Tag Archives: Landlord Advice

10Oct 2012

Property Landlord advice: Inventory a must for ALL rented property.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

We just as other Letting Agents must also be finding, have Landlords who are wishing to keep costs down to a minimum in these difficult times when we are all finding pressure on our margins. However, there are some areas that just do not justify cutting corners and the Inventory is one such area.

Deposit disputes in Landlords favour.

There have now been many cases of claims against Tenant deposits that have been successful, purely because of both a well written inventory and sufficient photographic evidence to back up our claim. The Tenants Deposit dispute system itself, after just one year in operation, warned Landlords that the biggest reason they were losing claims was because of an insufficient inventory.

Why?

Explained in the simplest terms, if you wish to claim against a Tenant for painting a wall black during a Tenancy without permission, if you cannot confirm that it was not black at the beginning of the Tenancy, you will lose. Similarly, if you wish to claim decoration allowed was done badly, you would also lose unless you could prove that the decoration at the start of a Tenancy was in good order. We have posted before about the importance and it is explained well in this Blog by Craig Smith

Photographic proof.

Of course photos play a massive part in this, as a house correctly recorded can easily be shown in its original condition, but that does not mean a well written version should not accompany photographs. If a written inventory confirms no stains on a carpet and there are no specific photographs close enough to confirm general level of dirt, this as well as photos confirming the current state and condition should (and have) proven to be sufficient. But of course, if you have both, then no problem should exist.

Cookers and sinks.

Cookers and sinks are the two items that cause most issues, and with experience, we know to ensure they are well photographed at the start and the end of Tenancy. (Only just in front of Gardens where the same rules apply) We have had occasions where even faced with the before and after photographs, Tenants have insisted on allowing the arbitration service to decide, but whilst this is their right and nowadays more common, we have always achieved the correct result on behalf of our Landlords.

Do not cut corners.

All of this explains why we encourage Landlords to have our Inventory as part of their Tenant check in. Of course Fully Managed properties always receive this service, so my comments are better aimed at Landlords who have either always, or in an attempt to cut costs have now decided to manage their property themselves. In the long run this will pay for itself.

Always at the house.

 It is also one of the main reasons why when checking tenants in to their new home, it should always happen at the house itself. Too many times lately we hear of Tenant’s being checked in at the Agents office. I would ask the question how an inventory can be relied upon if you do not go through it with the Tenant at the property.  If at the end of the Tenancy your Tenant objects to charges, it would be very easy for them to state the inventory was never checked in their presence. A risk I would not wish to take on behalf of my Landlords!

03Oct 2012

Property Landlord advice: Good Management means Tenants stay longer.

⋅ 2 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

One of the regular roles I undertake is contacting Landlords when Tenants give notice to leave their rented property. This is of course a worrying time for Landlords as nobody, me included, wants the risk of the property being empty when in by far the majority of cases the sitting Tenant has been settled for some time and we know they are looking after the house and paying the rent. A change of Tenant is always a stressful time for Landlords.

No change please.

So why do something that makes a Tenant think about moving? This was a thought that came to my mind when reading a report by David Salisbury, the Chairman of the National Landlords Association in the lettings section of Property Drum. The point he raised, about Tenants staying longer, along with rising instances of arrears is one that touches on my last Blog about Tenant charges, because some practises by Agents encourage Tenants to move on by making them feel uncomfortable in their role.

Tenant fees.

Practises that make a Tenant review their position cannot always be avoided, such as rent increases, which during our annual review are being looked at more and more as Tenants do stay longer in their homes. That does not mean we should avoid increases, all we can do is be fair which we always advise. But what can be avoided are unnecessary charges and in particular charging for and insisting upon a new agreement every year.

Agent practise and excuse.

You can tell we do not advocate this practise as the reason given, that it gives the Landlord security, actually backfires with the knowledge that more people move as a result of being badly treated (in their eyes yes, but after all it is their decision) We are also aware both locally and Nationally through discussion with other Castle Estates offices that even if Tenants do not move at that time, their perception changes as they see themselves being charged unfairly and then do move as soon as they can.

Consequences.

Now I know from experience that it is far better to have a happy Tenant in your home than an unhappy one. What care used be taken may not be so forthcoming when a Tenant feels aggrieved by the way they are treated and I know this personally as an Agent, Landlord and Tenant. The wider picture is far more serious for Landlords and another reason, when I have been aware of the moves by the CBA and Shelter to have Tenant fees scrapped by Law for the last Ten Years, why we do not charge Tenants additional fees that are not required. There is no doubt that such charges will be central to any campaign to enforce any change of Law.

Arrears.

This is one area where I can both understand the trend and also disagree with it at the same time, for as Agents who use a professional Referencing Agent we know how much more difficult it is to find Tenants who pass without additional requirements (Guarantors, larger deposits) But, to use any other type of referencing such as personal statements (The Magazine I was reading actually had another article on this very same subject on the same page)just does not cut muster and is asking for trouble. So in the long run and probably the reason why we are not finding arrears any more of a problem than usual using a Referencing Agency who have raised their own barrier before they issue a pass seems to be the answer and for us, we will continue to work harder to find the right Tenant understanding why.

27Sep 2012

Property Landlord advice: High Tenant fees coming home to roost?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There is an article in this week’s Property Drum on page 8 that has caught my eye as one of the chain of Letting Agents who have had to address issues in Scotland have commented upon the Shelter campaign surrounding the removal of Tenant fees. I would have to say I agree with  some of what they say, but I disagree with the main thrust of their argument.

Explaining the group.

First, to place some context behind what I wish to say about the subject, I need to explain where the difference lays between Martin & Co offices and Castle Estates offices, because we both have a Franchising background, but now Castle Estates is an independent group who share the same name, but operate entirely independently of each other and have no central controlling Head Office. Martin & Co remain a Franchising organisation where centre influence and dictate the policy of the group.

Comments are my own.

 Therefore I am commenting as an Independent Castle Estates in Staffordshire and not as the Head of an organisation in the same light as Sue Hopson, head of standards at Martin & Co is doing. As far as Castle Estates offices are concerned, if they operate in a manner I disagree with, then they are also the target of my comments.

Agreement.

Firstly I must say that the whole idea of dropping Tenant fees altogether as is the case in Scotland does not just move costs from the Tenant to the Landlord, for just as sure as Landlords will have to pay for the costs generated, these costs will be offset by increases in rent. Then, as has always been the case, market forces will drive rent levels to their correct rate. But they will start from and therefore remain at a higher level.

Major factor missed.

What the comments miss are the manner in which many Agents and I am not referring to anybody specifically when I say this, reduce Landlord fees and raise Tenant fees so they can market themselves as a cheap Agent in to Landlords in the first place! This is a short sighted policy and will surely attract the attention of such groups as Shelter and the CAB who have been looking at Tenants fees for well over ten years.

Bad practise.

In a market where the number of offices offering Letting services has probably doubled in the last three years as Estate Agents flooded to the Lettings Industry for financial reasons, the opportunity to advertise services to Landlords at low prices at the expense of the Tenants has seemed to much of an opportunity to miss for some. But the short sightedness of such an approach should Tenant fees be scrapped in England will need to be explained to Landlords and of course all of us will have to do this, not just those who overcharge.

Long term practise.

It is also a fact that high Tenant fees are nothing new and I have no problem in pointing the finger at Estate Agents who historically have been the main protagonists of this practise. Do I have Tenant fees? Yes, but they have hardly changed in over twelve years and I am happy to justify them, as I have done before now, to any Tenant coming through our system.

Inevitable?

Unless our Industry receives the backing of the Government in driving through legislation to ensure professional standards are upheld by all Letting Agencies, or they can no longer operate, then I believe the day will come when Tenant charges are dropped altogether justified or not, because those with this objective will always be able to point at practises that take advantage of Tenants where fees are concerned. But equally, as I have pointed out that from my own perspective I speak for my own office only, anybody else speaking on the subject should not ignore the current practise of high charges and should be able to ensure that offices under their control can justify what they charge Tenants as well!

26Sep 2012

Current Property News: Errant Landlord caught out.

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

I have stated before that one of the major problems with legislation that is policed by Councils is the amount of effort placed upon seeking out Landlords and Agents that ignore the law. This applies to Houses of Multiple Occupation, Fit and proper accommodation, Tenant deposits and in the case to hand today, Gas Safety certificates.

Local Council request.

In this instance a Landlord who was asked to provide copies of Gas Safety certificates for two properties in Staffordshire by her local Council and having failed to do so was referred to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). It is they that then pursued the matter, but it is good to see a Council taking a pro-active stance in ensuring property is properly maintained.

Legal requirement.

Just to confirm, for those without Gas in a property, the Gas Safety certificate is needed each year to ensure the equipment is working correctly and is safe to use (carbon monoxide gases)

No excuse!

The end result was a fine of £4709 including costs for a £65 job! There can be no excuse for not complying, especially as this Landlord ignored the requests for many months. This also included being given time to produce a certificate by the HSE within a month of notices issued.

Landlord needed convincing.

It does however strike me that by having gone through a procedure with the Local Council and then being given time by the HSE to comply, perhaps the problem lay not in what should have been done, but that the Landlord just did not believe prosecution would actually take place! It looks as though the whole affair took well over a year before any prosecution actually took place!

Contradiction in effect.

This is where action needs to be seen to take place quicker, because if the Law requires a Certificate to be renewed every year, then in a scenario where a certificate does not exist in the first place, to take a year to bring a case to court (assuming that one does now exist?) then the appliances concerned could have been unsafe for anything up to two years!

Does not add up!

Now forgive me for playing the cynic and far be it from me to suggest the Law is not correct, I would not dream of risking not having a property covered for a week, never mind a year, but to take a whole year to bring the case to conclusion for a Law that requires annual checks somewhat makes a mockery of the legislation that demands the check in the first place. Surely by delaying instant action, you are ignoring the supposed risk the Tenants are suffering?

 

18Sep 2012

Current Property News: What Landlords want to know?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

As part of our good practises when reviewing our methods of operation, between us we always discuss what Landlords ask about and speak about when we visits them to give a valuation and review of their property. It is important for us to be aware of any new trends and old ones and surprisingly, one trend that does not change is that Landlords are still discussing and talking about ‘Nightmare Tenant’ stories and what is done to stop them occurring.

Changed Market.

The market has changed considerably and I am sure will keep evolving over the next ten years. Certainly technology and mobile phones have meant we have to make information available quickly and accessible. Standard of housing has improved as competition for Tenants continues to grow and more and more properties enter the market. Yet the one thing that will not go away is the stories of Tenants trashing houses and the fear that brings with it.

Not common.

Yet certainly as far as I can comment on the houses we have been involved with, this is something that rarely happens now and I cannot remember the last time we had a property that was badly damaged by the Tenants.  We, like all Agents, get Tenants that do not care for property in the way that both our Landlords and we would prefer, but this is always a case of standards rather than actual physical damage done.

Strange beliefs.

There are also plenty of situations where what should be done and what the Tenants actually believe needs to be done differ, such as the Tenant who stated they did not need to clean one bedroom, because they had never used it during the Tenancy. Or the person who broke a window when mowing the lawn and said the Landlord had to be responsible because the lawn from where the stone came was the Landlords and not hers!

Manage to avoid.

The answer for me is to catch problems early and make sure the Tenant knows both their responsibility and our role as Agents in what you are trying to achieve together. In short, good Management will ensure damage limitation. But what this does prove is that some cases must still happen and that bad stories are the ones most Landlords hear first, or perhaps take note of!

Practical experience.

In the middle of writing this Blog, I have visited a new Landlord at their property, student accommodation it may have been, but she described the manner in which the last Agents had allowed the students to live last year. Not a property wrecked, as I have stated, more a question of standards. But it does rather prove my point. Whether self Managing or appointing an Agent, make sure that visits take place and that problems are resolved head on and not left to fester. Perhaps then we may allay Landlords fears by reducing further tales of the ‘Horror Tenants’

10Sep 2012

Property Landlord advice: Insulation now available!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

A few weeks ago I wrote that Residential Insulation which is currently being promoted through the Governments Carbon Emission Reduction Traget CERT and the possibility of Landlords being able to claim for expenditure against annual costs, was very difficult to explain to current Landlords and Tenants when the Industry itself had no way of communicating its message.

VNR Contracting Services.

I am pleased to confirm that I have now found a Company who is not only being proactive in speaking and working with other organisations, but that understood what we are trying to do, but is also happy to put leg work in themselves in achieving a result.

Landlord and Tenant choices.

What we need to know is that as Property Managers, we can rely upon a Company who specialise in the Insulation field to explain clearly the benefits of having Insulation fitted and the grants that are currently available for Landlord and Tenant alike, one through direct costs and one through the tax incentive currently being offered.

Action plan.

This means we will be able to write to our Tenants and Landlords alike with information relevant to them and then allow the Company to follow up with visits to answer questions and quote for the work direct ensuring that our Tenants and Landlords are able to take advantage of the schemes before winter this year, if they choose to get involved.

Service provided.

To us, this is part of what we should be doing as Property Managers on behalf of all of our clients, not for any other reason than from a central point we are in a position to receive information as Companies approach us and distribute the same to a wide audience. It is not for us to dictate what decisions are made or even recommend what options are pursued, rather to place the information in front of those who have the right to take advantage of the grants etc that become available.

Reliable Contractor.

What is reassuring now is that having struggled to find a Contractor to work with, we have been approached by one who already works with local Councils and as such carries a pedigree that is re-assuring. I am happy to recommend VNR Contracting Services Ltd and in reality that is only the second recommendations we have made in over two years of writing!

06Sep 2012

Current property news; Squatting finally made illegal.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

It is possibly one of the most depressing and sickening things that can happen to a property owner, to find that squatters have broken in to your property and that the law does not support this effective breaking and entering in any way and the responsibility to deal with the intrusion is thrown squarely on the shoulders of the rightful owner. These words, whilst repeated as I remember them, were used during a presentation to the Lettings Industry during a speech on the use of empty housing some ten years ago.

At last!

Now, after so many years the Government has reacted and made it an illegal offense to squat in premises without a legal right or reason to be present. What should have happened then is the unfortunate property owners who were suffering at present be given their voice and an outcry of at last should have been heard. What was heard was a cry of ‘unfair’ as housing groups and charities warned of rising homelessness.

Responsibility.

Now I must make myself clear here, I am not uncaring of the position people are in that sees them squat in the first place or the problems they now face if removed from property. My problem is that the house owner should have always been in the position of being able to rely upon the assistance of the law and it is unfair to somehow shift the responsibility back on the shoulders of the owners. This is clearly a failing of the social system in providing housing for all in the first place. This is said with full knowledge that there are some who will always remain outside of the system and be non-conformist!

Ignoring the Law.

I have always found it somewhat ironic that the Houses of Multiple Occupation laws were introduced to tackle safety in high rise City Centre properties and for ignoring them Landlords could be banned from owning property. Squatters, by the very nature of what they do, cause far more danger and would never consider such legislation in how they live, yet they are protected because their activity has always fallen under civil offense legislation and not an illegal act. To make it so at last corrects this ridiculous state of affairs.

Financial requirement.

What is so often forgotten is the financial requirement that the owner needs to fulfil and the difficulties they find themselves left in when a property is a target for squatters. In my small way, I feel I need to make a stand for the owners, and no matter how many stories there are of squatters who have maintained a property well, there are just as many of properties left in an appalling condition.

Enforcement.

Now we must hope that this blight (although mainly a City centre problem) is dealt with in short order. It is a fairly simple statement for me to make, because no matter what your feelings, we should live by the letter of the law and I believe ownership rights should be amongst those at the top of the list of laws to abide by. My hope is that the charities and groups working with those made homeless by this change of law do not fund any legal challenge through the courts. Owners, who are not all £multimillion Companies who can afford losses, deserve the law to be enforced in full.

04Sep 2012

Property Landlord advice: British Gas laying down the Law!

⋅ 2 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

I am not a lover of utility suppliers, mainly because they never seem to know how our Industry works and prove time and again, that they do not have a system that can deal with people moving on a frequent basis. I have seen STWA send out invoices for a few days between Tenants at three times the rate of the normal daily cost, heard staff at British Gas say “let’s turn the fax of today, we have enough paperwork to deal with” and famously (for me) told British Gas, “sorry if I have not pressed the right option, there isn’t one for ‘we do not know what we are doing’ ”

Visit out of the blue.

This time however, they have gone too far! An engineer turned up at a house we manage last week to change the meter because the Tenants were stated as not having paid the Gas Bill. Unbelievably that simple fact was wrong, as the Gas Bill had been paid and was up to date. But that did not stop the BG Employee changing the Tenants on to a pay as you go meter and also whilst at the property looking at the appliances.

Gas Fire turned off.

Mistake number two. Whilst there, without looking at the operation of the fire, he decided the fire was unsafe, disconnected it and labelled it as unfit for use. The Tenant, understandably, phoned us and asked us to explain why? We sent a qualified engineer round, who confirmed, as he had when he carried out the annual Landlords Gas Inspection less than four months earlier, that the fire was perfectly OK and that there was no need what so ever to turn it off.

Not the first time!

What amazed me about this was that our Gas engineer confirmed that this was not the first time he had heard of this and that the meter people employed by British Gas were not even qualified as Gas Engineers. Rather they were trained to carry out a ‘Visual Inspection’ and it seems on that basis only without any qualified reason; the appliance was labelled as dangerous. Rightly, our Gas engineer has sent his invoice to British Gas, as why should the Landlord pay for the mistake?

Liability.               

Now I know from experience that they are not the purveyors of all things good as they like to be perceived (especially from the TV ads) but you have to ask the question, since when have they been given the role of sending unqualified people in too houses to carry out unsolicited inspections? It frankly beggars belief but they must see themselves as the protectors of all things Gas related in Britain’s houses to go about giving their staff this kind of instruction.

Admission.

Now they have apologised for even getting involved in the first place as the Tenants had as stated paid their Gas Bill and the meter will be changed back again. As to whether they will pay for the engineer’s time to confirm all was well? Knowing British Gas I doubt it, but hey, somebody who matters might just read this and agree they should. Feel free to get in touch!

Motivation.

That just leaves us wondering why they should do this in the first place? I am afraid in my opinion I only have one thought as to why and that is to generate income through the repairs that appear without the ability to check correctly, would have been generated from this incident – why else? Forgive me if I am wrong, but why else should British Gas staff be condemning appliances (even though they are unqualified in the first place) during visits they are not even supposed to be making? If we had not known better, the result could well have been a call to a British Gas engineer to repair the fire and the result of that would have been an invoice.

Summary.

By all means call me cynical, but I believe this would probably have been the outcome of a visit to a property lived in by the house owner and the only reason this did not finish in this manner, is because British Gas would not have expected a third party to have knowledge through the Landlords inspection of the appliances and be able to call upon an engineer as we did. In other words it resulted from British Gas NOT understanding how the rental system works, but then I already know that.

Bad practise British Gas, Bad Practise!

29Aug 2012

Current property News: Montague report offers the Key for growth?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

The Montague report which reviews the manner in which the Private Rented Section is viewed by the Institutional Investment market has been released and is available for download from the Department for Communities and Local Government. The basic idea of the report was to look at why Investors do not look upon the Private Rental sector in the same way that they do Commercial property investment.

 The report is a weighty 28 pages of Summary and evaluation, but holds many good ideas and could just see the way forward for our sector as we struggle to meet the demands of a modern mobile work force. It is in three sections and is going to take at least two posts to comment upon, in this first post, I have selected highlights from the Background and Evidence sections in this post. I will follow this up by looking at the Barriers, Conclusions and Recommendations.

 Growth.

 I am a total advocate for the building industry (Housing) being the vehicle for leading the way out of recession. This is why I am always looking at new build and activity and look to the property sales figures of a guidance for where financially we currently sit. It is therefore nice to see clear figures quoted to support my theory. For every £1m spent, 12 jobs are created or supported and for every £1 invested in construction, £2.60 is generated elsewhere in the supply chain. The supporting sources are listed in the report.

 Local or distant Management.

 It struck me quickly when looking at the Evidence that a market exists, that there was a need to build in assured maintenance. I agree whole heartedly, that any long term scheme should include an organised plan for both maintaining of and maintenance on the property concerned. My immediate thought was to ensure the properties are managed locally and not by some distant organisation, to ensure both a distribution of the Management structure and workload through local contractors rather than the majority of the expenditure remaining in London.

 Across the Country.

 To do this, as the report recognises, there needs to be many differing schemes, which, in order to maximise the effect across the Country, as highlighted above, needs to be spread across the country and not concentrating again in the area that generates ever increasing rent levels; London. It is important in arriving at any conclusion that promotes and encourages Investor growth in Private rented property, that the whole Country sees the benefits.

 Wardens.

 Unsurprisingly, the wish to see Wardens or a Management presence in specific developments is a nice idea, but one that is only reflected for affordability, through the size of the initial development. As an Agent who Manages whole sites on behalf of one owner, exactly the type of site referred to in the report or that would be developed as a result of Investors becoming involved, there is a recognisable limit to the size of what are acceptable sizes of development so as not to have to large an impact on the local market, both by type of property available and by long term effect on local suburbs. In short, there are places that high rise buildings fit in and areas where they do not! Wardens suit large buildings but would cost too much for more localised schemes offering between 20 and 40 units.

 Long Term Agreements.

 I think it is a good idea to generate an agreement that sits well for longer than the current popular Assured Short Term agreement, but by the same token, I see no need to do this by changing the AST. As case of ‘It ain’t broke, don’t fix it!’ But a document built around the normal lease as exists for purchasing leasehold property would be ideal. This could still give the Tenant of this shorter term lease the protection afforded to the leaseholder, whilst reflecting the short term usage and the interests of the Freeholder as well.

 Block Management.

 It is suggested that Management of such buildings would tie in nicely with the current Block Management style and again as this is one of the services we offer I can comment and could not agree more. This would be ideal providing that local Companies were sought for provision of services, instead of the properties being managed from afar. Why do I feel this is important? Because we have grown our business on the dissatisfaction of leaseholders whose representative never visit sites or more importantly, cannot be visited because their offices are in London, Birmingham or Manchester.

 There are some great ideas in this report and I look forward to commenting on the conclusions but if there is one point of caution it is that consideration has to be made as to the spread of housing, which is needed throughout the Country as well as provision of service, which, to avoid complaints about schemes failing to deliver and being unapproachable, need to be sourced close to the buildings concerned.

 More to follow!

08Aug 2012

Property Landlord advice: Treating harassment seriously.

⋅ 2 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

One of the most difficult jobs that we have to do as Letting Agents is to convince a Landlord that no matter how badly treated he may feel by the Tenant neither we nor he can just turn up at the property and demand recompense!  Harassment and all the actions that surround it are a serious matter and a case has recently come to my attention which highlights exactly why we give the warnings that we do.

Extreme case.

The case I am talking about surrounds a Landlords efforts to remove a Tenant because they wanted to sell the property concerned and went about it in a way that was far from normal by any standards which does mean that the efforts the Landlord went to are extreme, but the penalties  are also high and what should be considered is that the Landlord was wrong in every way, before we even get to the legal steps to avoid action, but that does not change that he was found guilty in virtually every step he took.

Notice served.

Even though the notice was served and indeed not questioned by the courts, the very fact that the Landlord applied pressure on the day the notice came to its due date is significant. The courts only have one view and that is that the law must be seen to take its view. Even if the Tenant does not leave on the due date, the courts are the only vehicle through which a Tenant can be evicted.

Landlords rights.

The law sees itself protecting both the rights of the Landlord and the Tenant, but just because a Tenant does not leave does not mean that anybody can take matters in too their own hands. This is why even calling without notice can be considered as harassment! There is one simple rule here, do nothing without notice, even a visit to discuss matters should be done by appointment.  Let the courts do their work, under no circumstances should a Landlord take any form of direct action themselves.

Extreme scenario.

Yes the detail of this case is extreme, but the consequences do show just how this can get out of hand. The damages which could amount to £30000 (along with not unsubstantial costs) are the proof of just how costly getting this wrong could be.

Private Landlord.

It is also worthy of note that the Agent concerned, having served notice, was contacted by the Tenants solicitors, but from that moment on, the action was all against the Landlord and the Agent, obviously unable to fulfil its role, arrears (correctly) to have disassociated themselves. They have no choice when matters are taken out of their hands. But if it was an Agent that was being blamed for this action no doubt ‘rogue agents’ would have appeared in the report! But as it was a Landlord taking his own actions, it would be nice to know that he was banned from being a Landlord again!

Registration.

If all Landlords were registered as was recommended in the Rugg review of 2008 then there would be no doubt and action would have been taken. But that is not the case and as far as I am aware, without a specific case resulting in a Court ban, Landlords cannot be stopped renting property again! Who knows, that may still happen, but what is sure is that there is no legislation in place at present to rely upon.