Tag Archives: Property Legislation

31Aug 2012

Current property News: Montague report offers the Key for growth? Part 2

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

In looking at the second part of the Review of the Barriers to Institutional Investment in private Rented Homes, I have read and will comment on the sections headlined; The Barriers and Conclusion and The Recommendations.

 The Barriers.

 Most of these sections concentrate on the land and planning permission needs, but do refer to some rather confusing detail. Such as that Management costs are as high as 30% for Residential property. Now I know that National Companies specialise in offering services for Companies with large property portfolios, but when you consider the normal cost for Management on a local level would average at 10%, I find it difficult to see how this rises to 30% when managing from afar.

 Total Costs.

 I may of course be wrong, but it rather looks as though it is the cost of maintaining the property that has been added to the running costs, however, as the report confirms that it is normally Capitol growth that is considered to be the income from residential and not the rental income, whereas with Commercial investment it is the opposite way round. Surely then, if Commercial values drop over time, the cost of maintenance should be offset against Capitol growth and it is both that should be considered, as they are real income, when comparing residential to Commercial? Is this where encouraging Tax breaks can be made?

 Local market.

 Otherwise, once again, local Management will answer the cost issue, rather than distance Management having to find a local Agent to carry out the role of providing a Tenant, let the Local agent be the sole property Manager. Costs halved? – probably!

Lack of Experience.

The report then states that there is a lack of experience in knowing how any scheme would operate. But this does not exist in the market place; rather this confirms that in compiling the report, the Property Management Industry has not been approached. A fact confirmed by the later statement in Recommendation Five: that the market would benefit from; the professionalism of the management service. Had the Industry been spoken with (also confirmed in the Terms of Reference) then Sir Adrian Montague would have been aware that one already exists.

Right Model.

I also believe that the right model already exists as well. There are numerous professional Letting agents, who also operate as Property Managers as well, looking after leasehold sites (Block Management) throughout the UK. Providing that any incentives in profitability and land availability are made available Nationwide and providing there exists Agents with the ability to run both, then costs can be controlled, the whole Industry will benefit and progress can be made throughout the UK.

Professional Management.

But I believe that this is another opportunity for the Government to change their attitudes towards the rental sector, which is growing at the same speed home ownership for individuals is declining giving a thriving rental sector the opportunity to be part of the growth if not the very reason for it, that this country desperately needs. Tied with ensuring the Industry moves forward in a professional self managed, or Government managed (although I believe this is where the lack of motivation currently exists) manner, ensuring the scheme meets all the requirements listed in this report and that the properties concerned will continue to give the profitable long term return institutional investors require.

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!

14Aug 2012

Current Property News: Localism Act changes continue.

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

It would seem that a further little known section (or at least commented upon section) in the Localism Act has come to light covering the requirement of Local Councils to change the manner in which they deal with people who are becoming homeless under a standard notice to quit (Section 21) if they are unable to source alternative accommodation.

Normal circumstances.

This normally applies to Tenants with problems during a Tenancy anyway and would normally mean notice had been served because of rent arrears, hence the difficulty in finding alternative accommodation. But this is the very situation that the Council is supposed to step in and protect those unable to move and the very area where current advice can lead to an eviction order being served by the Courts.

Illegal Act.

The problem is caused by the advice currently given by Social Housing teams to stay put until such time as the eviction notice has been served. As if by doing so the courts are confirming the Notice is correct. At this stage most Council’s will provide accommodation. At first glance the change appears to make the Tenant ‘labelled as homeless’ with 21 days of the section 21 notice still to serve. Removing the need to rely upon the courts at all and ensuring the Tenant does not perform an illegal act by staying after the end of notice date and having to be evicted and all of the stress and discomfort this procedure produces.

Not so!

On taking advice and checking the legislation thoroughly, it now appears this is not the case and that this rule only applied in certain cases, where the Council placed the Tenant in the Private Rented section in the first place. But as someone who has always questioned the need to subject Tenants to such an uncomfortable and stressful course of action I cannot help but ask the question why not?

Simple.

It strikes me that a process whereby the Council can investigate and ratify a Notice three weeks before the end of the notice period, would in the long run save time and money for all concerned. Surely it is better not to place the Tenant in a position where they are in effect breaking the law and offer a solution which is based upon freedom of information and open for all parties to be present in a simple meeting. To me this is a no brainer and having spoken to our local Housing department about this very subject they do wish to involve and engage with Tenants at an earlier date, resulting they hope, in being able to provide accommodation at an earlier date.

Positive steps.

This is an action we will adopt as an agency as I only see better resolution of problems and a cheaper less stressful situation for all concerned. It is good to speak to a Housing department more concerned with solutions than problems. The only area I still felt uncomfortable about is that they still advice Tenants to stay until eviction notice is served, which I believe is tantamount to inviting them to break the law.

Keep talking.

But by ensuring Councils are aware of problem scenarios at an earlier date, hopefully this will happen less and we will do everything we can, with the knowledge that we must always have our Landlords interests first and foremost at the head of what we do. Even so, this stance can only help and hopefully sometime soon, somebody will see exactly what Tenants are being asked to be put through at a time when they are already suffering.

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.

28Jun 2012

Property Landlord advice: Energy performance just not getting through.

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

I have had cause of late to look at the tax allowance for Landlords in relation to insulating properties (Landlords Energy Saving Allowance) and with the intention of providing a good service for the Landlords we manage property for, I have been looking at how to get the message across in letters to not only the Landlords, but also the current Tenants who will of course benefit from lower bills, indeed most of the interest has come from Tenants who are able to claim grants against insulation costs in some cases at virtually no cost at all, in seeking permission to have insulation installed in loft or walls.

Little interest.

The problem seems to be that very few people are actually interested despite all of the talk around the Green Deal which is due to be introduced by 2018 and was again in the news last week, although the Government release gave very little content or actual information to assist you in understanding what this bill will mean to Landlords.  The problem though seems to be lack of knowledge of what is currently available and this is probably because it is still too little for Landlords to consider.

The Industry.

I have looked for information from one of the leading insulation suppliers to help get the message across but it would seem that not only do they have no literature to explain the current assistance Landlords can claim but have very little knowledge as employees either. This is a bit surprising considering the tax allowance of £1500 has been available for many years but what seems to be more surprising is that it is due to be phased out by 2015.

Landlords.

There is certainly very little knowledge amongst our Landlords and that is one reason why I wanted to go through this procedure, because as Agents we should always advise our Landlords, but apart from a release by the Residential Landlords Association which is very current, I have seen little other promotion or discussion.

Tenants.

You would think given the current legislation surrounding EP Certificates that Tenants would be on the ball! But since the introduction of EPC’s, we have carried out on well over 3000 viewings (as a conservative estimate) and yet we are still never asked for the EPC more than once a month. Roughly 1%. However, when Tenants are able to benefit from installing insulation at very little cost, then that is where interest does grow and why shouldn’t it?

Conclusion.

What this does seem to show is that whatever the end result of the Green Deal, what is on offer, is going to have to be easy to understand and attractive to all concerned if it is to be a success. Otherwise it will be ignored and clearly if this is enforceable then we will once again have further legislation that will produce a black hole for Councils looking to enforce matters such as Houses of Multiple Occupation legislation and indeed the current EPC legislation which only come to light when those who ignore it are caught. This is purely because Councils do not have the man power to seek out Landlords who fail to comply and the danger is that this legislation will fall under the same heading!

14Jun 2012

Current Property News: Rental sector attacked for no reason – again!

⋅ 1 Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Once again I find myself reading a report condemning the rental sector, this time  as the background to the thrust of the actual article, which is about increasing trends in the rental sector. The reason given is financial insecurity which should come as no surprise to anybody, but the article takes the unreasonable opportunity to condemn the rental sector without providing any evidence for the statements made.

Hidden reasons.

Of course the reason why is to suggest that the Government (this is after all a left wing paper)  are forcing families down a road to unsettled and poor condition housing, when in reality, and I can only comment from what I know about, the truth is nothing like the picture painted and indication given within the report.

Bad Housing, Bad Landlords and High rents.

As a professional letting Agency, we will only take on property that is to standard and when allowed upgrade property as required. I say when allowed because only this morning I have been discussing a Tenant who will not allow access to make alterations which will vastly improve a bathroom. Equally, we always and ONLY advise Landlords of the correct path and procedures surrounding the property and their Tenants. Also, rents in Staffordshire are not rising and Tenants are benefitting from the number of properties on the market by making offers.

Source of information.

Because of this and with the knowledge that not every property or Landlord is perfect and therefore accepting that problems do exist, I would suggest that like most of what facts are listed in the article, it is the London market that is the source of the information. But it would be so much better if either the article were split into two, sticking to the point made as the reason for the increase and giving the chance for the detail behind these damning statements about the rental market instead of providing no evidence what so ever!   

Professionalism.

I would agree however, as I have stated on oh so many occasions before, that the intended route the previous Government was intending to take, to ensure all agents were approved, is still the best possible route for the Industry. For if this is still a major problem, and as I have sated I can only comment on my local market, then the Industry itself, having launched ‘Safe Agent’ cannot be blamed for doing nothing to improve standards. The problem still seems to be in the Self Managed Landlord or the Agent who ignores all professional bodies and here all Tenants have a clear choice! Ask which bodies the agent belongs to that will protect them!

Legislation.

One of the first issues that I cannot agree with is that of legislation, because if ever an industry has been targeted it is the rental industry, with every facet of what we do coming under the legislative microscope for the last few years. The comment about deposits for example is a ‘throw away comment’ which cannot be supported, because any Tenant who suffers at the hand of an Agent or Landlord who does not use the Deposit legislation can be heavily fined and the Tenant has a clear route to take.

Tenant problems.

Of course what this could refer to is the number of Tenants who have found themselves loosing when being processed through the Deposit legislation, because although most do win because of badly prepared defences by the Landlord or Agent, I know as a fact, that if the Tenant looses when going through arbitration, they still blame the Agent and talk about the cost as if they have been treated unfairly. This of course is not the case, but as the article gives no background to the statements made we will never know!

Figures.

But one bit of background I can supply is that the percentage of people renting privately has been increasing for years and particularly so over the last two years. I asked the Department of the Communities only last week if the overall privately rented % for 2011 was yet available and it is not, but I expect it to reach 20%, a rise of nearly 5% in the last two years. Therefore to state it may be 36% by 2025 (which let’s not forget is still over 12 years away) when twelve years ago it was at 9% would reflect a rate of increase through good AND bad times that at current trends will stand at 31% anyway!

Bad Journalism.

So I am afraid that overall I label this article as bad journalism, trying to score a political point without any confirmation of the statements made attacking an industry which is not represented and quoting figures, which, when you are aware of the background, are really not that surprising. But it does touch on one major factor. Unless the availability of mortgages for Buy to Let Landlords is improved, the supply of rented property will quite possibly dry up! But where I will concur, is that by failing to introduce Licensed Agents and Landlords, the standard of the current source of rented stock, namely properties that fail to sell could well continue to suffer. For without legislation, as we all know, when finances are strained, shortcuts are taken!

24May 2012

Current Property News: EPC Clarification? – Hardly!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Last week I spoke about the confusion surrounding the introduction of the new legislation surrounding the supply of EPC’s to potential Tenants and how they need to be displayed when advertising properties in both the media and standard window displays. This week we have achieved some clarity through this link to a Q&A paper supplied by the NFPP.

Display documents.

Thankfully, it confirms that window display do not need to have the EPC displayed, which would as a stated, have meant whole scale changes throughout. In fact the clarification does make sense and now every time we give the same property documents as displayed actually out upon request, a copy of the first page of the EPC will be attached. Internet documents have always been clear and a copy needs to be available via a link for every property displayed.

Remaining question.

One area still remains unanswered and this is mainly because the Trading Standards Office (TSO) have as yet failed to contact me to confirm how they view electronic window displays, such as a TV with a scrolling image. As the TSO are the agency charged with enforcing the regulations and the body who will issue fines for non compliance, they will be the body I will seek confirmation from, but hopefully common sense will again prevail and the term ‘window display’ will win over ‘electronic display’ when they confirm an answer as it is the difference between the two definitions that is causing the remaining confusion.

Remaining confusion.

However, one area of the new regulations is still causing confusion and that is whether an EPC in the new format is required even if the existing one is still within its ten year time frame. At present each EPC for a rented property does have a ten year life, but the new regulations ask for certain pieces of information, as displayed on page one of the new style certificates to be included, but this information is not on page one of the old style certificates.

Legal view.

 The legal view is that to comply with the legislation, a new certificate has to be supplied, otherwise how can we provide the information as needed on page one of the new style certificates. Bearing in mind the regulations actually confirms the data as listed on page 1 of the new certificates.

Industry view.

Surprisingly, the view of the industry (at least locally) is that a new certificate is NOT required, and that the old style, even though it does not include the data referred to on page 1, is sufficient. Surprisingly because one would assume they would take the line of least resistance and of course, increased revenue!

Still waiting.

Having now been waiting for over a week for TSO to phone me back, had a row with my legal advisor because he cannot see the commercial sense with which I will be putting my Company at a disadvantage if I only took his view locally and had to insist that my current EPC provider asks again specifically about the issue of providing the data as specified when he has already responded to my question, means I am winning no friends in trying to resolve the issue, but as it is my Company that would be fined if we get it wrong, I must be persistent. But the worst comment that has come out of this shambles and I firmly believe that it is a shambles, is that there is no definitive answer, and only the courts could provide one! Perhaps I should just ignore the law then unless my Company is successfully prosecuted? It just makes further nonsense all round!

16May 2012

Current Property News: EPC regulations being made to look nonsense.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Recent changes in the way in which EPC documents have to be displayed are quite frankly being made to look ridiculous by the way in which they are being translated. It is of course well known that there are always areas that need clarification when new legislation is introduced, but the plethora of new requirements being launched at our industry at present does beg the question, why is it so unclear how to introduce changes that, if we got them wrong, are subject to a financial penalty?

EPC Displays.

The clarity is supposed to be how and where the information shown on the EPC is displayed. There are three areas of concern, when a property is being viewed, when it is being advertised and when it is being displayed. The problem lies with the latter, but all affected areas have had to be clarified.

Property viewings.

This for us was the easiest to deal with, as the EPC has to be available for all potential Tenants when a viewing takes place. As our staff carry I Pads with the EPC stored for every property being marketed, along with as much information as a Tenant may require, this was easy to deal with. All we needed to get clarified was that an electronic version, with a back up of the written version being supplied either in the post or by e-mail. It is.

Advertising.

This includes both the paper version of advertising as well as through the web. Again, after some suggestions that the EPC would have to be placed alongside each property advertised in the paper, it was confirmed that it does not need to be in this format. Good job really or this post would have had two targets for the ridiculous suggestion of the year!

Display advert.

Now for the area that has me looking to the skies in frustration! It is well known that property details are in by far the majority of Lettings or Estate Agent offices produced in A4 size, or something very close. This includes the window display and in our case as with many others on a rolling TV display. Well somebody has now decided that the front page of the EPC should be included on page one of the document displaying the property, if the document includes for a rented property a photograph and the price as well! Not much point in producing it if it does not!

New Style.

They also state that it has to be page one of the new style, but that the new style is not needed for those that have already been produced (They last ten years for a rental property) so firstly, how can we show the new style unless we pay for an updated version? If you visit the EPC report retrieval site www.epcregister.com to recover a report it is STILL shown in the old style?

 Ridiculous requirement!

But worst of all, is how can a form designed for A4 reproduction, with close on 50 lines of information be shown clearly ON an A4 sheet of paper and leave any room for anything else to be displayed on the same sheet of paper? Does this mean that all property display details are going to have to be re-produced in A3 to allow room? Are every single Estate and Letting Agent in the country going to have to change their display units costing £millions? This is (once again) an effect of the changes that has just never been thought through, the practical requirements and sheer ability to be able to comply with the need to show the EPC in the manner described is just impossible?

Conclusion

I just do not have one! I just hope that common sense prevails in the end and that a proper solution is found, in the meantime all Agents are left wondering what to do whilst being in danger of having a fine clapped on them for failing to display EPC details in the new format! Or do we just change all internal and window display units and spend a fortune changing them? Just in case!!

01May 2012

Block Management Advise: Sub Letting can lead to problems.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

 

As an agent who act as both a Letting Agent and a Block Management Agent, we are in a fortunate position especially when renting property on sites that we manage as well, of being both aware and able to ensure that the rules of the site in question are adhered to in our Tenancy rental agreements. This was highlighted last week when a Tenant that we had turned down for a property because we knew pets were not allowed, was moved in to the same site through a different Agent, but still with pet dog at heel!

Clarification.

 

Let me first of all clarify the situation regarding the owners of Leasehold property. In law, they are Tenants of the property but on a lease which normally lasts in the region of 90 plus years. Therefore, when they let a property, they are in effect sub-letting to a second Tenant on a short term lease, usually an assured shorthold agreement. The important part of this clarification is that the Leaseholder has an agreement, the Lease, which he must abide by. This Lease will confirm what is allowed and what is not allowed to happen on site through covenants included within the lease, from the basic permission for the Leaseholder to sub-let, to such items as the use of the Car Park, balconies, use of common areas and of course the all important item for this Blog, permission for pets to be kept on site or not as the case may be!

 

The rights of the Tenant.

 

What is important for the Leaseholder is the need for such covenants that impact on the second Tenant to be included in the shorthold agreement, so that they can be enforced. Fail to state in an agreement that all covenants included in the site lease apply and such covenants cannot be enforced. I have had situations before where a second Tenant stored a caravan on the car park, which was against the lease and as Block Managing Agent it was our role to enforce the covenant. Fortunately the Tenant was very understanding as they wanted to stay long term and found alternative storage for the caravan. If they had not, the guilty party would have been the Leaseholder, as it is their responsibility to ensure, if allowed to sub let, that the terms of the Lease are upheld.

 

Back to the Dog.

 

So now we are faced with a situation where a potential Tenant had been turned away from the site because they had a pet. Correct on our part, we manage the site, we are aware of the covenant. The person concerned, because he wanted to live on this particular site, followed up another flat available through a different agent and because they said nothing, has moved in to the flat with dog ensconced. Now it is our duty to inform the Leaseholder that they have moved a pet in too a flat against the lease and that they must enforce the provisions of the covenant and remove the pet.

 

Implications.

 

Of course, providing the agreement is the normal six month Assured Shorthold agreement, then notice can be given and the matter dealt with sooner rather than later, although the reaction of the Tenant may not be as understanding as we achieved with the Caravan. I cannot foresee him finding somebody else to look after the animal having engineered a situation where he achieved his initial objective.  For the Landlord, somewhere along the line, the potential of greater costs and or loss of rent will be significant. If I were him, then a discussion with the agent would be forthcoming, again, sooner rather than later.

 

Conclusion.

 

What should always happen on any leasehold site is the lease should be checked, or at least the question asked of the Landlord, what are the restrictive covenants for the site concerned? For the Tenant in such situations, whether carried out with knowledge or not (although some would say in this case the action as carried out with full knowledge that pets were not allowed because we had already informed him) there is the question of compensation for at least moving costs and / or the cost of dealing with whatever the implications are of complying with unknown covenants at the time of signing the secondary lease.  These could of course be significant depending upon the situation, but the bottom line is that as Leaseholder the fault lies with allowing the situation to develop without sufficient safeguards in place. The question that has to be asked is why was the Tenant moved in without the Agent giving the Landlord best advice? Probably a question the agent may find difficult to answer!

19Apr 2012

Current Property News: EPC Regulations still being clarified.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

With the recent change in EPC regulations, we like many other Agents turned to our advisors and asked for clarification of what the changes meant and what was there considered practical way they could advise us to adopt the changes as required. The answer we received raised more questions than it answered and we were left none the wiser. It appear that the manner in which the changes have been introduced have left those who carry out the inspections at a quandary in understanding what is now required.

Agents requirements.

The main change for Letting Agents is to have the EPC available within seven days of the property being marketed. I am pleased to say that this was our own timetable anyway but always done with the knowledge that we had longer if the EPC was not forthcoming. No for us the clarity needs to be around what is meant by an electronic copy, when the report from the RLA states that the new format should be used after April 1st, but fails to say if this is ONLY for new EPC’s created rather than an updated version of the old certificate.

Words speak volumes.

 Some reports suggest that this is the case, but when you attempt to download EPC’s that are still current but were produced in the old format, they are still in the old format! So ‘the powers that be’ need to clarify for those concerned what they should or should not be doing. It becomes more of a problem when those that are supposed to be advising do not know themselves!

Simple guidelines.

At present we are ensuring we are operating in a manner best suited to the intent of these changes until we receive total clarity, which means we will avoid any unnecessary costly changes to our systems whilst still providing the information when requested and ensuring one is available without delay.

These guidelines will hopefully assist in the meantime:

1. When viewing a property ideally an EPC or at least the new front page should be “available”

2. Available means it can be in electronic format

3. An EPC MUST be commissioned immediately on marketing if existing one not available

4. Long as you can prove you have commissioned then for up to 7 days you can view and market without one. It is an offence but there is no penalty!! It is after 7 days that it becomes more serious

5. The eventual winning tenant MUST be given a copy of the full EPC when the contract starts i.e. at check-in.