Landlords are not greedy

clutton_2

I attended a meeting this week chaired by the Council at which Dr Julie Rugg came to speak.

She had been commissioned by the government (who gave her carte blanche as to how she did her research) early last year to investigate the private rental sector.

She produced a report before Christmas and, as a result of her report, the government have now produced a Green Paper which anyone can comment on.

She did say that in her researches she discovered that the vast majority of landlords treat their tenants well, and they do comply with legislation.

She also said that Shelter and CAB have numerically exagerated the % of landlords causing problems - that both Shelter and CAB used their records of numbers of complaints - they then numerically extrapolated a national figure but did it incorrectly.

.

The Green paper suggests (amonst other things) that a register of landlords be set up which would include landlord name, address, addresses of properties owned etc etc

The suggestion is that "prescribed bodies" - including the police and tax man - could access all the information on there, but that tenants would only be able to verify that a LL was on the register (registration would be compulsory) but tenants not be able to access records of all the landlords properties. Landlords would have to pay for the register on an annual basis.

A landlord member suggested right at the end that the Council Tax system already contained landlords details, and surely that could be used (with a couple of extra add-ons) as a register - IF one was needed at all.

As an example National Landlords ASsociation have now issued all their members with a Membership Card and a "Welcome Pack" which LLs can give to tenants.

This, in my view, is a bit of frippery - as it gives prospective tenants NO idea at all as to whether the LL will comply with the regulations - NLA do not sanction landlords who may be complained about.

Indeed last year NLA started its own forum, and two of the landlords on there must surely have been complained about on here - they called their tenants scum and so on and so on..... the NLA did close down the forum, so clearly dont want to be associated wiht that sort of approach to landlording.

I digress

What purpose do MSEers think such a register might serve ? (The Scottish one is in utter disarray)

Do they think it a good idea ?

Jowo_2

I approve of a national landlords register.

I'm aware that under-resourced local authorities in Scotland haven't been able to follow up problems reported by tenants for landlords that haven't complied.

However, when I lived in Scotland, whole areas or entire blocks of flats, had been brought to their knees by absent landlords who failed to contribute towards repairs or act against anti-social tenants. The buy to let boom seemed to create modern slums. Some slum landlords are now effectively banned from letting property.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2034648.0.our_factor_has_sacked_us_our_flats_are_a_den_of_crime_and_its_all_down_to_absentee_landlords.php
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2411840.0.0.php?act=complaint&cid=1796183

In our tenement of 8 flats, 2 out of 8 were owned by landlords and both refused to pay towards repairs and cleaning, often having anti-social tenants. I expect this scenario is fairly common throughout Scotland.

Reporting them to the local authority meant that one landlord started to cooperate and paid the arrears they owed (the 2nd landlord is having their property repossessed).

Emma1973

In Manchester there are large areas where the LLs have to be licenced, a couple of months ago it was estimated that 800 LLs had yet to register.
How many LLs have been prosecuted for not having a licence? 1!
What do LLs get for paying for their licence? Absolutely nothing!

Whats the point of LLs getting a licence? Its only going to cost them money, they get nothing from it, and the likelihood is if they behave as decent LLs they wont get prosecuted anyway!

clutton_2

""Reporting them to the local authority meant that one landlord started to cooperate and paid the arrears they owed ""

thats one of my objections jowo - the local council have had duties and legal reponsibilities for years and years to force bad landlords to make repairs - they just have not bothered...

will a name on a register Really make that much difference ?

Emma "Selective Licensing" has indeed taken a hold in manchester - with almost all inner city terraced suburbs now being compulsorily licensed ..... this optional selective licensing can be used by any council in the country at any time

its no good licensing landlords in manchester - if no attempt is made to control bad tenants also - its not landlords who smash up property and leave rubbish on streets and dont pay rent

franklee

I think a register is a good idea. In these days of more repossessions it would be good if the landlord had to declare he has his mortgage lender's permission to let in order to qualify to be registered (either consent to let on a residential mortgage or a BTL mortgage). This would be useful as it saves the tenant having to ask the landlord details about his affairs which it seems LL's don't appreciate. The registration form could have a bullet list of the LL's main responsibilities, TDS, gas safety etc. and the LL could be asked to sign to say he'd read it. This hopefully would cut down the ignorance that accidental landlords have, from reading this forum it seems many do not know about the basic requirements. However I doubt they are going to ask the LL anything that useful.

As a prospective tenant I'd just want the register to confirm the landlord's name, address for service of notices (which could be his agent's address) and that he is present on the register. If he wasn't registered I'd just choose another property/LL.

Snooze

franklee wrote: »

I think a register is a good idea. In these days of more repossessions it would be good if the landlord had to declare he has his mortgage lender's permission to let in order to qualify to be registered (either consent to let on a residential mortgage or a BTL mortgage). This would be useful as it saves the tenant having to ask the landlord details about his affairs which it seems LL's don't appreciate. The registration form could have a bullet list of the LL's main responsibilities, TDS, gas safety etc. and the LL could be asked to sign to say he'd read it. This hopefully would cut down the ignorance that accidental landlords have, from reading this forum it seems many do not know about the basic requirements. However I doubt they are going to ask the LL anything that useful.

As a prospective tenant I'd just want the register to confirm the landlord's name, address for service of notices (which could be his agent's address) and that he is present on the register. If he wasn't registered I'd just choose another property/LL.

The register you are talking about is not the one that clutton is talking about. You are talking about some ideal world that is highly unlikely to ever happen.

Clutton said

The suggestion is that "prescribed bodies" - including the police and tax man - could access all the information on there, but that tenants would only be able to verify that a LL was on the register (registration would be compulsory) but tenants not be able to access records of all the landlords properties. Landlords would have to pay for the register on an annual basis.

Therefore this register would be useless for tenants as it wouldn't even prove that the LL has permission from the lender to let that particular property.

The whole thing is not designed to help tenants in any way, shape or form - it's sole purpose is for the government to make sure every LL is paying their taxes. If you (collectively speaking) believe otherwise then you are very naive.

Rob

franklee

clutton wrote: »

its no good licensing landlords in manchester - if no attempt is made to control bad tenants also - its not landlords who smash up property and leave rubbish on streets and dont pay rent

Isn't that a bit like saying restaurants shouldn't have food hygiene licences as some of their customers do a runner without paying. Or that because some of their customers don't pay, financial advisers and solicitors should not be registered so prospective customers can check they are qualified before choosing to use them. No health and safety registration for supermarkets as they have shoplifters. In other walks of life we license the businesses to protect their customers, yet when the customer defaults or commits theft or fraud, the business has to seek redress through the courts.

A roof over the head is as important as a bit of financial advice and more costly yet for that the customer should have to make a leap in the dark because there are some bad tenants ...

A business is a business after all and that comes with risks and rewards.

franklee

Snooze wrote: »

The register you are talking about is not the one that clutton is talking about. You are talking about some ideal world that is highly unlikely to ever happen.

Clutton said

Quote:"The suggestion is that "prescribed bodies" - including the police and tax man - could access all the information on there, but that tenants would only be able to verify that a LL was on the register (registration would be compulsory) but tenants not be able to access records of all the landlords properties. Landlords would have to pay for the register on an annual basis."

Therefore this register would be useless for tenants as it wouldn't even prove that the LL has permission from the lender to let that particular property.

The whole thing is not designed to help tenants in any way, shape or form - it's sole purpose is for the government to make sure every LL is paying their taxes. If you (collectively speaking) believe otherwise then you are very naive.

Rob

That's why I wrote However I doubt they are going to ask the LL anything that useful. I put the idea forward in answer to clutton's "What purpose do MSEers think such a register might serve ?".

What it will be isn't decided as it's still in consultation we don't know for sure it will be useless, it may be useful depending on what is done.

I said I would not want to access the landlord's records, name and service address is hardly the records. Nor is it records of all the landlords properties.

Gorgeous_George

I don't mind joining a register but I would be concerned about the cost. With just one property it would be easy for the costs to outweigh the potential benefits. Any costs would be passed on to my tenant (and there is plenty of room for me to do this as I charge well below market value).

My tenants would gain nothing from my membership. I don't think tenants with bad landlords would benefit either.

I think MPs should put their own affairs in order before interfering with mine.

GG

tbs624

franklee wrote: »

Isn't that a bit like saying restaurants shouldn't have food hygiene licences as some of their customers do a runner without paying. Or that because some of their customers don't pay, financial advisers and solicitors should not be registered so prospective customers can check they are qualified before choosing to use them. No health and safety registration for supermarkets as they have shoplifters. In other walks of life we license the businesses to protect their customers, yet when the customer defaults or commits theft or fraud, the business has to seek redress through the courts.

No, what Clutton was saying really isn’t remotely like any of those things. The purpose of the selective licensing that she has mentioned in areas of Manchester has much to do with the Council seeking to address tenants’ antisocial behaviour in those areas (Gorton, Harpurhey , Moston, Bradford ) by making LLs more responsible for dealing with it.

Local residents in those areas complained of problems with private rented housing: three-quarters of the complaints related to tenants' behaviour, so Clutton’s reference to “bad tenants” will be as in those who are ASBO material, causing problems for the local community. The "solution" is to pass the buck on to those who let out the properties in which those "bad tenants" live by making them register with the Council.

kippen_noedel

I don't object to a register but I tell everyone now, I will just pass on any costs, I pay enough in taxes already.

I already go further than most to provided decent accommodation and do not believe I should be charged to maintain a system set up to control the bad ones, There are enough powers for local authorities already, they should just enforce them more often. That would be the best deterrent.