Mandy Thomson

Thanks for that, Edwin - that's very helpful.... Read More

Thanks for the comments to date. Yes, where my own tenants are concerned I was careful to stipulate the exact terms of the concessions I was giving (using the NRLA COVID rent concession template helped) however, it seems many landlords have acted first then only considered the legal niceties afterwards, once they realise their tenants aren't in any hurry to pay back the discount...... Read More

If those leaseholders have mortgages you could write to their lenders but if the lenders agree to pay this is likely to have a negative impact on the leaseholders' credit files so should only be done as a last resort.
I would suggest offering the LHs payment plans so they can pay the additional costs by instalment.
If the leaseholders are on low incomes, it might be worth seeing if the local authority might provide a grant or loan, if the works will have a direct impact on the LHs' living accommodation.... Read More

... Read More

Dare I comment here from both sides of this argument?

As a small private landlord myself, I have to confess I am nervous about letting to housing benefit claimants even though I agree the vast majority of them make decent tenants who pay their rent and look after their homes. However, I also feel that refusing housing benefit claimants carte blanche is completely unfair.

Why I have reservations about HB tenants

There is no denying that rogue tenants are more likely to claim housing benefit (though I accept that non benefit claimants can be lousy tenants too, even those on high salaries).

When considering HB tenancy applicants, I find they often expect more changes to my properties and sometimes these are unreasonable. For example, wanting a newly painted flat painted again in a different colour. However, this is because they are trying to make do with a property they wouldn’t otherwise have considered because their choice is so limited. One applicant (who was in work but didn’t earn enough so needed housing benefit to top up) initially rejected my property then came back a week later asking to be reconsidered but brought a bucket list of desired changes with her.

There are vagaries to the housing benefit system, but again, much of this is caused by claimants with “chaotic lifestyles” not complying with the requirements of setting up and maintaining the claim.

Mostly, housing benefit is capped at a much lower rate than real market rents (as we know only too well) but there are a small number of claimants who will get their full, or near their full rent, paid (for example, pensioners on guaranteed pension credit or a disabled tenant awarded a discretionary housing payment).

Why I nevertheless think blanket bans are unfair

I believe nevertheless landlords should look at an applicant's individual situation and properly assess their affordability based on an accurate projection of the housing benefit they would expect to get if they were renting the property they're applying for.

I have a friend who is trying to move his elderly disabled mother to his area. The lady has rented in the social sector for many years, and has always been a good tenant. She lives in a retired housing scheme and that is what she looking for in both the private and social sectors in her son’s area. She currently gets guaranteed pension credit and has tried to impress upon the letting agents that this would likely cover her full rent, less utilities and service charges that she could afford.

After previously helping to move another elderly relative, this time to a specialist private retirement housing provider who know how to reference housing benefit claimants, my friend suggested the agents use one of the government approved benefit assessment tools. This landlord accepts housing benefit because they understand that elderly tenants are more likely to require it and are not in much position to change their economic position. Unfortunately, neither this landlord nor another specialist retirement landlord currently has anything available in the area.

My friend wants to move his mother before winter and another lockdown – this more or less rules out the social sector, hence why they're looking on the open market. However, my friend was told he would need to stand as guarantor (which he is happy to do) but as his income has been affected by COVID, he is not currently earning enough. In my opinion, this is not necessary as with his mother on guaranteed pension credit I would say he need only guarantee a third of her rent, but they are expecting him to guarantee 3 – 3.5 times rent.

I believe this is lack of knowledge of the retirement market and how to assess a housing benefit tenant for affordability, compounded by a "computer says no" approach on the part of the agents.

To finish, yes, it would be nice if Shelter would offer guarantees for housing benefit tenants, and moreover, provide information and guidance to the private sector on how to reference such tenants, instead of alienating us private landlords and letting agents.... Read More

Sorry, Alistair - only just seen your response. You might find this post by Bill Irvine and my response to it helpful https://www.propertytribes.com/are-landlords-entitled-to-claim-lhauc-t-127646211-lastpost-user-438521.html... Read More

You're correct about the self employed tax allowances not being available to landlords as to claim you'd have to paying tax as self employed, not a private property investor.
However, and I believe @Dr_Rosalind_Beck, @Sherrelle_Colman and @Bill_Irvine might have some insight here, I've been advised in the past that if a landlord's total income is low enough, they can apply for means tested benefit themselves, and the equity in their rental property should be disregarded as a business asset, or is that wrong? I can produce some case law to support this on request.... Read More

The Conservative party's anti landlord policies are not great, to say the least, but there is a bigger picture here.

Does anyone here seriously think Labour offers landlords - and the economy as a whole - a better option than the Tories? No, of course they don't.

So OK, you might say, I'm going to vote Lib Dem, Green, Brexit, any other small party, or even not vote at all - if you do that, you're simply allowing Corbyn more of a majority. The third largest party, the Liberal Democrats, manifesto is the most favourable to landlords of the three largest parties. However, even the Lib Dems themselves publicly admit they are not going to win the election, so their next goal is to stop the Conservatives winning seats - in other words, their aim is now to help Labour into power.

A Labour government would be disastrous for the economy, and it's only in a strong economy that business (including the PRS), the NHS, education, state pensions, public services - in short, everything important, can thrive.... Read More

Interesting point as it's mainly Labour local authorities who impose selective licensing schemes then call for the use of s.21 in such cases and not s.8 when there are 2 ASB grounds - one mandatory and one discretionary. Clearly tacit admission by the left wing that s.21 is needed under the current system (or they're not averse to its use when it suits them...).... Read More

Thanks, Ian. I was meaning it as a workaround to the withdrawal of s.21 where the tenancy would otherwise be open ended but the landlord wants to ensure the tenancy will only last a specified time (such as a student let).

Similar to the old practice of issuing a s.21, expiring on the last day of the fixed term, at the start of the tenancy.... Read More

Witness reports and photos etc are all that should be required to prove balance of probability in a civil matter, there is no need to prove a case beyond reasonable as per a criminal matter.... Read More

I'm assuming there's vet's reports?... Read More

See my earlier comment on here made at 8:30 AM, 30th April 2019 in which I reference the Nearly Legal blog which raises pretty much this point - s.21 is currently used as a means of ensuring landlord's compliance with certain obligations and would/should the new no fault grounds brought in to replace it also allow their use subject to compliance only?... Read More

Hi Kylie
Really sorry to hear about your daughter's experience.
The answer to both your questions is yes, but your daughter and her co renters need proper evidence to back up their claims.
Where the deposit is concerned, there are plenty of solicitors doing this on a no win no fee basis as the legislation means claimants will always be awarded SOMETHING plus their legal costs. The serious property disrepair will make the judge less sympathetic to the landlord assuming there were no breaches on the tenants' part.
Where the damage to the property is concerned, including the deaths of the pets, provided there is again good, well presented evidence to back up the claim, this can be done through the small claims court (unless the damage amounts to more than £10k). No solicitor needed and these often go through with no hearing.
They should also report the state of the property to Environmental Health at the local authority, again presenting evidence (though probably not worth doing if the landlord won't be renting it again or is leaving a long void between tenancies to get the work done).... Read More

Thanks to everyone for your contributions, in particular to @DavidM, @PJB, @Carol McEvoy, @Ian Narbeth and @John Dace for sharing your experiences of your particular niche markets and raising awareness of the unique issues involved.

Thanks also to @Larry Sweeney for sharing your idea of allowing landlords free choice of whether to use a county court or high court bailiff to enforce possession orders instead of having to submit a writ as at present.

Even without the withdrawal of s.21, it is clear we need special grounds or some other legal device to remove anti social HMO tenants whose inconsiderate behaviour would not present such an issue were they not sharing with others. Although this scenario is more likely to occur with tenants on separate agreements, this can does also occur among housemates on joint tenancies.

As for student tenancies, this is one known area the Scottish PRT doesn't cater for, and again, even with s.21, a landlord still has to wait 2 months before starting possession proceedings to remove a really stubborn tenant - it's not often, but it does happen (I had a scenario referred to me where the student dropped out then didn't get a job so became stuck in his student accommodation without paying rent).

Also, the issue of property that is used for both holiday lets and ASTs is being overlooked - thanks for pointing out that this is not such a small niche market as originally thought, particular in coastal and rural areas.

Grounds to deal with tenancy breaches in general need to be much more easily enforceable, and there should be certain situations in which the landlord has right of access after perhaps three written warnings - for example, gas safety inspection, suspected subletting or evidence of illegal activity.

In addition, if there is a police incident and witness statements as supporting evidence, a landlord should be able to swiftly remove a tenant who has vandalised the property or been involved in a violent incident - an actual conviction should not be necessary.

Last but not least, sometimes landlords, especially hands off ("property investor only") and "accidental" landlords, can be their own worst enemies by sleep walking into letting property then finding they can't so easily evict (as they haven't complied with pre-requisites and don't understand the process full stop) when they find the tenant that wasn't rigorously vetted is rogue.

Some may disagree, but I believe such landlords should be stopped for their own good and the good of the wider community - therefore, I firmly believe a Rent Smart Wales style scheme should be adapted in England (where landlords can only self manage if they can demonstrate a fair understanding of housing law or use an approved letting agent).

Moreover, mortgage and insurance providers should be made to act as gatekeepers (no registration/licence, no mortgage etc) to maximise compliance.... Read More

Although there is little funding to establish a housing court, in his webinar David Smith said he does not believe it's the intention of government to diminish the PRS, if anything the opposite, and while they ARE determined to scrap s.21, they are also very open to ideas from the PRS community on how a viable alternative to s.21 could be achieved.

Therefore, back to my argument, why must straightforward possession cases be decided by a judge (especially one who doesn't know the first thing about housing law...)?

Fully trained and competent case officers (once trained and it's fully implemented) would be much cheaper going forward than judges as they would command a lower salary than a judge or a solicitor and would be more knowledgeable and efficient as they would be highly specialised in possessions and the related housing legislation.... Read More

The Scottish PRT is an open ended tenancy, meaning the landlord can only end it using grounds.

For information, the model PRT can be downloaded here: https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-government-model-private-residential-tenancy-agreement/... Read More

This is the case with the Scottish PRT - LL must use grounds but T can give 28 days notice at any point. Where joint tenants, one T can no longer solely end tenancy without consent of the joint tenants.... Read More

Hi Ian - instead of trying to incorporate NTQ into tenancy agreement, what is your opinion of asking (not demanding) tenant to sign post dated NTQ at start of tenancy (though I can see a tenant claiming coercion)...... Read More

The Nearly Legal blog (published yesterday) is raising the issue of s.21 being a means of enforcing certain legal requirements such as proving issue of EPC and gas safety certificate, and complying with landlord licensing (meaning non compliance of any pre-requisite renders s.21 unenforceable).
The underlying message is the new no fault s.8 grounds (and possibly even other grounds) should be similarly unenforceable without evidence of compliance with other non related procedures.
Where this is something critical, such as service of gas safety certificate or compliance with mandatory HMO licensing, I would whole heartedly agree, but I do NOT think any grounds under the new s.8 should be subject to something that adds little value to tenants such as service of the EPC or How to Rent and where the deposit is concerned, I would agree with failing to protect at without good reason but NOT simply protecting late or forgetting to serve the PI.... Read More