Author Archives: Steve Roulstone Marla

17Apr 2012

Current Property News: Landlord wins Judgement against bad Tenant.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Just occasionally matters come to the point where faith in the system is not only renewed but also rewarded! The news we received this week is one of those cases.  We have a Landlord who has had great faith in dealing with the situation that was presented to them in a professional and thorough manner through the courts. Thankfully to a good conclusion as this was after we advised the Landlord that it was a case worthy of legal judgement,  ensuring that the Tenant was not allowed to get away with the state that they left the Landlords property in at the end of the Tenancy.

Ignored instruction.

We soon realised at the start of the Tenancy whilst doing our property visits that the house was not being cared for in the proper manner. General untidiness was soon becoming harmful to both the inside and outside of the house. We did everything we could to get the Tenant to carry out the work required, but in the end under instruction from the Landlord, following our advice, notice was given to leave. Any effort to keep the property in order at that stage ceased.

Check out.

When we then came to check the Tenants out of the property, the work needed to return the property to good order was vast! We photographed, noted, gained quotes and spoke to the Tenant about getting the work carried out. They disagreed, refused and eventually ignored all communications until the Landlord had no choice but to instruct the work in order for the home to be available for the rental market again.

Options.

 At this point we spoke again at length and in the end after looking at the cost of the dilapidations advised the Landlord to take the matter to court. This is of course a big decision to make, not only for the inevitable risk that such a decision brings with it, but also because of the actual task itself which can of course be daunting. The Landlords stood by their conviction and filed papers.

Courts take time.

Never was a statement more true. The original hearing was cancelled twice initially after sitting around all day to be told the court did not have enough time to hear the case, then at the Tenants request until a third date was finally set for this month and only now has the Landlord finally received a judgement. This made all the more understandable when you realise that the Tenant actually vacated in June 2010!!

Award.

But in the end it was worth it! The courts awarded the Landlord the whole of the claim for damages, the deposit in full and two months loss of rent because of the length of time it took to get the property fit for the market again. This is made all the better with the knowledge that the Tenant who replaced the person claimed against still enjoy living there and are treating the property as it should be treated by any good Tenant.

Summary

And what do we take from all of this? Well first of all that currently the law does not move quick enough to resolve matters for Landlords under such circumstances; it does not make sense for anybody to be left waiting for two years for a decision to be arrived at and even if it had been heard the first time the case was cancelled it would still have been nearly a year. That the reasons why such a case can be delayed for a further year are too lenient, because it should NOT be possible to postpone a hearing with such ease as was the case for the further delays suffered  and that Landlords need better help from the Deposit holding bodies, as this was a substantial amount they should not have been made to cope without when you consider the amount awarded to the Landlord by the Judge was over £3000.

The good side!

But thankfully the biggest conclusion is that it does pay to take your case to the courts. I of course do not know for sure, but people who leave property in such a condition probably hope the problem will go away because of the trouble needed to pursue the matter to conclusion, but also in the end the courts have awarded correctly and it proves that errant Tenants can be brought to justice if the Landlords have the strength of character to hold true!

16Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: Tenant Deposit should be viewed for what it is.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There is no doubt that the deposit paid by Tenant has been viewed differently since the introduction of the TDP Legislation which has of course famously been updated by The Localism Act which has been introduced this month. It is not surprising when you consider the legislation is all about protecting the deposit, that most Tenants now look upon this as an amount of money that should by rights be returned at the end of the Tenancy no matter what the circumstances, rather than a deposit to be used against any damage made at the property during the term of the Tenancy.

Wrong perception.

The worst case I have heard of happened to us only last week, where a Tenant using that time old well worn phrase, ‘my friend told me’ continued to inform us that she did not have to clean the property as that was now considered to be fair wear and tear!  Well that was a first for me, what next, Landlords who should supply cleaners for Tenants?

Immediate implications.

The problem here of course is that because this person has been badly advised, the Deposit will immediately go into dispute if negotiation does not achieve agreement, and when you consider that one of the approved schemes actually charges their Agents dependent upon how many claims are made, it leaves us in a ridiculous situation that would, should we still be with that supplier, cost us money for a totally unnecessary case. Whatever happens, it would leave a bad taste in somebody’s mouth and as the Agent we would probably be the subject of the Tenants wrath. Fortunately, we have managed to explain the correct procedure and the Tenant has agreed to pay for the property to be cleaned.

Bad advice.

Of course once bad advice has been given, when we meet the Tenants at the property, where no cleaning has been done, it is too late to put right, as officially, the Tenant will have no access  after we have taken back the keys, otherwise they remain liable for the rent as well. Frustrating for us, especially as we write beforehand clearly pointing out the work that needs to be done prior to the check out appointment, which includes all cleaning and even state if the Tenant needs further assistance that they should not hesitate to be in touch (Of course we know if there is liable to be a big issue because of our property visits beforehand)

Perception.

For me it is clear that the legislation has meant that the deposit is perceived as something that should be returned if rent has been paid and the Tenant has been reasonable in their conduct whilst at the property. This is simply not the case. The deposit is present should rent not be paid yes, but also to ensure the Landlord has a fund to fall back on should the Tenant damage the property. What we should all realise (and I speak as a Tenant myself ) is that the longer we live at a property the more chance there is that damage will be caused. That is just a fact of life, not damaged on purpose, just a by-product of living in a home!

13Apr 2012

Tenant Advise: Problems finding a house to rent.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

A letter recently published in my Local Stafford Paper, questioned the ability for some Tenants in difficult situations to be able to rent property in the town. The blame has been placed purely with the local Letting Agents, but takes a very simplistic view of the reasons why they have struggled. There are far more factors that need to be considered before any judgement can be made, and I am going to put the case for the agent through these pages.

 Law of Agency.

 Here it is again! But so many Tenants do not understand that we are bound by our (legal) agreement with the Landlord to give best advise under all circumstances. I offer a quote from a recent article by David Smith of Anthony Gold Solicitors, in The Negotiator magazine ‘this means that the Agent must act in his clients interests even where that produces a harsh outcome for the other party, in this case the Tenant’ I quote because I believe his words confirm the reality of our position better than any other description I have ever heard. So if a Landlord does not want pets, we would be breaking our legal agreement if we allowed Tenants with pets to move in to a house with express knowledge that they had. Equally, if a Landlord does not wish for Tenants in receipt of benefits then, we have to obey this instruction in exactly the same manner. We are not here to be judge or to offer succour to those in need, no matter how worthy the cause. We are here to follow our Landlords instruction, to the letter!

 The benefit system.

 There are several areas where the Benefits system fails to deliver for the Landlord, firstly, they pay four weekly in arrears. This means that the Landlord has to find more than a full month’s rent to keep his cash flow in order. Why, when we have sufficient Tenants who are able to pay rent in advance, should we suggest that the Landlord waits for their money and only gets a percentage of it (Yes it catches up eventually but not for a full year!) when they do receive payment. It is also paid direct to the Tenant now, and, as happened in our latest case, only when the rent was two months in arrears would the Council start to communicate with us as the Agent of the Landlord and only when the Tenant agreed, would the Council pay the rent direct to us. Please tell me why, under those circumstances should we encourage acceptance of Tenants in receipt of benefits. It would be good to say this was an isolated incident, and it would also be wrong to say that problems occur with all Benefit claimants. Unfortunately for those who do respect their commitment, most do not.

 Insurance.

 One of the (many!) benefits of using an Agent, is our ability to have the Tenants professionally referenced. All Agents should use a referencing Company whose acceptance of the Tenants automatically places the Landlord in a position to take Landlord Insurance to protect the Rent and pay Legal expenses should they be needed. Now because the system works well and because Agents know how to manage and control debt, the policies are still available in some instances for less than £100 per year (I only quote this figure as an example, because with FSA regulations in mind, I am not able to discuss the benefits of one Company above another!) If this was a policy that was relied upon again and again by Landlords it would cost far more, so it confirms without any doubt, that the referencing system works! Finally, no Agent worth their salt should, in my opinion, operate without the ability to offer Rent and Legal Expenses Insurance. Otherwise, how can it be argued that they are giving best advice to their clients?

 Guarantors.

 If a Tenant does not earn sufficient income, they may need a Guarantor; this is the natural manner in which income short fallings are balanced against the Industry standards used for income calculations. However, all Guarantors MUST be able to afford the rent. Look at the situation from the Tenants point of view, if a Tenant who could not afford the rent was moved in to a property without any check at all, it could be argued very easily that the Agent or Landlord had acted without due care to the Tenant, placing them in a position where they are unable to afford the commitment they have made. No different than being oversold items on Higher Purchase! Now, if they are able to provide a Guarantor, I can see no difference (and neither can the Industry) in what they should also be able to afford! Just because somebody agrees to be a Guarantor does not mean that the Tenant is automatically protected. The legal agreement clearly confirms that the Guarantor is responsible for the Tenants short fallings which includes all financial matters involved with the Tenancy. Now again, if we just accepted people on face value and they suddenly found themselves with a bill they could not pay, have we done our duty as Agents? Under such circumstances the Guarantor could easily claim to have been unfairly treated.

 Financial limits.

 Finally, the rates at which affordability calculations are judged, are not the responsibility of the Lettings Industry. They are developed and run by the financial referencing organisations, from whom Letting Agents are only responsible for using their services, not the manner in which they operate. We are all faced with rules that we have to abide by that we have input into the detail would be very rare. This is one such position. But as I have indicated before, such organisations and Insurance companies are subject to the law in the FSA regulations they must abide by. What we should NOT do is blandly allow people to be referenced for a property they cannot afford.

 Summary.

 So, it is very easy to blame the Industry and Agents in particular, but there are wider issues and pictures that need to be considered. That these people who were the reason for writing this piece have had difficulties because they are on Disability Allowance and Housing Benefit, I say they should look to the social organisations that are supposed to help them, rather than the Industry that on the face of it would have to break several codes of conduct to accommodate them. We are not able to move people in too a property against the Landlords wishes, we cannot ignore referencing and neither can we place our Landlords in a position where they cannot take the benefits of the most basic of Industry Insurance Policies. We cannot ignore the possible implications of accepting Housing Benefit Tenants and neither should we ignore what a Tenant and Guarantor can or cannot afford. Rather than being unfair, when you consider our legal position and to whom we are responsible, that is being Professional!   

 

12Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: Choosing a Tenant – Landlords needs first – by law!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

One of the areas that crop up again and again when we are going about our job, is the relationship between ourselves as Agents of the Landlord and our prospective and actual Tenants. It is and always has been in our interests to have good relationships with our Tenants and we continue to promote that at all times, but when it comes to our position legally we have to consider the Landlord above the needs of the Tenant and it is this stance which is often mis-understood!

Tenant’s rights.

 We do of course give the Tenants duty of care, but two situations have arisen this morning which yet again could and possibly does leave us looking like ‘bad boys’ if we proceeded and made what we believe to be the best decisions in the interests of the Landlord. The first issue surrounds another Tenant viewing and proceeding with a property before a second prospective Tenant had viewed. There was a statement made about who was due to see the property first which we could not agree with as we do not give preferential rights of viewing as a Company Policy.  

I saw it first!

This is simple enough to understand, if the first person to phone cannot view for a week, do we stop others who can view today? No because it would not be in the interest of the Landlord and our decision is an easy one! In this case what has clouded the issue for the prospective Tenant, is that they felt they had been promised to be shown first but as we never do give such promises, because it is never in the interests of our Landlords, this would simply never be the case. It is more likely that there was a misunderstanding of what was being asked and promised, but it ended with an nasty phone call to myself and my staff which of course is not acceptable for either party.

Best Tenant.

The second problem was one where in asking for information to assist finding a property for a potential Tenant, nothing has been forthcoming since we asked from the Tenant. Now when they ask to view a property again, which we know will be impossible without the information, do we tell them no without delay? We are of course always charged to find the best Tenant at all times for our Landlords and that inevitably means making decisions. We have to otherwise we would not be doing our job.  But it is highly likely this situation will again end up with a disappointed party, but we are not bound to find property for all who contact us, just those we believe will be good Tenants.

Overiding facts.

In every situation we are bound to make the decision that is in the best interests of our clients and that is our Landlords. This means disappointing some who contact us. But until Tenants understand that we have a legal commitment to serve our Landlords and that overrides any duty of care towards Tenants  (unless that neglect of duty includes an illegal act or stance) such issues will continue to occur. What of course we can hope is that not every time someone does not get what they want it does not end up in aggressive phone calls.

11Apr 2012

Current Property News: Landlords to address Legionnaires disease as well!

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There are times a as a Letting Agent that it feels as if the whole world is looking to upset your apple cart. No sooner do we get to grips with the Localism Act when along comes the HSE and offers up another tasty treat for Landlords and Agents to comply with. This time it is Legionnaires disease and the implications of removing the size limit in water tanks that has bought every rented property in the country in line with the new Code of Practise issues by the HSE.

What Next!

I am not suprised that the Industry has read the detail and asked open mouthed what else are we liable to be asked to take on board? There are cases of Legionnaires found in residential homes, but if we start looking at statistics for the reasons why people fall ill in the home, or have accidents, then Legionnaires falls way down the list of matters that need addressing! The problem is that the HSE are the organisation responsible for controlling the disease, so as soon as the 300litre tank size restriction was removed, they have no option but to advise Landlords and Agents accordingly.

It’s a silly world.

It would of course be easy to look at other areas of concern and suggest for example that stairs are banned; all glass is covered by wire protection; cookers are limited to low temperatures; kettles are banned; children are banned from kitchens and treat all areas of danger in the same manner. There are times when we all think that such matters are treated with overkill, I am no different!

Deal with the facts.

 And those facts are that the industry is now evaluating the situation and dealing with the new Code of Practise. On the face of it and the initial reaction from the Industry suggested that there would now need to be further costs generated by regular inspections of all internal water systems. But I believe that those looking at the situation will be able to give us clear guide lines as we look to take the Code of Practise on board in a practical manner.  

Tenant responsibility.

Before and between tenancies, we will ensure systems are in place to deal with the requirements. Where a Tenancy exists, we will probably develop a strategy to deal with instructing the Tenant on how to ensure the problem is dealt with during the Tenancy by following prescribed instruction at regular intervals, such as heating the water system to required temperatures especially in modern property where the system can be easily dealt with. In older properties, it may well be a requirement that any areas of concern are highlighted and dealt with through an inspection.     

Professionals.

At the end of the day, we will deal with this as we have dealt with the numerous changes in legislation introduced in the last ten years, in the right manner. As I have always said if we call ourselves professionals, we deal with matters professionally. Even though it still seems like a sledge hammer to crack a nut! I once had a Health and Safety expert as a Tenant, who questioned the standard of fence between gardens at a newly built property, because his neighbours had a dog that barked at him every time he went in the garden. His take was that it is our responsibility to protect him as our Tenant from all eventualities.

Sensible solution.

 I wondered at the time if that would include building gates at the end of the drive, chopping down the trees across the road and installing conveyer belts for use instead of the stairs. What we do do as a matter of course is address these issues in a sensible and practical way. We ensure fences offer security, dog or no dog, trust people to be able to drive on the road and not crash in too the house, have people take responsibility for tree safety, in this case the local council on an adopted road and ensure that a hand rail is in place to assist everybody using the stairs. No doubt the solution for dealing with Legionnaires disease in the home will also prove to be just as practical!

10Apr 2012

Property Landlord advice: TDP paperwork plans finally in place.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

There are times as a Letting Agent that a job of work comes on the horizon which was unexpected but you know from day one, is going to take quite some time to research and complete. This has been the case with the legislation surrounding the Tenants Deposit Protection introduced in the Localism Act. We could see as soon as our advisors started to inform us of the upcoming release that this was going to be one of those times.

At the coal front.

It is still a saying that explains what has been needed to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act and the arranging, writing, collating, printing and posting has taken the best part of two weeks to complete. Not so surprising when you consider that every Landlord and Tenant has had to be contacted, but not only this but Tenants fell in too differing categories of action and therefore we have had to confirm where all of our Tenants sat before getting in touch. Being part of the day to day office means that I have been involved with dealing with most of this and that is why I use the coal face expression.

Understanding.

But by being the person who has written the letters, organised who needed to be placed in too what category, decided how each category has had to be dealt with (and physically collated the information and put the envelopes through the franking machine!) you end up with an understanding of not only what is being done but also why.

Implications.

Now we understand better the implications going forward and how it changes as our Tenants situation changes. For example, those who leave prior to the 5th of May, should only be concerned with how their next Tenancy is dealt with. But how many times have we known a move to break down just before it is completed! To counter this we have served paperwork on every Tenant, immaterial of when the Tenancy ends, because as we are a large Agency, there is more chance that at least one of those moving out will fall through and having worked so hard to ensure all the Tenants are dealt with correctly, this is not the time to let one slip through our net!

Revised procedures.

Getting to grips with these changes also means we have changed our procedures to ensure that the paperwork is correct now and every time. It has been discussed that Landlords and even some Agents would be better without a deposit as they will not be risking falling foul of the legislation in the first place if a deposit does not exist. I would disagree. As Agent of the Landlord, we are duty bound to give best advice about all scenarios and I cannot see a situation where no Deposit helps the Landlord. That means that we as Agents should be professional enough to deal with the paperwork correctly through our own systems.

Now is the time.

So what we have done is write to the Landlords two weeks ago, write to the Tenants last week and change our paperwork systems now, a full month before the legislation dictates that matters should be dealt with in line with the legislation. This will give us a full month to ensure our safeguards work and allow us to continue to offer a full professional service to our Landlords. Such changes and the work that they generate are not always welcome, change never is, but we must continue to embrace them, roll with them and adapt. Then and only then can we be in a position to call ourselves Professional Agents. Those who read my blog  regularly, will know I believe there is no other way!

26Mar 2012

Avoiding Deposit Disputes: A Good Inventory is Key!

⋅ 1 Comment

By Craig Smith

When a tenancy comes to an end, there will often be some work needed to return the property to its original condition. Although it is not always needed, the most common costs from a deposit include cleaning, gardening and rent arrears.

Start the Tenancy Properly

It is not always necessary, best practice is to have a written tenancy agreement in place for any tenancy. Along with the tenancy agreement, to avoid any disputes at the end of the tenancy, should be an inventory. A written inventory should always state any fixtures and fittings but a good inventory will also state its condition.

You may think that an unfurnished property may not need an inventory, a term we hear quite often is ‘… but there’s nothing in there.’ Fair enough, there may be no furniture such as sofas, beds and tables but don’t forget that walls are still wallpapered/painted, carpets should be left clean and kitchens/bathrooms left in good condition.

Keep the Inventory up to Date

A number of changes can be made at a property, particularly during longer tenancies, so the inventory should be amended to reflect this. This is particularly important if a tenant has asked permission to redecorate or replace items in the property along with any documentation to support any permissions granted. For example, if the tenant wanted to repaint a room and the Landlord agreed subject to the property being returned to its original colour upon the tenant vacating.

A Good Move Out Report

Not only should an inventory be taken at the start of the tenancy and agreed by all parties, a good move out report should be taken in order for any comparisons to be made from start to end of tenancy. If an agreement cannot be reached regarding any costs, the dispute would either go to dispute resolution (if registered with a deposit scheme) or even go to court. This is where a good inventory and move out report will be crucial to any decision made by the adjudicating team.

Protect Yourselves

An inventory will not just protect the Landlord for any damages but also the tenant to prevent any unfair charges at the end of a tenancy. Don’t forget that the inventory should always state the condition of items at the property and should contain as much description as possible to be relied upon. 

21Mar 2012

WHY SHOULD A LANDLORD USE AN AGENT – Part 1

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

There are lots of them and here are just some the rest follow in Part 2.

OK so times is ’ard and Landlords think letting properties is like shelling peas and they can do just as well. Consider these reasons why if you are a Landlord you should  use an agent. And if you are an agent reading this, then make sure you push these benefits to win yourself some business!!

1.         Depending who you pick they are the professionals

Select the right agent i.e. not just on price, and you have a pro on your team. OK so 40% of agents are not even registered with the Property Ombudsman because it is a voluntary scheme unless your agent belongs to ARLA, RICS, NAEA or NALS in which case membership is compulsory for them. And choosing an agent that is a member of a regulatory body doesn’t guarantee all will be sweetness and light – but you’ll have a better chance that it is.

2.         Using an agent gives you someone to sue!!

May seem a mercenary reason but if you use someone claiming to be a professional, or that it was reasonable for you to consider they were professionals, if it all goes wrong you at least have someone else to blame – and sue. A Court will expect an allegedly professional agent to set and demonstrate higher standards – might be useful if you do end up with the tenant from hell.

3.         They know how best to present a property and the best market for it

Doubtless your property is the best in the street or the block, and doubtless you have high personal standards. But there is nothing like objectivity to really discover just how ready for letting your property is – a professional agent knows what your property is up against locally and the standards your property needs to meet to compete in that market, and will advise you what needs doing to maximise your rental and speed of letting.

4.         They can let your property quicker than you can

Or they almost certainly can and if any good they should do. At times of near insatiable demand such as we have now any property that is presented in a half decent location and condition, and at the right price, should let within at most a month of going on the market and really should be spoken for by a tenant being referenced within 2 weeks or so.

Agents have access to massive marketing power and will use property portals such as Rightmove, and will probably have their own website too. Some agents also advertise via social media such as twitter and facebook. Note to mention their shop front in the high street where people looking for accommodation can browse the professionally taken photographs.

The only way a Landlord lets privately themselves quicker than an agent is usually if they have simply taken the first prospective tenant that came along.

5.         They will make sure you stay on the right side of the Law

Your professional agent will know all the legal requirements and will be able to advise you on everything from the right tenancy agreement that you need to making sure you have a gas safety record before the tenancy starts.

Life is getting more complicated and in April there will be revised rules and regulations relating to Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) and even more crucially, tenants deposits. If you are not an experienced landlord you will need professional help. 

20Mar 2012

Lettings News: Are Landlords Fully Aware of Their Responsibilities?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Craig Smith

There are many reasons why someone may want to let out their home. A lot of home owners at the moment are struggling to sell their property but still need to move on with their lives, perhaps a job offer in a different part of the country or moving abroad. Putting a tenant into the property can keep the mortgage paid and the house looked after whilst the Landlord is away.

Basic Health & Safety

A lot of these Landlords can come into this situation knowing nothing at all about renting a property and it is our job to keep them on the right path. The Landlord would be responsible for ensuring that the property is safe, for example ensuring that any gas appliances are tested annually and that anything that the tenants are left with a safe environment to live in. Don’t forget that Landlords can (and have been) jailed for failing to ensure that their rental property is safe!

Then there are the less well known items that can catch out unsuspecting homeowners, such as ensuring that stairways are safe. One property that we looked after for a Landlord had no banister rail along the stairway and although it did look great, something did need to be done before a tenant moved in to prevent any accidents occurring. A simple banister was fitted in order for the stairs to be deemed safer, the Landlord would much rather have a small expense at the start of the tenancy than a claim for damages from an injured tenant!

General Repairs

Repairs also need to be covered by the Landlord throughout the tenancy, not just to the building itself but also to any items that have been left for use by the tenant. Of course, if a property has been let furnished and a tenants pet has ripped the cover on a sofa then the tenant would be liable for the damage. But it is the Landlord who should cover any wear & tear such as a cooker breaking down or rotten window frames.

Who Can Carry Out the Repairs?

For general repairs such as gardening or decorating a lot of Landlords prefer to do this themselves which will help to reduce any costs but for more specialist items such as electrics, qualified contractors need to be used. Some of the most well known include using a GasSafe registered engineer for works to gas appliances and most electrical works that are carried out must now be certified under Part P building regulations. 

09Mar 2012

Current Rental News: Localism Act shakes up the paperwork for TDP Legislation.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

Well it would seem we have reached the ‘All of the votes are in’ stage of the Localism Act and the changes in Law and its effect on the Tenants Deposit Protection legislation . These changes are now imminent, I have written before about the impact as charges were first of all discussed and then debated for the work which this act now confirms need to be carried out for virtually all Assured Shorthold Tenancies in the UK. Yes that’s right, all agreements entered in to that have now passed the initial six months (or longer?) fixed term, now need to be checked.

Clarity.

To be fair, this change in the Law clarifies the initial legislation. It has also been described as a way of closing all the loopholes, but without doubt, you need to add the judgement in the Swrpere case of last summer to the effect on what now needs to be done.

1988 Housing Act.

All Assured Shorthold tenancies that have passed their initial fixed term become periodic tenancies.  The Act itself does state exactly this as Section 5 of the Housing Act 1988 reads ‘A new Tenancy arising at the end of the fixed term’. So although no new tenancy agreement is entered into, the Law states a periodic is a new tenancy and therefore the necessary steps under the TDP provisions – deposit protection and PIN service – must be completed. The deposit will already be protected of course, but action may still need to be taken in respect of the two insured schemes. But what really matters and especially in the light of the much focused comments in the Swrpere v Nice 2011 judgement, is the serving of another PIN form within 30 days of the tenancy going periodic from now on, or by 5th May for existing periodic tenancies. This has always been ignored before the Localism Act 2011 for two reasons. First it was overlooked simply because no new Agreement is signed.  Secondly under the original TDP legislation and Court decisions it was always possible to protect the deposit and serve the PIN late. But The Localism Act 2011 closes off all these escape routes – protect AND serve later than 30 days, either of them, and you have committed an offence with no escape.

Correct procedure.

The act becomes law on the 6th of April and allows all details to be corrected by the 5th of May. So action will need to be taken sooner rather than later. All of our Landlords and Tenants will be receiving letters confirming how we will deal with the corrected procedures next week, as we look to deal with the issue at the first possible opportunity. It is centred on the Prescribed Information that all Tenants complete at the commencement of an agreement (The PIN Form) and ensuring this, as well as the Terms and Conditions of the scheme the Deposit is registered with, are served again in the case of the PIN and have been served correctly in the case of the T&C’s.

Not stopped there!

For the first time, the legislation will also apply to ALL AST’s as it looks to ensure that ALL agreements even if they pre-date the TDP Legislation, will now have a protected deposit. This of course means ensuring Tenants who will have now occupied a property for at least five years will have to be considered, have the scheme explained and dealt with by May 5th this year. There is no doubt that should this not be done, then it will be an offence under the Localism Act punishable by fine. It also needs to be said, that I am aware of enquiries by the ‘No Win – No Fee’ Solicitors as to the implications and procedures – could this be the next wave of adverts?

Summary!

Not easy, but suffice to say a broad brush approach should be taken and all Tenancies should be reviewed without delay. The whole Industry will need to get this right, and that means many questions will be asked and an understanding of the new legislation and the procedural changes this introduces will be needed by all concerned. We are fortunate to be associated with Companies who evaluate and advise about the impact such matters bring with them, which I believe will not stop with this topic alone. A case of watch this space, as further parts of the Act are clarified over the next few days with what defines a deposit next on the agenda!