can a repair man let himself in?

clutton_2

the help the aged report is 9 years old and several of their recommendations are already enshrined in statute via the 2004 Act... the size of the interview sample was also pitifully small, so extrapolation to national data would be meaningless

so not especially good as a research tool.....

i think everyone will agree that the Wests were a one-off.... (hopefully) and in any case most of those poor poor girls were staff or lodgers, and had far less rights than tenants....

So once again.. a very poor attempt to blacken landlords reputations

Local authorities have had the power to close down bad rental properties for years and years... under their environmental health/ repairing legislation - they can try to enforce landllord repairs, or do repairs themselves and bill the owner... they claim they have not got the resources to deal with things as they stand let alone a new landlord register...

The Scotland register is still not up and running after what 2 years ? again councils dont have the resources..

it is pointless passing legislation with no teeth to implement it...


a Register is not going to force bad landlords to register. there will aways be some who can cleverly stay below the radar....

The vast majority of landlords, like plumbers, secretaries, judges, cleaners, etc etc are decent people doing a decent job.... and yet this site continues to pillory landlording as a profession because of a tiny number of cases.....

Landlords will generally talk about "rogue tenants" - as we acknowledge that the vast majority of tenants are excellent...

lets show each other a bit more respect and stop generalising....

amy104

As both myself and my partner work full time we have no choice but to allow the LA to give key access to the property otherwise nothing would get fixed, I don't believe in making life awkward for them on the off chance some dodgey repair man may walk off with my stuff. I just make sure I know exactly when anyone is going in and make sure nothing important is left lying around.

There has to be a compromise tho as I can agree I was upset when I found out the LA had entered the property unknown to me - the emergancy was that I measured the freezer in inches and they needed it in cm! I also had a repair guy go in at 9am and when I got home at 6pm I found he'd left the front door unlocked all day.

Wee_Willy_Harris

My posts have always indicated that the bad LLs are the minority. I try to avoid generalisation when refering to either side of the tenant/LL debate. Throughout THIS thread I have only highlighted the difference between good and bad LLs and that any scheme to differentiate between the 2 would benefit good LLs.

The fact that the Help the Aged report is 9 years old is largely irrelevant. Many of the recommendations remain unaddressed. Recommendations such as more security of tenure and the regulation of the private sector. Few of the recommendations have been legislated for since the report was written.

We already have a successful registration scheme running in this country under the guise of "selective licensing". Expansion of this scheme would be a positive start. It's not about re-inventing the wheel.

I'm sure we all hope that the Wests were an extreme but isolated case never to be repeated. But moving away from that extreme, there are many instances of bad LLs taking advantage of their tenants. After all, if this was so rare, why would organisations such as Shelter and CAB invest so heavily in its prevention, why would local authorities have to spend money to provide teams to deal with the private sector, why would so many LLs fall foul of the legislation, why would so many law firms establish specific departments to deal with tenancy issues?

Whilst I agree that the vast majority of LLs are decent people who act in a professional manner towards therir tenants, the minority still exist. That minority is what blackens every other LLs name and the profession they strive to uphold.

I do struggle to understand what your objection is to cleaning up a sector that not only do you accept to be dirty, but that you are a part of. To do nothing is to accept what already is. I can't believe you are happy to continue to have your name blackened by the very people you deride.

clutton_2

i do accept your final statement re i am not happy to have my name blackened by bad landlords... but my own reputation precedes me in the market place and i have no trouble getting tenants ... selfish i guess...

The aged concern study was based on 38 tenants... hardly a nationwide study......

What i do struggle with is - what practical use a register will be. Even Dr Julie Rugg (who did the PRS report 2008) struggled with what information it should contain and what that info would be used for and who would have access to it.. and the register was HER idea !!! This report was one of many government reports whose aim was to "seen to be doing something" whilst actually doing precious little.

""We already have a successful registration scheme running in this country under the guise of "selective licensing" - oh really.......

i spent about 2 days filling in a monumental form to be " compulsorily licensed" in the north west , and since filling it in (and i could have written a whole load of lies for all anyone knew) i have had no contact whatsoever from the council - 3 years later.

they saw my CRB - they saw my insurance certificate for the property - the rest of the information provided could have been utter lies.... as no references were taken up, no other research was done on me, and no inspectoin of the property took place.... and it cost us just short of £400

Tell me please howyou measure "success" in this context...


you say "" so many LLs fall foul of the legislation,"" - where are you getting your figures from to claim "so many" ? - indeed how many is So many ?

Who does this Selective license help and why ?

Wee_Willy_Harris

Having completed the documentation (and, I presume, had a little look at the scheme) I'm surprised that you are unaware who selective licensing helps. But, to offer clarification if needed, selective licensing helps communities. It puts the onus on the LL to be more pro-active in such things as vetting tenants and acting to address tenancy issues such as ASB. It also ensures that the slum LLs and the gangsters of old are removed from these areas by the "fit and proper person" test. At the moment, SL is used mainly in areas of high social deprivation where an issue has been identified. In many of these areas properties are sold remarkably cheaply, often for little more than the cost of a mid range family car. (Indeed, stories abound of properties changing hands in pubs on little more the turn of a card!!). With properties selling so cheap, many districts end up with a disproportionately high level of "absentee lanlords", such as has happened in Manchester, where investors from well outside the area have bought property with the notion of turning a quick profit. In many cases, these LL aren't interested in dealing with any issues within the neighbourhood caused by their tenants as long as they get the rent. Often it even pays them to leave the property empty and hope for capitol gain. This creates many issues within a community, and those issues are what SL hopes to target and address, in line with other enforcement measures as appropriate.

LLs have a part to play in the wider community. Sadly, some have to be "encouraged" to do so. SL is just such an encouragement.

clutton_2

i suspect you are a politician WWH - nicely side-stepped !!!


""It also ensures that the slum LLs and the gangsters of old are removed from these areas by the "fit and proper person" test.""

slum landlords will not be driven out as the forms are to be completed, at least in manchester, by the person that manages these properties .....those who really want to hide will just use a front man or alternatively use some of the more disreputable letting agents... ....

"the fit and proper" thing.. is just showing a CRB .. we seem to be back where we started this morning !!

i am off to a meeting

have a nice evening

Wee_Willy_Harris

Politician??? How dare you. What did I do to deserve THAT kind of abuse???

Slum LLs may not be "driven out" of SL areas, but their practices will, which is the main thing. SL is much more than just applying for a CRB and business as usual. There are other tests not covered by CRB checks... For example.....

You must be able to demonstrate satisfactory management and financial standards for your rented property.

You must have satisfactory procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour on your property.

Properties must be suitable for the number of occupants.

You must also be able to show that your property meets the government’s health and safety regulations.

You must commit to work with the local authority to address issues of ASB

The worst LLs will be either unwilling, or unable to meet these criteria and face stiff penalties for non complience with selective licensing (a criminal offence, by the way). Even the initial cost will be enough to put some landlords off the idea. But, where an area has been so designated, compliance is a legal requirement.

Whilst I can't speak for your experience of SL, or how it was implimented in your area, there have been considerable tangeable successes with marked reductions in criminallity, ASB, property turnover, eviction and abandonment. Obviously, this will have a positive impact on both property values and rental demand. All good news to LLs as well as the wider community.

Anyway, hope the meeting was productive.

rl290

I don't know why this thread has become so hijacked on the topic of the criminal check... seriously?!

To actually answer the question, if this was really a potential emergency (while highly subjective, a leak could be considered to be one) I would expect any LL/LA to at least try to phone the tenant as a matter of courtesy - if only to make sure that something like this (coming home to find someone else in there!) does not happen. Some tenants would be terrified to find a stranger in their house. I don't know about other LLs on here, but I would certainly phone and try any other method to get the message through (email etc).

This was really the point that the post is on about. Not criminal checks.

R

Wee_Willy_Harris

rl290 wrote: »

I don't know why this thread has become so hijacked on the topic of the criminal check... seriously?!

To actually answer the question, if this was really a potential emergency (while highly subjective, a leak could be considered to be one) I would expect any LL/LA to at least try to phone the tenant as a matter of courtesy - if only to make sure that something like this (coming home to find someone else in there!) does not happen. Some tenants would be terrified to find a stranger in their house. I don't know about other LLs on here, but I would certainly phone and try any other method to get the message through (email etc).

This was really the point that the post is on about. Not criminal checks.

R

With all due respect, that question has been answered and your points already made.... repeatedly. The conversation (or thread, if you prefer) has moved on to a related issue raised in the course of various comments made. As the thread concerns the actions of a landlord from a legal point of view, and the possibility that they may have transgressed such legal requirements, I believe the policing of LLs is a relevant topic to be covered by this thread.

Should you feel that not to be the case, please feel free to refrain from further comment.

clutton_2

WWH - gotcha !!!! politician it is !!!

re SL - you say


"You must be able to demonstrate satisfactory management and financial standards for your rented property.

You must have satisfactory procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour on your property.

Properties must be suitable for the number of occupants.

You must also be able to show that your property meets the government’s health and safety regulations.

You must commit to work with the local authority to address issues of ASB"

I agree 120% that all of the above aims are laudable and desirable... but Manchester City Council (who were heavily criticised by their poor practise in implementing the SL procedures) show that they have "done their duty" by getting landlords to fill in a stonking great form - and NOTHING ELSE.. no inspection, nothing .... no compulsory HHSRS routine inspections.. no ongoing production of maintainance schedules signed by Recognised workmen, no ongoing copies of GASSAFE Certs, no ongoing production of insurance certificates - in fact NO third party corroborative evidence WHATSOEVER... that is why i think the whole system is a waste of time in terms of flushing out poor landlords.... they will simply lie on the form...... and no one will ever check up on them.....

Its all paper based and its all pointless......

I also have come across letting agents who fill in the form for the landlord without even going into the property.... (needless to say i have never used such charlatans myself) Agent are able to do this because they will always have the "cop-out clause of "its down to the LL melud i'm only a poor wee letting agent under instruction" ........

If anyone in the council or government had asked opinions as to what would make a SL process both viable and effective.. they certainly did not ask landlords their views.... no .. dont ask landlords.. they are all shysters....

Manchester City Council claims great success in Moston SL area for example, (I dont invest there, but have managed there) - because the crime rate has gone down and anti social behaviours have diminished but its only because the MCC has CPOd more than half of it and knocked it down !!!!

Dont get me started re MCC -


yes - very successful landlords meeting, we are going to put foward a motion to have most tenants sent to IOW if they dont pay their rent and then cut off all ferries....