Tag Archives: Property Legislation

11Oct 2011

Property Landlord advice: SAFEagent (3): At last friends in high places!!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

The final stage in the initial creation of the SAFEagent scheme which soon launches to the public, will see it do so with a major endorsement from housing minister Grant Shapps. The endorsement includes displaying the kitemark on the CLG website, whilst Shapps has congratulated the industry for taking matters into its own hands and urged agents not signed up to the SAFEagent scheme to do so immediately. He announced the Government’s official support for the industry-led campaign at the same time as launching new factsheets for landlords and tenants. In them, both tenants and landlords are specifically advised that they should seek out a SAFEagent member. Shapps emphasised that he is supporting initiatives such as SAFEagent in preference to regulating the private rented sector. He has, however, has taken no convincing regarding the merits of the SAFEagent scheme. He said it was aimed at addressing a key area of concern for both tenants and landlords when it came to letting agents – making sure their money is safe. 

Shapps said: “The private rented sector provides a valuable source of accommodation for over three million people in England, and the vast majority of them are happy with the service they receive. “That’s why I have promised not to wrap the sector in red tape, but instead to work with the industry to help them develop their own plans to tackle those bad landlords, and with councils to throw the book at those who don’t live up to their responsibilities.” He added that with SAFEagent he was “delighted the lettings industry has taken matters into its own hands, and is launching a quality standard that will ensure that landlords and tenants know what to expect from their members.  These improvements could never be achieved by adding layers of pointless Government regulations.”      

He went on: “This is exactly the sort of measure the private rented sector needs – simple and sensible changes that are driven by industry and designed to deliver results.” The SAFEagent scheme has been mentioned in the House of Lords as an example of the kind of voluntary initiative the Government wants to see in raising standards. But mandatory regulation of the private rented sector was not ruled out. It happened during a debate on an amendment to the Localism Bill aiming to insert a new clause into the Bill that would enable the statutory regulation of private letting agents to be introduced at some point. The amendment was also supported by the British Property Property Federation, Residential Landlords Association and housing charities.           

Responding at the end of a lengthy debate, Lord Taylor of Holbeach, a Conservative peer and House of Lords whip, said: “I am delighted that the Government have been able to endorse the Safe Agent Fully Endorsed scheme – SAFE – recently launched by the industry which highlights a key risk around clients’ money. He went on: “I have considerable sympathy with those who have been caught out by bad practice, but we do not think that regulation now is the right answer.” September has been a good month for SAFEagent as apart from Government endorsement and passing 1200 agent registrations CFP Software, part of Guardian Media Group, is the latest industry supplier to offer its support to SAFEagent.  CFPwinMan is the most widely used lettings and property management software package across the UK and is installed in over 3,000 businesses, with tens of thousands of users. It is the first, and currently remains the only, property management software to be accredited by the ICAEW.

07Oct 2011

Property Landlord advice: SAFEagent(2): A story of continued growth

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

Registration for the new SAFEagent scheme has consistently outperformed projections and expectations.

In June, the first full month of receiving registrations, over 500 agents signed up, keen to differentiate themselves by promoting  a simple kite mark for the consumer to recognise letting firms that protect landlords’ and tenants’ money through Client Money Protection schemes. By the end of June the figure had risen to 750 and the 1000 members mark was passed in July. Only agents covered by a CMP scheme can join SAFEagent, making it a fairly exclusive club. As commented on in our last item on this subject the premiums for CMP are way beyond an individual agent and it is only by being part of a group policy that an agent can obtain the cover.               

The initiative, which will be promoted to consumers by the end of 2011 following the initial push to agents, has received widespread support, including from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) and Trading Standards Institute (TPI) and more recently Shelter. Shelter is very supportive of the SAFEagent scheme claiming their research has found that one million private renters have been the victim of scams and they welcome any initiative that helps tenants to make safe choices when they are looking for private rented accommodation thus avoiding avoid unscrupulous letting agents and landlords. They would also like to see letting agents doing more to ensure tenants are well informed when they look for a private let, assuring tenants that their deposit will be protected, providing written tenancy agreements and carrying out inventories. A professional and properly run lettings agency would do this of course, and much more, including having transparent fees schedules which can also help tenants to size up the additional costs of renting a home. Such processes and procedures can help to avoid problems later on that can lead to tenancy breakdown and problems for Landlords and tenants alike – not to mention their agents!!         .

SAFEagent marks a huge leap forward in the effort to eliminate the potential threat posed to consumers by uninsured agents, who are able to operate in the private rented sector without Government intervention though SAFEagent has always hoped to obtain Government recognition for the new mark. Whilst NALS, the Property Ombudsman, Council of Mortgage Lenders and Residential Landlords Association have been quick to back the SAFE initiative, both the RICS and ARLA have been notably tepid in their reactions.
Meanwhile August saw The National Union of Students, Which? and Citizens Advice Bureau placing their enthusiastic endorsements alongside backers which already included the likes of Shelter, The Property Ombudsman and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, Trading Standards and The Residential Landlords Association.             

With the private rented sector continuing to grow so quickly and with more and more people relying on the rented accommodation, it is vital to have mechanisms like SAFEagent in place to make lettings a safe and professional sector, and ensure that tenants are not left out of pocket. CAB of course has a long history of seeking to protect the interests of tenants in the private rented sector, who are often among those who can least afford to lose money to the unscrupulous and clearly will see the SAFEagent scheme as helping to steer tenants towards reputable letting agents who are properly insured. The UK’s largest supplier of referencing to the lettings industry, HomeLet, became the first UK supplier to align itself to the SAFEagent campaign promising to raise awareness of the SAFEagent mark among its clients and encourage them to get registered.             

The message ultimately to consumers looks a simple one: be safe choose a SAFEagent when you rent or let 

Registration for the new SAFEagent scheme has consistently outperformed projections and expectations.

In June, the first full month of receiving registrations, over 500 agents signed up, keen to differentiate themselves by promoting  a simple kite mark for the consumer to recognise letting firms that protect landlords’ and tenants’ money through Client Money Protection schemes. By the end of June the figure had risen to 750 and the 1000 members mark was passed in July. Only agents covered by a CMP scheme can join SAFEagent, making it a fairly exclusive club. As commented on in our last item on this subject the premiums for CMP are way beyond an individual agent and it is only by being part of a group policy that an agent can obtain the cover.               

The initiative, which will be promoted to consumers by the end of 2011 following the initial push to agents, has received widespread support, including from The Property Ombudsman (TPO) and Trading Standards Institute (TPI) and more recently Shelter. Shelter is very supportive of the SAFEagent scheme claiming their research has found that one million private renters have been the victim of scams and they welcome any initiative that helps tenants to make safe choices when they are looking for private rented accommodation thus avoiding avoid unscrupulous letting agents and landlords. They would also like to see letting agents doing more to ensure tenants are well informed when they look for a private let, assuring tenants that their deposit will be protected, providing written tenancy agreements and carrying out inventories. A professional and properly run lettings agency would do this of course, and much more, including having transparent fees schedules which can also help tenants to size up the additional costs of renting a home. Such processes and procedures can help to avoid problems later on that can lead to tenancy breakdown and problems for Landlords and tenants alike – not to mention their agents!!         .

SAFEagent marks a huge leap forward in the effort to eliminate the potential threat posed to consumers by uninsured agents, who are able to operate in the private rented sector without Government intervention though SAFEagent has always hoped to obtain Government recognition for the new mark. Whilst NALS, the Property Ombudsman, Council of Mortgage Lenders and Residential Landlords Association have been quick to back the SAFE initiative, both the RICS and ARLA have been notably tepid in their reactions.
Meanwhile August saw The National Union of Students, Which? and Citizens Advice Bureau placing their enthusiastic endorsements alongside backers which already included the likes of Shelter, The Property Ombudsman and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, Trading Standards and The Residential Landlords Association.             

With the private rented sector continuing to grow so quickly and with more and more people relying on the rented accommodation, it is vital to have mechanisms like SAFEagent in place to make lettings a safe and professional sector, and ensure that tenants are not left out of pocket. CAB of course has a long history of seeking to protect the interests of tenants in the private rented sector, who are often among those who can least afford to lose money to the unscrupulous and clearly will see the SAFEagent scheme as helping to steer tenants towards reputable letting agents who are properly insured. The UK’s largest supplier of referencing to the lettings industry, HomeLet, became the first UK supplier to align itself to the SAFEagent campaign promising to raise awareness of the SAFEagent mark among its clients and encourage them to get registered.             

The message ultimately to consumers looks a simple one: be safe choose a SAFEagent when you rent or let.

03Oct 2011

Property Landlord advice: SAFEagent (1) : New kitemark will 'clean up industry'

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

It is now 6 months since the first announcement of a new kitemark initiative for the lettings industry. Although I have previously commented on this initiative and expressed our wholehearted support for it much water has flowed under several bridges since the new kitemark initiative known as SAFEagent was launched for agent registration in May. It is free for agents in established client money protection (CMP) schemes to register, but just what is CMP? To the layperson in effect it is bonding, along the lines of ABTA where if your travel firm goes bust and they are ABTA bonded then ABTA steps in to bring you home.

CMP operates in the same way to protect Landlord and Tenant money held by agents with CMP cover. However the policy premium for CMP cover is eye wateringly expensive, and impossible for an individual agent or even a corporate chain to take out in their own name. So CMP cover is obtained by being a member of one of only 5 such group schemes in existence, these being administered by ARLA, NAEA, NALS, RICS and The Law Society. Because it is compulsory for CMP to be held by a member of SAFEagent so it follows that only members of the 5 organisations with the cover can become members. SAFEagent does not provide CMP itself and indeed to do so would be an expensive and unnecessary duplication as its members already have CMP in place.

SAFEagent was formed by a Steering Group of lettings agents and is administered by The National Approved Letting Scheme which in itself was created by the Government. It was the desire to deliver a simple message that led to the formation of SAFEagent – that by joining its members would have the means to differentiate those agents who operate with CMP and those who do not.           SAFE agent has some impressive friends and supporters. Apart from NALS which endorsed the scheme immediately and then offered to run the administration for it – an offer readily accepted by the Steering Group – the Property Ombudsman Christopher Hamer also welcomed the initiative many months ago, as has the Residential Landlords Association who commended its “clear and recognisable brand”.           

The Trading Standards Institute (TSI) has bolstered the initiative with Ron Gainsford its chief executive endorsing the introduction and promotion of a single mark to identify letting agents who are in Client Money Protection insurance schemes. This is the objective of SAFEagent – that by having just one kitemark will increase recall levels of the scheme and enable consumers to make sensible and safe choices of letting agents based on a raised awareness of the importance of that agent being part of a Client Money Protection insurance scheme. This in turn of course will help trading standards services in the fight to reduce the number of rogue and ‘uninsured’ letting agents who disappear with consumer money – a move that all honest agents would support.        

However, of the industry organisations, only NALS has come forward to welcome the kitemark. NALS, NAEA and RICS have yet to give their support despite SAFEagent growing impressively as will be seen in the nest article on this subject.

09Sep 2011

Current Property News: Good news bad news day for renting. Not forgetting the legal issues.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

I recently commented on how the BBC in a recent report, jumped to conclusions without researching the market to back up the assumptions that they confirmed on air. Namely, that not buying your own house was bad for individuals and supposedly the Country as a whole. There is no great surprise here because the BBC loves to report on the property market in a negative manner, I wish I knew why, but can only surmise as to the reason!

Endesleigh understand!

So it was with great pleasure that I found an article pointing out that by way of a survey that had been carried out, my own findings, from dealing with Tenants on a daily basis, were correct. One of the main reasons people are renting is because it suits their lifestyle. The ability to move on quickly, sample differing locations, City or Country, differing types of property, Flats or Houses all add to the trend for renting to become more popular up and down the UK.  I do not quite understand the reference to colours contained in the article, but will comment further on the point about price, because another article, released on the same week, completely disagrees.

The Telegraph does not!

So imagine my surprise, within five minutes finding an article that completely sees the current market in the opposite way in relation to the cost of Renting against the cost of Buying? I accept that the report does refer to first time buyers and specific advantages available to them in the housing market, but I think we have to look at where the information comes from in this case. Unfortunately, we are not given that much detail, but what I can state, is that the average rent of £677 for a two bed flat, is heavily influenced by London rates and is therefore unrepresentative of the rest of the Country. More detail would be useful.

Complicated process.

What does effect the decision to rent rather than buy, is the legal process that everybody has to go through and the risk associated with a sale collapsing, this despite open discussion and comment that the system is in desperate need of reform.  The long winded buying process is unworkable for people who know they will probably have to move at least once if not twice during their formative working years and until such time as a quicker, cheaper workable method of buying and selling property is introduced, this will only further encourage people towards the rental market.

Facts do not lie.

Well in this case with the affordability question, I guess the jury is still out and unless and until we see the figures behind the statements contained in these reports, I for one could not comment further. However, one fact that needs adding to this equation is the evidence we see through our own Agency of a legal system which appears to be getting worse rather than better, causing more deals to collapse. I say this because we see the effect of sales that have gone wrong as owners turn to the rental market to allow them to move on by renting their home out or desperate for rented property to allow their chain not to collapse, in increasing numbers. Add this to the proven fact that more and more people are looking to the rental market for their chosen route to find a home, the problems, cost and delays caused by buying and selling property at present will only swell the ranks further and add to those people turning to the rental market as their solution.

25Aug 2011

Current Property News: Agent fined over conservancy area change

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

A West London agent has been fined £250 with £250 costs, by the Courts for erecting a For Sale board in a conservation area and the story shows just how careful agents need to be and the lesson has to be, never assume! The agency was charged with the fine after admitting the offence at West London Magistrates Court yesterday [August 16]. The agent claims the fee was the minimum possible due to the court accepting that the crime was a genuine error and not a deliberate disregard for the law.

Following Instructions.

The incident happened in May, when a client asked the agent for a board to be erected in the same place as it had been seven months previously, which the estate agent duly completed. However, during the interim seven months, Hammersmith & Fulham Council had designated the road in question as a conservation area. The agent claims it was omitted from the list of estate agents notified of this change by the planning office and the offence was reported on May 9 and the board removed 24 hours later, after which the agent assumed the matter was closed. However, at the end of July the managing director received a court summons relating to the offence, which consisted of 34 pages of evidence, including the council’s claim for costs incurred for three hours of investigation and over three hours of legal fees.

MD Reaction.

The agent was stunned by the turn of events, and while admitting to having been in the wrong, said they thought the prompt removal of the board had resolved the matter at the time. It was not a fly board making false claims of success nor a board left up for months it was simply placed in a road where until October 2010 boards were permitted and erected at the request of a landlord who was also unaware of the new restrictions. The MD is convinced the council intended to make an example of his firm feeling that a simple fixed penalty system would save valuable time and resources with prosecution in the Courts reserved for repeat offenders and warns fellow agents that ignorance is no defence.

Summary.

Agents need to ensure that they regularly check their Local Authority Planning website and read public notices in local papers. ‘The onus is on the agent to check, not the Local Authority to inform.’ The council had sought a fine of £2,500 plus £500 costs, he said, but after hearing him speak, the court levied a fine of just £250 on the firm plus £250 costs so in the end not as onerous as the agent expected, but the guilty verdict did confirm where responsibility lay.

19Aug 2011

Current Property News: Evicted Tenants to look in the private sector.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

So Councils are considering evicting Tenants from Public sector rented property because of the involvement of family members in the recent disturbances. (I will not call them riots because to me it was criminality and opportunism of the worst kind, so to avoid any link or possible connection with any kind of justification what so ever, let’s call a spade a spade!) It will be interesting to see exactly how any such person coming from the Public sector will fare with the referencing system (by professional referencing Companies)in the Private sector, because they have been sheltered from the harsh realities of requirements both financial and procedural by being in Council housing.

Referencing.

The main reason people fail professional referencing is the inability to afford the rent payable, and without the knowledge of the individual circumstances surrounding this particular case as reported above, if they were Benefit recipients, then at the very least a Guarantor would need to be provided, before a Landlord would even consider accepting Tenants on Benefit payments. The main reason is quite simple and nothing to do with the standard of Tenant, but because the Council pay in arrears, in four weekly instalments and because the Tenant has to continually confirm their own circumstances in order to continue in receipt of Benefits. Too often I have witnessed payments stopping because of this requirements and it can take up to six months to resolve in the worst cases and with the slowest Councils.

Payments.

The other significant difference will be the need to supply a full deposit. At this point I would add, not a Council supported system where no money changes hands, because despite the Council being happy to confirm that they will honour problems when the Tenancy starts (in order to get the person of their books!), all they actually do is create another barrier to the Landlords ability to re-let, by arguing at every opportunity and in one case, just refusing to pay because they did not agree with what the Agent had confirmed. Well excuse me, but we do not need any further hurdles to jump when seeking recourse when Tenants damage or mistreat property! But also rent in advance and paid by standing order, in advance from then on. This can be a barrier, especially for Benefit applicants, because the system just will not make the allowance and pay in advance for those seeking property from the Private sector.

Eviction.

I also note with interest the reference to problems in getting cases through the courts. The system of using Section 8 notices is of course designed to get action quickly and there is no doubt that the courts let Landlords down time and again, but there are other ways and other notices, such as a section 21 notice, which can be issued at the start of the Tenancy to protect the Landlord, because the courts have no choice but to award possession to the Landlord under a section 21, but once again, unless the notice is current, some courts will not allow them. But the final point I just cannot resist making, is what the courts reaction would be to a Landlord wishing to evict in the Private sector if a Tenant was found guilty under similar circumstances? Just a small bet on the BBC reacting through one of its typical early morning sound bites, raising concerns on behalf of Tenants!

22Jul 2011

Current Property News: BBC Ignore the law – again!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There are times when you just cannot avoid reports on TV that paint a totally false picture, even when you are not looking for it and last Saturday morning as a crowning example of just one of these times. All I was doing was enjoying my breakfast at the start of a long weekend’s holiday and as is my usual routine, catching up with the early news at the same time.  So I was watching BBC Breakfast news (although I do see this programme becoming more of a magazine than a true news programme) when once again an ‘expert’ was being asked for his opinion on this month’s attack at the rental market, increasing rents and the effect on the Tenant under contract.

 Same old same old!

I must say I do get entirely sick of the way the BBC constantly appear to ‘have a go’ at our market, not just because I am over protective, which would be true anyway, but because they never tell the whole story and always leave these sound bites (because that is what they, not a subject debated, just two minutes of perceived problems) with the impression where our market is concerned that it is unfair, badly managed and led by greedy property owners!

Ignoring the law.

The impression left for those who are not aware, is that rents are increasing in many areas of the Country and Tenants already in property are being asked to pay ever increasing rents or being thrown out! Of course this is just not the case. The Housing Acts of the last thirty years have ensured that a legal framework exists to allow increases and to protect the Tenant from ever increasing rents. This is because Landlords are only allowed to increase rents once every twelve months and then by notice, ensuring that if the rent is too high for the sitting Tenant (something that every Landlord I know tries to avoid, because as was equally ignored by the report, Landlords do not like down times when property sits empty) they have sufficient notice to find an alternative. This way Landlords can ensure the rent received is in line with current rates (Thought; if increases were not allowed, would the BBC bother to report on how Landlords are trapped when Mortgage rates increase? Somehow I doubt it!!) and Tenants know they have twelve months between increases. It is worth pointing out, that this notice period is longer than home owners get when mortgage rates increase!

Does the BBC care?

I have to wonder just how many other industries are treated in the same manner, because the damage done by such powerful organisations in this type of reporting is immeasurable. I would like to feel that through the pages of this Blog I can put the record straight but I could never hope to reach the same numbers as the BBC, even in my wildest dreams! No doubt other industries get treated in the same way, but what really put the top hat on this item was that the ‘expert’ was nothing to do with either our industry or the housing market, rather their own in house financial advisor. Now this to me just confirms that they do not care, for if they had done the right thing and actually spoken to someone who knew the industry, the whole article would have been thrown out, as the actual methods as highlighted above would have thrown the whole concept of ill-treated tenants out of the water! So in conclusion, to me at least, it is obvious that the BBC actually do not care, as long as they have what they believe to be a ‘story’ with a point, truth, facts and of course by default ‘The Law’ are not important to the BBC!

08Jul 2011

Property Landlord advice: Periodic Tenancies – friend or foe?

⋅ 2 Comments

By Mike Edwards

Under the provisions of section 5 Housing Act 1988 when a fixed term tenancy reaches its last fixed date from the next day onwards it becomes a periodic tenancy. This is an automatic process, no-one has to do anything and it happens whether or not the landlord is happy about it, or would prefer a new fixed term agreement to be in place. Either party can state if they want another fixed term but if the other party doesn’t agree then they are going to end up at best with a periodic tenancy. Or if it is the landlord that is insisting on a fixed term then his only option is to give notice to the existing tenant and find a new one.

Landlords decision.

Few Landlords normally feel that strongly but occasionally if the initial agreement is ending at a date that could make the end of any replacement tenancy awkward – say between mid November and mid March, then it is not uncommon for that Landlord to seek a longer term in an attempt to avoid having to re-let at what is generally acknowledged to be the worst time of the year. It is very much horses for courses at the end of a fixed term as to what the parties would prefer, or indeed insist upon. There are advantages and disadvantages for both parties both in being committed to a fixed term or in having a periodic tenancy. The most obvious for the Landlord is he is at the mercy of a month’s notice from the tenant at any time.

It’s that last day rule again!

The notice must expire on the last day of a period of the tenancy, so if rent is due as per the agreement 1st monthly the notice and any obligations under it – such as rental payments – must continue until that date unless the parties mutually agree an earlier surrender of the tenancy. The Landlord must give two months notice if it is an AST or an AT with the same end of notice period dating requirements. These were clarified in Church Commissioners v Meya (2006) in the Appeal Court and thus the decision is binding on lower Courts.

Notice period.

The requirement of two months notice in a periodic tenancy sometimes causes Landlords real difficulties so the trick is to do a standard visit 10 – 12 weeks before the known end date of the tenancy and while looking around subtly sound out the tenant’s intentions. If there is any hint they might want to go periodic rather than sign up for another fixed term (if that is what the Landlord wants) then serve a s21(1)(b) during the fixed term as a belt and braces position to protect the landlord. The matured notice can then be used at any time during the periodic state. This was enshrined in Case Law many years ago as there is no time stipulation stated in the Statute for how long a matured s21 notice remains valid and can be used in Court. So you could serve a s21(1)(b) on day 2 of a 6 month AST if you like and use it to evict the tenant after he has been periodic for 5 years or any time.

Agreed solution.

Finally if the tenant does want to go periodic then on giving one month’s notice a 13(2) notice can be used if a rent increase is due. A fixed term does give the landlord more certainty – but like the tenant it does mean he is stuck with the other party if his plans change and he wants the house back, so the key to unlock any problems? Discussion! Talk to your Tenants and reach an agreement that satisfies everybody – ah the art of Management!

13Jun 2011

Current Property News: Jailed Rogue Agent fuels the fire for legislation at time of SAFE Agent launch.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Two items of news were reported late last week, which are both of note but for differing reasons. One for the right reasons and one for the wrong reasons, but together they speak volumes about what the Industry is trying to do and what the Industry needs by way of regulation, which would in my opinion seriously reduce the number of times such events both occur and are therefore reported.

Launch of SAFE Agent scheme.

Better than expected numbers are turning to the SAFE Agent scheme which is really good news and reinforces my opinion that this type of scheme is exactly what the Industry needs and wants to be a part of. The very fact that so many Agents are looking for recognition in a way that they can announce to their customers, be them Tenants or Landlords that they operate in a way that all client’s monies are protected speaks volumes about the Agents who want to be seen as professional Companies and give re-assurance to their client base.

Government backing.

This scheme has been introduced simply because the Industry has felt that some recognition of professionalism was required by people within the Industry, who, by virtue of the organisations they belong to or who are able to represent, have been able to get both the message across quickly to what I believe to be a willing Industry (Certainly within Castle Estates) who seem to be embracing the message with open arms. What we need now is official recognition from the Government that they both support the scheme and will look to review registration of Agents sooner rather than later. Hopefully they will see by the numbers of Agents joining that the Industry will also embrace and because of the second item of news, see the need for Government legislation to support professionalism in the Lettings Industry.

‘Agent’ jailed for two years.

It is because we continue to see Agents stealing from their clients,  that Government legislation is still required, because even though we hope and will work towards SAFE Agent being a standard for all professional Letting Agent offices, it is only when the Government back us with registration that such occurrences can be really reduced. Allow me to repeat, for I have stated this many times, but registration of Agents who use sound proper methods of looking after client’s money and in running the business in general is the only way the Industry will become truly professional. We are now looking at an Industry, when Private Landlords are included, which is fast becoming responsible for 20% of UK Housing stock. How much longer can the Government ignore the shout for legislation?

 

Estate Agents.

It should also be recognised, that it is not just the Client’s money aspect of Management that needs to be legislated. In the last three years the Estate Agency market has jumped in their thousands in too Lettings and I know only too well, that many do not understand the legislation that any qualified Letting Agent would need to understand and learn before they could become achieve qualification. Now I could just imagine the clamour of noise if the situation had been reversed? Estate Agencies operate at best using RICS standards which have been adopted by the courts as a formal code of practise. Indeed there are far more statutory requirements upon professional Estate Agents than Letting Agents and I am sure the Estate Agents would be the first to shout loud and proud about standards should the reverse of the current market changes come about!

Good for everybody.

At the end of the day, all Industries benefit from raising standards and ours is no different. The problem in any sphere of operation is the people in it, and legislation always seeks to control people. So the sooner we are properly legislated, the sooner people such as Mr Stagg, will not be allowed to trade in the first place, for as the article points out – at present there is nothing stopping him from starting another agency the moment he leaves prison!

08Jun 2011

Property Landlord advice: Length of Tenancy under BBC scrutiny.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

On Saturday morning I sat eating my Toast and Marmalade and was told during a report on the BBC 24 Hour News channel, that agreements for Tenants are six months long and that any Tenant who was in a property for longer than two years effectively became a squatter and could not be moved out! Well after I recovered from what I thought had been a tremendous shift in the legislation being introduced by the forthcoming Localism Bill I realised once again that here was my Industry being discussed on a National prime time News programme and once again the information being presented was at the very least misinformed if not just plain wrong!

Please check your facts.

It is a long term complaint of mine, that by allowing people to phone or e-mail or text in to News programmes, that the comments and therefore air time that is given to some outlandish views is so miss-representative of what the majority think and believe that it is treating the majority views with disrespect and paints such a false picture of whatever topic is being discussed as to be totally miss-leading of the nations views. But here we have a topic that I know about being given the same treatment by the chosen speakers who were given plenty of time to get the facts totally wrong.

Let’s put the record straight.

Firstly, that a Tenant who has been in a property for two years is as good as a squatter! Unbelievable! All I can say is if that was the Gentleman’s experience, then he needs to get better advice, because as long as the correct agreement is used to best suit the situation, then no matter if a Tenant has been in residence for ten years, both Landlord and Tenant rights remain the same. In fact, if the Landlord lived in the house as their main residence then with the correct agreement, when it is time for the Landlord to give notice, again providing that the notice is issued correctly should for some reason the Tenants not move out, which they would 999 times out of 1000 then the courts have no say in the matter and must award the property back to the Landlord.

Tenants can only stay six months?

Well forgive me but here is a situation which best serves both parties, because in order to ensure the Tenant is responsible in their actions and that the Tenant enjoys living at the property, an initial six months is just what is required, but that is not the end of it! I myself have just moved in to a property on a five year deal, which, with the correct clauses for bad health etc, is exactly what my wife and I wish for. It also suits the Tenant and with reason, for it should always be the case that length of Tenancy is for negotiation between the Tenant and the Landlord. But more interestingly, as a Letting Agent in my twelfth year of running an Agency, it is the Tenant who will always want the lesser time, indeed most stay in property under a periodic agreement after the initial period, which gives them the right to leave at short notice, because it suits their needs better!

Professional judgement!

Once again I see a situation that would have been presented in such a better manner if Professional Agents had been introduced to the situation (and it is a pity that once again I do not see our Industry professional bodies flying the flag for Letting Agents) at least the facts would have been correct, but perhaps it is because the powers that be at the BBC already know that the story would have much shorter legs, if a voice of common sense and reason was introduced to these sound bite discussions, which continue to pour confusion and fear on the housing market. What a pity that those who listened will probably consider the Lettings market something to be avoided. Instead of probably frightening house owners who cannot sell at present, they could have been re-assured that the rental market is a viable proposition and a possible answer to the lack of activity at a time when three times the normal number of properties than normally enter our market year on year are currently being rented throughout the UK!