enough to need somewhere cheap at short notice and ended up in a complete dump, where despite several requests, basic things such as a front door you could open properly and a large damp patch in one of the bedrooms was never put right. This person is constantly away on expensive holidays and can only usually be contacted if one of his tennants falls behind with their rent - strange that.

    The good landlords will queue up to have handed out their increased red tape and costs, and those hanging on by the skin of their teeth will probably have to give up, only to be replaced by more bad ones. The government would be better suited spending the moeny they are using on this scheme by employing undercover "tennants" to root out the bad apples.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MinxCat
    Love rating 6
    MinxCat said

    I am totally for all of the proposals if it impartially protects everybody concerned. I am an accidental landlady, meaning I rented my home for a short period (was meant to be 2 years) but had to get rid of the tenant. She felt it was her right for some reason to not pay her rent or bills incurred on time or at all, stole my garden bench and a wicker chair stored in my locked shed, left the place dirty, installed a hideous satellite dish with the worst wiring I have ever seen which has destroyed one of our UPVC windows without permission and broke into my shed which she felt she obviously had the liberty to do. I am really amazed not so much at the tenant because it has become evident that she is a "world owes me a living" type of person who has several bailiffs after her for non-payment of council tax and the rest ! but at the agent. I think it must be his Auntie the way he is defending her actions despite all of her breaches to the tenancy agreement. However I will continue to complain to all of the bodies they purport to be a member of (and they have lied as I have found out ) until something changes and I get some justice. These rogue greedy letting agents are giving all letting agents a bad name, so you legitimate letting agents better not defend them by saying nothing. If you find 'yourself' a tenant, as I have been whilst letting put my own house this non-person make sure you check and double check everything about the letting agents credentials, right down to ringing and getting written confirmation of all of the bodies they say they are members of. It is not unheard of for a letting agent to use the tenancy deposit scheme they have set up to meet their own costs and not that of the landlords or the tenants. I am hoping that this ruling will catch out all those who want to operate an unfair and fraudulent business. A note to all Dodgy tenants, letting agents and landlords "the world does not owe you a living, we all struggle to pay bills and trying to coast through life ripping everyone off will catch up with you in the end.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • laser111
    Love rating 0
    laser111 said

    Registration of landlords will not benefit tenants as it will not increase their security under AST's and landlords could still choose to evict rather than carry out expensive repairs. It's the tenants who will pay for this as landlords will of course pass on the cost to the tenant in administration fees and so on and quite rightly as otherwise rising costs make letting unprofitable.While it is difficult to see what the benefits of registration would be in practical terms at the very least it should be free of any charge. The only people who will benefit financially are the govt. who enforce a charge.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • pootle2000
    Love rating 0
    pootle2000 said

    i agree with comments made about both tenants and landlords but in both cases their re always a few bad peopkle that always spoil it for others.

    i had one landlord that when i had my back window put through he was willing to let me stay for one month rent free while i found somewhere else to live and would let me out of my contract penalty free

    however i have also had bad landlords that when i have tried to help by decorating to a high standard are not interested when something they should be maintaining has gone wrong and i have had to fight to get it sorted. i have even been told it was my fault because i didnt pay rent which is paid by direct debit so is always on time it was with the letting agent but they hadnt checked properly.

    i know times are hard on everyone but clamping down on landlords will only get rid of the good ones who are the ones who need to be helped.

    its the letting agents who need to be regulated to help BOTH good landlords/ladies and good tenants

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • acredited landlord to be
    Love rating 1
    acredited landlord to be said

    Typical of this government it cant regulate its own MPs mortgages, interest, floating duck houses on non existant mortgages but wants to sling mud at landlords. It hasin its wisdom decided to make payments direct to claiments to make them more responsible for there finances. Since they have forced this on landlords I have so far this year got five tenants in arrears to approx £2,000.00. If I cant pay my mortgage the banks should let bad tenants have more time to run up debts before they reposes a property. Tenants should to the one have a license to rent (put it on the new ID cards when issued) with a central database telling how many windows, doors and door frames etc they have kicked in or destroyed before doing a runner. Then there are the really clever tenants who ???? No I wont educate any bad tenants who might read this dodge where they dont pay rent and get damages from the landlord.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • mmintersting
    Love rating 0
    mmintersting said

    Another governmental waste of time zzzzzz.

    Boo hoo to all you landlords.

    Its the risk you have chosen to take for financial gain, sell up or shut up.

    If you did not exist more FTBs would get on the property ladder.

    Lets heavily tax everyone who has more than one home.

    Regards

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • naterbox
    Love rating 12
    naterbox said

    mmintersting, some of us are landlords by accident, not choice. I inherited the property when my parents died. As the complete estate is covered by a CPO, it's almost impossible to sell. Would you have preferred me to leave the property empty? I don't think there are any FTBs who would be even remotely interested in the place.

    There is no financial gain from tenants who fail to pay rent, and leave the property in such a bad state that it needs totally redecorating before it can be let out again. I inherited the property in 2000, and am still not showing a profit.

    Report on 21 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • SmallGovBigPeople
    Love rating 1
    SmallGovBigPeople said

    "thank god for our LABOUR government..." We all know what bazza1212 is playing at. Another socialist trying to prop up a morally, socially, financially, politically corrupted bunch of undemocratic thugs. Snowman has got it right. This government only knows how to regulate, organise, record, snoop, pry, dictate, control and destroy peoples right to run there own affairs. That's what socialism is all about. There are already laws protecting tenants from bad landlords. What about Landlords from bad tenants? This is typical socialist useless legislation designed to increase the governments stock of jobworths and increase their votes.

    As a landlord all I will do is increase the rent to compensate for the cost and do the minimum required instead of the overkill I currently do.

    To quote Benjamin Franklin "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either"

    Another is " Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

    In God we Trust.

    Report on 22 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • rightoncommander
    Love rating 14
    rightoncommander said

    Based on all of the whining and the landlord sob stories on this board, as a current tenant who would like to buy a house I am delighted! I hope that many landlords are driven out of the market, thus reducing house prices at the lower end of the market and allowing me back into home ownership. The last house I bought, I had to pay several thousand over the asking price because a BTL vulture kept bidding me up, but the mortgage was still less than my rent that I was paying on a smaller property to another leech, oops I meant landlord. A reduction of the private residential letting market can only be a good thing for the majority of people in this country, allowing more social housing and more affordable home ownership.

    Report on 22 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Richmond
    Love rating 0
    Richmond said

    I manage an unfurnished apartment for my son. The apartment is only seven years old and we have a full, legal rental agreement and have suffered only one bad tenant who left owing a month's rent.

    We have taken trouble to be good landlords. The boiler has been serviced each year and a certificate issued. All faults have been quickly rectified and we have never had complaints from any of our tenants. Last year the flat was re-painted throughout and new carpets fitted. We never have problems re-letting it because it is so modern and clean. We have never engaged a letting agent as it is so easy to re-let and we are able to pass the financial savings on to our tenants.

    I object most strongly to the government introducing yet more regulatory burdens onto landlords like us. Every time the government introduces new regulations the cost goes up and we are expected to pay. All it requires is for unhappy tenants to be able to report to the local district council housing department who can then investigate and bring the two parties togther to reach agreement. As far as we are concerned, any "authority" is welcome to call on our tenants at any time by arrangement to check on their satisfaction.

    I think the government should start by concentrating on regulating their own dishonest expense claims and second home lettings rather than making life yet more difficult for honest people. They have lost all credibility with the population.

    The government is like the fox regulating the hen house!

    Report on 22 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Richmond
    Love rating 0
    Richmond said

    I manage an unfurnished apartment for my son. The apartment is only seven years old and we have a full, legal rental agreement and have suffered only one bad tenant who left owing a month's rent.

    We have taken trouble to be good landlords. The boiler has been serviced each year and a certificate issued. All faults have been quickly rectified and we have never had complaints from any of our tenants. Last year the flat was re-painted throughout and new carpets fitted. We never have problems re-letting it because it is so modern and clean. We have never engaged a letting agent as it is so easy to re-let and we are able to pass the financial savings on to our tenants.

    I object most strongly to the government introducing yet more regulatory burdens onto landlords like us. Every time the government introduces new regulations the cost goes up and we are expected to pay. All it requires is for unhappy tenants to be able to report to the local district council housing department who can then investigate and bring the two parties togther to reach agreement. As far as we are concerned, any "authority" is welcome to call on our tenants at any time by arrangement to check on their satisfaction.

    I think the government should start by concentrating on regulating their own dishonest expense claims and second home lettings rather than making life yet more difficult for honest people. They have lost all credibility with the population.

    The government is like the fox regulating the hen house!

    Report on 22 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • towsu
    Love rating 0
    towsu said

    I have numerous houses and consider myself a really good landlord. Rather than constantly putting pressure on landlords the government should take a look at protecting the landlord as well.

    it is stated that a good deal of rented properties are in arrears that is because tenants dont pay the rent and the law states that they have to be in at least 2 months arrears before we can even start to look to removing them from the property then you have to give further notice and then they can go to court and the judge will allow them to stay if they promise to start to pay the arrears which they dont then you have to go back to court it can take months. why should they get any extra 2 months notices when the mortgage company will not give that to us as the mortgagee we have had to pay for them to live in the property for months and you state they need protecting from rogue landlords, in the majority of cases the houses are trashed and then the tenant just moves on and leaves the mess for us to clean up and all the expense. the government has also now decided to pay any housing to the tenant it has made it impossible to get council paid money without a fight. we are constantly getting hammered as bad landlords how abouts GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD TENANTS. the law should allow you to remove tenants who dont pay rent so that the property does not get repossesed.

    i feel this site is a punching bag for landlords and offers no help EVER from the rogue tenant.

    Report on 23 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    rightoncommander - nothing gives you the right to be a homeowner: you have to be capable of affording it. If you're currently priced out of the market you just need to save harder, cut your expenditure or get a better-paid job. Why is your landlord being a leech by asking you for rent, but it's OK for you to pay mortgage interest to a bank? There's no difference - in fact most tenants are getting a *bargain* - they may be covering the landlord's mortgage (though often not if interest rates are high), but they're also getting the benefit of the capital and stamp duty tied up the property, which they can't afford themselves, plus all the maintenance work for free, buildings insurance, regular gas inspections that homeowners don't have to do, and the embedded cost of a fitted kitchen, carpets and other furniture.

    The only reason most landlords bother with renting at all is the eventual prospect of capital gain: there's no money to be made on day-to-day rentals. Even then, landlords have to pay 18% capital gains tax when they sell, unlike homeowners who get to keep every penny of capital gain. Now I wonder who is being the leech? Arguably the thing we need to change to stop house price inflation is not a few landlords paying more than the going rate, but the whole system whereby capital gains on principal private residences are tax free. I wonder if rightoncommander would be quite so keen on owning his own home then?

    Report on 23 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • petitemisschief
    Love rating 22
    petitemisschief said

    I used to work in Housing Benefit and every single private landlord I encountered failed to accept that once a tenancy agreement had been made then their tenant had rights. They seemed unable to realise that the house was no longer theirs to come and go as they pleased. Most thought that the housing benefit was theirs as a right and could get really unpleasant when told their tenants claim was confidential. If its too much hassle sell your property and let the first time buyers get back in the market. Letting property is not the easy ride that many think and I'm glad to see more regulation in this area. If a land lord goes through the proper procedure then tenants who default on their tenancy agreements can be evicted. There will be rent arrears - ask any local authority or housing association but these are a business risk you take. 

    Report on 23 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • SmallGovBigPeople
    Love rating 1
    SmallGovBigPeople said

    petitemisschief said "these are a business risk you take" Spoken like a true government jobsworth who can't get sacked and has a protected pension paid for buy people who do take risks.

    A landlord has the right to expect that they have the right to protect their property. THE HOUSE IS THEIRS, NOT THE TENNANTS! The tenant is renting the property not buying it. Like all government socialist the truth is better unsaid. 

    One more thing while the socialist are blaming landlords for the current level of house prices, there are hundreds of thousands of houses currently on the market. If you can't buy now then you never will. 

    God Save the Queen

    Report on 24 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Abbeville boy
    Love rating 4
    Abbeville boy said

    Tiger Moth said 'I would have thought most tennants would visit the rental property that they were interested in, before signing a letting agreement. If you can not recognise: 'damp', poor decoration and grotty furniture that is rather sad.'

    The trouble with damp is it can be covered up temporarily by an unscrupulous landlord with a quick lick of paint between tenancies. If you're renting an unfurnished flat and it's been redecorated beware - talk to the neighbours if the previous tenant isn't available (even if they are, they might be just as keen to get you in so that they are released from their tenancy).

    Report on 27 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Abbeville boy
    Love rating 4
    Abbeville boy said

    I totally agree with Rightoncommander - I'm also saving hard now for a deposit and hoping to buy next year.

    I've had honest and dishonest landlords, I've had frankly thieving Letting Agents although never for very long as I won't put up with anybody's crap, but I find it difficult to have any sympathy for landlords when they can simply not renew the agreement after the first term, instead leaving the tenancy open on a 'rolling basis' (what the hell exactly does this mean legally???) and then serve a section 21 whenever they feel like it giving 2 months notice.

    Report on 27 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Abbeville boy
    Love rating 4
    Abbeville boy said

    SmallGovBigPeople said

    'As a landlord all I will do is increase the rent to compensate for the cost and do the minimum required instead of the overkill I currently do.'

    Well as a financially savvy tenant with an eye on the market I hope your tenants are sensible and either refuse the increase, as I did with the hike suggested by my current landlord, or move elsewhere.

    And I'm no Socialist either - I have never and will never vote for the kind of morons we currently have ruining this country.

    Report on 27 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Nuck_the_king
    Love rating 0
    Nuck_the_king said

    I have read these comments with interest, having been a tenant in my life and now in the position of being a landlord of a 2-bedroom property in Cumbria.

    As with every other situation in life, there are good tenants and bad tenants; and there are good landlords and bad landlords. It would be nice to think that reputation would drive out the bad ones, but unfortunately this isn't going to happen; you can't really be sure about the previous history of any potential tenants, and you also don't know much if you are new to an area about dodgy landlords.

    However, in response to Abbeville Boy who said "I find it difficult to have any sympathy for landlords when they can simply not renew the agreement after the first term, instead leaving the tenancy open on a 'rolling basis' (what the hell exactly does this mean legally???) and then serve a section 21 whenever they feel like it giving 2 months notice." I appreciate your frustration with this; but as a landlord, I have been advised that if I sign a new short tenancy agreement every six months, after a certain amount of time, the tenant is legally classed as a "sitting", not a shorthold, tenant, which makes them even more difficult to remove. Don't blame the landlords; blame the legal system if you want to blame anyone.

    In response to Bazza1212, every landlord is (quite rightly) OBLIGED to have a Gas Inspection Certificate for any and every gas appliance in any letting. Full stop and end of. It costs less than £100, only needs to be done annually, and if yours didn't, take the evidence to court and sue the *rse out of him. I have absolutely no sympathy for him whatsoever; the health of tenants is non-negotiable and he should be put out of (the lettings) business.

    I welcome the Deposit Protection Scheme; it costs nothing for neither tenant nor landlord: and provides a useful, safe, independent, government-backed account that is secure for both of us.

    I want my tenants to live in my house, but make it (as much as possible) their home. Corny I know: but that is how I feel about it. If I look after them, then (I hope) that they will look after the house. It's give and take; and so far (touching wood here), my tenants have been great. I've just got a sweet young couple who have moved in; her Mum lives 2 doors away, she is due to have a baby in 7 months; and I hope that they will have many happy memories of being there.

    Not all tenants are out to grab all that they can; and nor are all landlords. Given that the overall tone of the report is positive, perhaps (as usual) more resources should be put into finding and removing the rogue elements on both sides rather than imposing ever-increasing burdens on good and bad alike. More costs for landlords inevitably means more costs (or more corners cut) for their tenants.

    Report on 29 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • JCofRamsgate
    Love rating 3
    JCofRamsgate said

    As a pensioner with a house more than big enough for just me, I have let out rooms, and for one year only, my whole house while I was away. The first lot were filthy and left a washing machine leaking ruining the ceilings below. The agent agreed with me that they were dirty, but told the tenants that they were model tenants simply because they paid their rent! The second lot put on the heating on a 24-hr basis when they moved in and did not turn it off until they moved out 6 months later. I'd rather leave the place empty if there is a next time.

    I'm not greedy, but letting is the only way I can raise my living standard slightly above benefit level. I already comply with existing safety legislation, but if I have to pay for additional regulation and standards, there will be nothing left out of the £20 extra a week I make out of the rental.

    So, one room less available to let. End of story. And I'm on benefits for the next 30 years of my life.

    Report on 29 May 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • FireBlade
    Love rating 25
    FireBlade said

    The message that resoundingly comes from the comments generated by the article is that protection is SEVERELY lacking for the property OWNER.

    Once again, the numerous "bad" (to describe them politely) tenants are protected further. Absolute madness. Why are they never held to account over their actions?

    Report on 01 June 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • FireBlade
    Love rating 25
    FireBlade said

    Nuck the king- a well balanced post indeed, although i used to have the same view as you- if i treat my tenant well, they'll look after the house. WRONG. And i even work with the guy, having done so for many years.

    People like me (and i dare say you also) would ALWAYS treat others' belongings even more carefully than my own. From my experience, other people don't give a monkeys. And are hard-faced to boot.

    Report on 01 June 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • maryjane
    Love rating 0
    maryjane said

    There are already many regulations in place. These do not help anyone when one is faced with a landlord who does not give two hoots. I'm not talking about rogue landlords in big cars stomping on poor little tenants. I have recently rented a property for my daughter to live in during her final year at uni. I paid for a private individual residence as she wanted peace and quiet to study. The first day the boiler did not work. She was without hot water and heating for the first 9 days of her tenancy. Any right thinking landlord would ensure a flat was in working order before renting. The boiler was over 25 years old and had been causing problems for ages but what the hell lets rent the flat out and take the £625 a month anyway. Having fixed the thing with no apology or excuse the agents detected a gas smell at the four monthly check up. They said nothing to my daughter but went away and called the gas board. They turned up and turned the gas off as it was immediately dangerous. It transpired that not only was the work shoddy, the fitter was not registered and had created a false gas certificate with false number and date. Matters escalated to a full blown investigation by HSE, the outcome for trying to poison my daughter HSE sent the landlord and the fitter a letter telling them not to do it again. If the legislation is in place to say it is a criminal offence to not supply correct gas fittings then it should be prosecuted. What else will stop these people doing these things. My point was my daughter apart from bad headaches and no hot water or heating from 4 feb to 2 march and no peace to study in is okay. I feel a responsibility towards anyone else who rents that place. But what can I do. I have contacted the local mp who professed intense interest - has done what????? I now see the property is for let again boasting a fully working coal effect gas fire - ~I assume this is the one turned off by corgi as unsafe. I wonder whether I will receive some kind of blame if there is an accident.This landlord is a 29 year old person who has a shop in the same road who should no better. The landlord is untruthful, deceitful and a danger to the public. If anyone has a constructive input as what can be done to stop wilful abuse of the rules that endanger peoples lives I would love to hear from them.

    Report on 11 June 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nrl
    Love rating 1
    nrl said

    Pond321 hit the nail on the head about legal regulation of letting agents...and he has no axe to grind on this issue as he is a tenant himself.

    I have been a landlord since 1990 and over that time have had a number of criminally fraudulent letting agents...the last of which (Tower Property Services) have had huge claims against them by a number of landlords including myself.

    One agent let his 'mate' stay in my propertry rent free. Why was it difficult for me to find out what was going on - because I was in Hong Kong at the time and had to fly back unannounced to get into to my own property (oh and BTW this was during the 90s property crash when my mortgage was at 15,85%!!!, I still have the mortgage statements to prove that, I also still own this same property, so hang on in there people, there is light at the other side).

    Anyway, in a nutshell, I have been defrauded by both tenants and letting agents of approx £30,000 since 1990. Although I have sued and won my court cases - that is useless against an individual or a sole trader who disappears into the night, or against a company who go bankrupt with my money (Tower Property Services, London). It should be a criminal offence to keep client money in the main company accounts. Solicitors have to do this so why not letting agents?

    Given that we are in a regulation dependent society, I have no problem regulating landlords. However, let's have a level playing field...let's regulate letting and managing agents and tenants too...and get the law sorted so that abusive non-paying tenants can be booted out the month after they have failed to pay their first arrears...not the 9 month process it currently is.

    Report on 19 July 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nrl
    Love rating 1
    nrl said

    ...and for thew record, all my propertries are presented in an almost brand new condition to new tenants ie freshly painted walls/ceilings/skirting/doors. Creosoted fences, tidied gardens mown lawns, cleaned windows etc. Spotless inside - cleaned, dusted, no grime left in the kitchen, thoroughly cleaned over hob etc. New white goods & appliances (not in every case, but mostly), new carpets. New batteries (door chime etc), new filters (cooker hood).

    All properties have emergency maintenance agreements in place ie to sort out plumbingh. electric, boiler problems as they happen (if they happen).

    The above may explain why my tenants tend to stay for several years at a time...I'm not looking for brownie pionts, I just consider that is the minimum I should be doing.

    However, I do expect similar in return. ie I do not expect to have dirty carpets, kitchen worktops covered in grime and the oven oozing grease onto the kitchen floor, when handed back to me at the end of a tenancy. Although very rare, this has happened a couple of times and is just not on.

    Report on 19 July 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nrl
    Love rating 1
    nrl said

    @maryjane Sorry to hear about your issues with your daughter's landlord. He is committing a criminal offence by letting the property if he doesn't not have a valid CP12 certificate - that is commonly known as a landlord's gas safety certificate. A copy MUST be supplied to each tenant and the original MUST be kept by the landlord. failure to supply a CP12 certificate means (in theory) that the property cannot be let.

    Report on 19 July 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Crawford
    Love rating 3
    Crawford said

    It is dispiriting, but not surprising, to see the usual collection of people who seek to make an all-embracing argument use their own experiences. The simple fact is that the small minority make life difficult for the majority in any walk of life. This is doubly so in the rental market - as landlords we offer homes to tenants, and it is our responsibility to ensure these homes are the best possible.

    It is not the role of the tenant to provide the mortgage payments for us - if we find ourselves victims of non-payment, that is unfortunate, but still happens. And for the laissez-faire capitalists amongst us who think that minimum regulation is the best way to manage the rented market, check out the rules and regulations that exist in continental Europe and parts of the USA.

    The easiest way to avoid non-payment problems is to insist on well-referenced tenants, and avoiding students and people whose rent is made up of government benefits. If, as I have done in the past, accept non-waged tenants, then the possibility of rent default is always possible.

    I wholeheartedly agree with the new measures, not least those that will regulate some of the charlatans who act as Letting Agents.

    Report on 05 August 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • PeaJay
    Love rating 0
    PeaJay said

    This conversation has decided it for me. I came in to the market many years ago before Buy to Let mortgages made it fashionable to be a landlord. I was and am in it for a return on investment better than a deposit savings scheme and latterly better than stocks and shares.

    My properities were purchased at a time when the rent to interest ratio was a reasonable return and of course I have been favoured by the capital gain of the properties. Market rents have not kept pace with inflation in my part of the country.

    During this time I have tried to be reasonable to my tenants providing a home which is comfortable and safe. Compliance has become a bigger and bigger issue which I have met.

    Now I am quitting the BTL scene as the return is no longer matching the effort and risk, while at the same time the stock market is looking more attractive.

    I have to say I would probably have persevered to wait for capital gains to catch up and make the return more attractive again; however the combination of tenants whose moral (and respect of property standards) do not match mine plus the risk of even more punitive legislation means I am off.

    Review your long term investment strategy and your medium term commitments and make your own decisions.

    Report on 22 November 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • vjdmorrey
    Love rating 0
    vjdmorrey said

    As a tenant, you have a number of duties, but similarly you also have a great deal of rights, particularly when it comes to your deposit monies.

    In the UK, some landlors simply think that they can do anything they wish to with the deposit money.

    Tenants should be sure to take the correct advice to protect their position.

    www.RecoverMyDeposit.co.uk

    FREE and professional legal advice.

    Report on 18 April 2010  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.9% to 3.5% (T&Cs apply).

Barclaycard 25Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 25 months (2.4% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.5% to 2.4% (T&Cs apply)

Halifax BT 25 Month MasterCard

0% for 25 months (2.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 19.0% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV3