Tag Archives: Property Legislation

11Jul 2013

Property Landlord advice: Landlords and Legionella; The Facts!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Legionella

Last year, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) changed the regulations on the size of water tank for regular inspection for Legionella disease, which had the implication that all rental property is now included within the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 legislation. I wrote at the time that what the industry needed (Rental Industry) was a clear and defined method of dealing with the implications of this change, well the results are in and Landlords are once again facing the bill.

We all know that the risk of a Tenant catching Legionella within a residential property is slim, I doubt anybody would sensibly deny that, but what cannot be denied, is that the HSE are quite clear in their advice on the subject, that it is clearly the responsibility of Landlords to ensure that all precautions are taken to avoid any risk at all. This means all houses must be considered for Health and Safety checks and as Agents we have no option, in fulfilling our obligations to our Landlords, but to advise that check be carried out.

There is a difference here in that the decision as stated in the legislation, lies clearly with the Landlord and therefore whilst we have to recommend the inspection, every Landlord has the right to say no and as long as we can confirm the instruction, then our position is clear. The point being, it is not our decision, but we always have to give best advice and can never confirm that a property does not need investigating.

The Code of Practise change states that to comply with the law in this area, it is required that all rental properties must have had a Legionella risk assessment, so only if the disease occurs would failure to comply become an issue. What the decision by the HSE confirms, is that no risk is to small to escape their attention.

What is not considered is where do you stop? Just how many checks and precautions do you carry out before you accept that life carries risks and no matter how you live your life, you run the risk of being caught out at one time or another, by something outside of our control? Just imagine for a moment that it was found that by cleaning every carpet every year, that asthma was cut by half. Does that also become the responsibility of the Landlord as well? Or does the Tenant accept the risk, or, have the carpets cleaned themselves.

This for me is where this legislation falls down, by all means make everybody aware of the risks in private houses, but let’s have a situation where the Tenant decides if the check should be carried out and if they feel it should, let’s have the price shared by both parties if the Tenant wishes to have the risk assessed?

I once again turn to the sales industry, has anybody suggested that private houses should have this investigation before they are sold? The answer of course is no, but I fail to see what the differences are and why once again, the rental industry has been signalled out for action. So this additional burden has been placed upon all Landlords, but I repeat, no matter what I believe, in our position as a professional management agency, we cannot ignore compliance issues, particularly in relation to the health of Tenants and in the interest of safety.

25Jun 2013

Lettings News: Deposit Case Sends a Message to Landlords

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Craig Smith

Message

There has been yet another court case due to confusion around tenancy deposits and this one has sent the lettings industry into a spin about what does or doesn’t need to be done.

The case in question is Superstrike Vs Rodrigues where the Landlord had issued a section 21 notice for the tenants to vacate. The tenancy started before the tenant deposit protection came in on 6th April 2007. The issue with this case is that the tenancy actually started before 6th April 2007 and became periodic after that date. Once the tenancy had become periodic, it was deemed to be a new tenancy in the eyes of the law and therefore the deposit should have been registered. In turn, this meant that the Landlord could not rely on their Section 21 notice for the tenants to vacate.

The tenants challenged the notice that was issued as the deposit had not been protected in line with the Housing Act 2004 legislation. As the wording isn’t all that clear, a lot of Landlords could find themselves in a bad position if they have had long term tenants.

Right now, there will probably be a lot of Landlords checking their files to make sure they are within the law and with good reason! By not registering the deposit as it should have been a Landlord can find themselves not only unable to give notice to the tenant (they could but they would lose if it went to court!) but also having to pay back more than 3 times the deposit amount to the tenant.

Back in November 2012, there was a similar case that caused Landlords to make some important changes to their processes. The deposit may need to be protected, we already know that, but once the tenancy has gone to a periodic status it means that a new set of Prescribed Information needs to be issued to the tenants. This information should already have been provided to the tenant at day one and needs to be given again at the first periodic stage.

This is a process that we, as an agent, have already been doing for our Landlords to ensure that they are protected and not at risk from such cases. It is a very rare instance but one that could have major consequences for any Landlord involved. The deposit protection schemes are yet to release anything further on what they advise Landlords to do.

14Jun 2013

Letting News: Rent Regulations Could be The Future

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Craig Smith

5 Higher Rents 140613

Members of the London Assembly are calling on Boris Johnson to introduce tougher regulations for Landlords in the private rented sector in London.

We’ve already said ourselves that further regulation of Landlords and agents would be a good thing. If every Landlord or agent had to be registered under a specific scheme it would mean that they would have to agree to certain rules. If these were to be breached they could end up out of pocket or struck off from the register, depending on exactly how the scheme would work. This might sound like harsh punishments but it would help to reduce the amount of improperly trained agents making a mess of things!

There is currently no statutory regulation of lettings agents, only voluntary schemes. This means that anyone could set up their own letting agency but might not have the proper training & know-how to run it properly. I believe that the scheme would need to be fair & properly thought through if introduced by the government. We’ve seen so many times the government has back-tracked on certain things but this needs to be fair, clear & concise in order for it to work effectively.

The assembly also calls for tougher rules on rentals to stop rent amounts from reaching unaffordable amounts. Their figures show that the average rent amount in Londonincreased by around 9% last year which is a large amount given the already higher costs in the capital. Of course, London is generally more expensive as it attracts higher earners and is a much busier environment than smaller towns and villages but if the reforms do come in it could have a knock-on effect for the rest of the country.

Schemes such as this are often trialled in certain areas, a bit like the congestion charges, then spread to other areas later on. It would be interesting to see how this would work and the effect it would have on Landlords.

The publication also states that more should be done to help homeless households. Many Landlords offer a 6 or 12 month tenancy to begin with so that if any issues should arise then neither party is tied in for a longer period of time. It suggests that homeless households should be given 24 month tenancies if they are placed in a privately rented home. This might sound like helping the needy but lets not forget that the Landlord could end up suffering here too! There is always a reason for a family being left homeless, it could be due to the loss of their current rental property or having their home repossessed but if they don’t look after their new property in the correct manner, the Landlord could be stuck with a bad tenant for 2 years.

There are still many items up for discussion surrounding all of this but it will be interesting to see how all of this unfolds. Could this prove to be just the thing that the industry needs or will it be endless red tape for all involved?

16May 2013

Rental News: BBC Watchdog Criticises Letting Agents

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Craig Smith

BBC Watchdog 150513 CS

Yesterday the BBC aired a program which looked into the ways that some clients can find themselves being ripped off by rogue letting agents. Some of what was said does ring true as, believe it or not, the regulations surround lettings agents are very loose.

The Big Issue

If you didn’t see the program yesterday, there is a clip of it on the BBC WEBSITE HERE. It featured TV favourite Nigel Havers who had a bad experience himself (quite ironic considering some of the characters he has played on the screen!). Sometimes it does need someone like him to add a little weight to an argument, in this case the argument that there should be stricter regulations surrounding letting agents. Nigel, if you are reading this, we agree with you!

The problem at the moment is that anyone can setup a letting agency with no prior training or qualifications. I was speaking with someone yesterday who has heard of one business selling letting starter kits over the internet for a small fee. So quite literally anybody could be setting up in your area! Apparently the renewal rate after the initial purchase is very low but it is the initial sales keep the money coming in and that particular business afloat. I’m yet to see one of these packs myself (perhaps you have one and could let us know if it was useful?) but without any proper training or support, what is the likelihood of that prospective agent surviving & doing the right thing?

Qualifications

I know we have waffled on about this before but Castle Estates are proud to be ARLA members. It isn’t just a fancy logo that can go in our window and it certainly cant be purchased by just anyone! Anyone who wants to become a member needs to pass examinations (been there, done that) to prove they have the knowledge and what it takes. Or let me put this in another way, your property could be worth a lot of £££’s, would you really want to trust someone to manage it who has no idea what they are doing?

There are 5 people in our office who have currently gone through the necessary training and 1 more studying at the moment. Although these aren’t compulsory in the eyes of the law, we prefer to show our clients we are prepared to do this so that they have faith in us as their agent.

Further Complaint

The other issue that the program highlighted was that of utility companies being very difficult to deal with. The main company named was Spark Energy and I’m not going to comment any further on this at the moment. If you are really interested, just read their reviews in Money Supermarket to make up your own mind.

We used to work with such companies after them making so many promises of great customer service and easy to use facilities but they all seem to fall down. We have had so many complaints from tenants that we now no longer use any specific company and let the tenants decide who they should use. We do still encounter problems, usually relating to specific suppliers, but thankfully nothing quite as bad as some of these reviews report!

30Oct 2012

Current Property News: CAB Failing to understand Tenants Deposit Scheme.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

“The problem is they just do not realise that there are decent honest Landlords and Agents out there!” So said a fellow Letting Agent who just happened to be in my office this morning, when speaking about the Citizens Advice Bureau and the problems she had found in dealing with them. So it seems a regular problem is happening for other Agents, which does nothing to resolve the issue, but does make you realise that CAB are not perhaps the all knowing all seeing force that they convey, when demanding changes in the way we run our Industry.

Regular item.

In fact, it was only last week that I referred to their campaign to remove all Tenants fees, and support for a new five year agreement, but how can they be taken seriously as a champion of the Tenant when (taking our evidence from two conversations with them this morning) it is clear they do not even understand how, for example, the Tenants Deposit Scheme works!

Phone calls.

What happened this morning was an initial call from a Lady at the CAB asking why we were not returning a Tenants deposit (The Tenant having been at the house for many years) What she was not aware of was that the Deposit was not being refunded because of cigarette burns, yellowing paintwork caused by smoking, general untidiness and cleaning requirements. This in a house where the Tenant had been warned about the consequences when we carried out our Property visits of smoking inside.

Not aware.

The problem lay with the Lady not being aware of how the DPS (Our preferred Deposit organisation) works. So we had to advise them of what would happen and how the claim would go to adjudication as both parties could not agree. The Tenant stance was one of ‘but I have always paid my rent’ which of course was not acceptable.

Problem compounded!

Lo and behold, not an hour later, a second person from the CAB phoned and asked for the Tenants DPS reference number. Now for those who do not know, DPS will only give the Tenants reference number to the Tenant, but we would expect CAB to be aware of this at least, as it is such a basic rule of the system. Instead, we had to explain again how the system worked and be spoken to as if we were being obstructive in how we were dealing with the matter. This is unacceptable and speaks volumes about the manner in which CAB view Landlords and Agents.

Who knew!

The fact is, as a professional Agency, we pride ourselves on carrying out our affairs to the letter of the Law. The fact seems to be that our Tenant, who we had of course already the procedure explained to him, could not find anybody with the knowledge at the CAB to advice him well at all. The phone calls of course ended up, providing they were relayed correctly, with the same advice we had already passed on, but while I am of course aware that the CAB do a very good job in advising the public, it seems they need some training on what is now a basic staple of Tenant law, because what should have happened when the Tenant reported his situation in the first place to the CAB was an answer of, ‘Yes, that’s right!’

Review.

As a matter of course, we review every situation where we are in communication with organisations who act for others, whether it is another Agent, Solicitor or organisations such as the CAB. In doing so in this case we were satisfied we did our job correctly. The only question was one of language and translation, but as I have stated, the Tenant was long standing and we had held many conversation with him over the years and we are left in do doubt that the problem was not one of miscomprehension, rather a Tenant who did not get what he wanted, feeling he could get help from others. It is a pity we were spoken to by the CAB in such a poor way when what we did was correct and I just hope that in relaying the conversation our Tenant was advised that we are correct in our dealings on his behalf!

24Oct 2012

Current Property News: Landlords facing gas supply cuts through new regulations.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

It is very rarely that I print a headline designed to make people stop, but this is one. Following a criminal case into a death arising from Carbon Monoxide poisoning, a new test has been added to the Gas safety Certificate for Tenants concerning the inspection of joints in the flu where they pass through voids with no access. Simply put, it a joint cannot be accessed, it will fail. The consequences are a request to cut off the Gas supply and all the problems of a Landlord failing to provide space and water heating until the problem is corrected.

Immediate action.

This is a situation that needs immediate action, because it soon becomes clear that where problems occur, especially if property is in a block of leasehold flats for example. Therefore, all of our staff, and especially staff who carry out our three monthly visits, will be educated to understand where problems exist and highlight them as soon as possible.

Extent of problem.

What needs to be realised here, is not just which boiler flues may cause concern, but also the length of time that will be needed to correct the problem. As Letting Agents, we are well aware of how problems do occur during a Gas Safety Inspection, but 99 times out of 100 the work is completed on the day, or at the very worst the following day. That inspection hatches may need to be fitted points out just how long the work could take, before a system can be given the green light.

Spotted early.

This is why we are looking now and not waiting for the problem to occur. It is what we need to do as an Agent and where a potential problem exists we will supply the Tenant with a carbon Monoxide detector as soon as we are aware. We are also Block Managing Agents and being aware of where the responsibility lies, we will be advising all of our Leaseholders to review the situation and check for themselves. Finally, we will write to all of our Landlords and make them aware of the changes and implications.

Best advice.                 

There will be much more detail in the fall out over the introduction of these important and wide reaching changes. We are aware of one Landlord who owns a block of flats, who has had to fit inspection hatches in the living room of eight properties to comply. But more than anything else is the importance of ensuring a Tenant does not lose supply and heating for any length of time. One thing for sure is that a Tenant’s permission would need to be sought to allow the gas supply to be turned off, and without permission the Landlord is left in no man’s land with a system which cannot be licensed. Nobody would want this scenario to result in anybody’s death, but it is not a scenario I am going to allow to develop and this is why we are addressing it now.

Leasehold.

The Leasehold property owner faces an even worse scenario, as it may be the shared element of their building that hides the flue and then permission will need to be sought before any works can be carried out! This is another scenario that could take several weeks to be resolved and another reason why we are surveying our blocks for problems now, rather than wait for the problem to occur. We will do everything we can through being pro-active to ensure another tragedy does not occur under our Management.

Conclusion.

As a property owner, I am able to look at the action from both angles and as owners I can only recommend you do the same, or at least ask your property professional what they are doing on your behalf. One thing is sure, if nothing is done and your property comes under those that will fail, a whole new set of problems will occur and at that stage they may not be under your control!

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!

04Oct 2012

Current Property Landlord news: Landlord complaints not being addressed?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

A report from Shelter (as reported on the BBC news pages today) states that complaints about Landlords have risen by 27% over the last three years. As always there are statistics and statistics and the ones quoted in this report are a little ambiguous, but let’s take them at face value and assume they mean exactly what they say and assume we are measuring one year against another and that the 27% figure applies from 2008/09 to 2011/12.

More houses bigger numbers.

So let’s look at what has happened at face value, because some of this increase is purely down to trends. For a start, there are some 5% more houses in the private rental sector than there were four years ago and of course nowadays, people do choose the easy route and register a complaint with the authorities prior to actually reporting the issue to the Landlord. This must apply to at least 10% of the figure quoted.

No excuse.

But do not get me wrong, as a Letting Agent I am not making excuses for these figures, far from it, just wanting to put a little bit more reality to the situation. At our office for example, we have only ever had two instances of problems being reported to the Council and on both occasions we were not spoken to first. Problems can occur without the Landlord or Agents knowledge and unless we are informed we are powerless. In the two instances we have been involved with a Council inspection, only one resulted in work being needed and that is work that would have been completed should we have been made aware first!

Flooding in!

In the report for instance specific mention is made of damp houses. This year this is not a surprise as I can verify as a Tenant. Many Landlords will have found damp patches and rising water (In a cellar in my instance) without prior expectation or knowledge, as the water table has risen dramatically this summer and started from a high point (as it did in Staffordshire) this spring.

Action.

But none of this does remove the fact that more action is required and this is what concerns me about the report. Shelter ask for more positive action to be taken by Councils at the same time confirming a rise in the number of successful prosecutions or orders for improvements. But if Shelter feel this is not sufficient, then it is clear the system is not working and something else needs to be done.

Further breakdown.

Firstly, I would like to know exactly what the breakdown is between privately run property in the hands of Landlords and fully Managed property in the hands of Agents. As I have confirmed, two houses reported in twelve years with nearly 400 houses under our Management would suggest, if other Agencies operate with both the correct knowledge and standards, that the majority would be privately managed. So firstly let’s have a better breakdown of the figures and more information as to which areas Shelter feel better action needs to be taken.

Now for the old chestnut.

Because when figures are broken down and if Councils are unable to follow up and prosecute sufficient cases then clearly a new system is required and yes, for me that is qualified Agents who pass a Government designed test (with the co-operation and involvement of the Industry professional bodies if possible) and all Landlords must be registered and approved themselves, and if not then approved and registered Agents must look after their properties.

Standards improving.

There is no doubt that the quality of housing in the Private rental sector IS improving and best advice to all Landlords which should always be our objective when marketing a property, is to consider the competition. To Landlords who are not prepared to present and protect property and therefore their Tenants correctly, we must always point out what needs to be done and why using the same principle! If the advice is not taken, then we cannot manage the property. Surely, professional standards to the same level would be the solution bodies such as Shelter wish for?

Drum banging time.

Legislation is overdue because of confirmation in reports like this that the current system does not work. Councils are too thin on the ground and cannot police and control the current system. If all Agents and Landlords had to meet qualifications laid down or not be able to rent property out, the system would be self policing – surely this is the way forward.

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?

 

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.