Which authorities have legal responsibility on landlords?

teabelly

I have been asked this and always assumed that local councils had the legal responsibility to make sure that landlords on their patch are providing EPCS and more importantly gas safety certificates. But is this the case? Who does make sure landlords fulfill their obligations when tenants themselves can end up being booted out if they do. If it letting agents are involved do they take the flack with the landlord or just the landlord regardless of whether the agent has fouled up or whether the landlord has instructed them to ignore legal obligations?

Also would it be a legal tenancy condition to refuse to return the entire deposit if a single item that isn't on a inventory is left behind ie the tenant has left something of theirs? I would have said that it wasn't and some sort of reasonableness test would be offered. I'd also assume if the LL hasn't protected the deposit anyway the tenant would be automatically entitled to double the deposit on the end of the tenancy anyway....

N79

The Crown has authority of LLs. This is enforced by the courts.

Either the Crown Prosocution Service or a Local Authority can initial prosecutions for illegal activity by LLs. Ts can initiate litagation againts their LL if they believe the LL has acted unlawfully.

Also would it be a legal tenancy condition to refuse to return the entire deposit if a single item that isn't on a inventory is left behind ie the tenant has left something of theirs? I would have said that it wasn't and some sort of reasonableness test would be offered.

Indeed. LL could claim the costs of removal, storage and finally disposal of said item. If it is a plate then the cost will be negligable. If it is a garden shed, a new bath or probably worst case an asbestos garage then it could be quite large.

I'd also assume if the LL hasn't protected the deposit anyway the tenant would be automatically entitled to double the deposit on the end of the tenancy anyway....

Not automatically, on application to a court if the court agrees that the LL has breached the housing act (ie has acted unlawfully). Given the state of the legislation, returning the deposit before the hearing is currently probably sufficient to escape a penalty.

teabelly

Ah. So if someone suspects a landlord of bad behaviour and reports it to the local authority then would they have a duty to investigate and potentially prosecute?

Looks like things are more complicated than ever.

N79

That will depend on the "bad behaviour". But in principle yes, Local Authorities have the lead role in launching prosecutions for most LL and T matters as it is often the Local Authority that can often turn an unlawful act (eg failing to meet repairing obligations) into an illegal one (eg failure to comply with repairing orders).

teabelly

Ta for the info. It's very useful to know and some LAs need reminding of their obligations.

tbs624

teabelly wrote: »

I have been asked this and always assumed that local councils had the legal responsibility to make sure that landlords on their patch are providing EPCS

Lack of EPC is dealt with by Trading Standards Officers and can result in the LL being landed with a 200 quid civil law penalty

teabelly wrote: »

and more importantly gas safety certificates.

Can be dealt with by either the HSE or the local Council's EHO.

teabelly wrote: »

But is this the case? Who does make sure landlords fulfill their obligations when tenants themselves can end up being booted out if they do.

There *is* a problem with retaliatory evictions which has not adequately been addressed by successive governments. Shelter has campaigned on the issue.

teabelly wrote: »

If it letting agents are involved do they take the flack with the landlord or just the landlord regardless of whether the agent has fouled up or whether the landlord has instructed them to ignore legal obligations?

LAs can also be held responsible for their actions/omissions in some cases

teabelly wrote: »

Also would it be a legal tenancy condition to refuse to return the entire deposit if a single item that isn't on a inventory is left behind ie the tenant has left something of theirs?

A LL has to be able to justify any proposed deposit deductions and a T has the right to pursue the matter to court if they disagree

teabelly wrote: »

I'd also assume if the LL hasn't protected the deposit anyway the tenant would be automatically entitled to double the deposit on the end of the tenancy anyway....

The law allows for a 3x deposit amount penalty but there is no guarantee that a T would be successful, especially if the LL repays the deposit to the tenant or registers it late, prior to any court hearing