EPCs for the PRS: Ed Miliband fires the starter gun for a landlord exodus

Here we go again with energy performance certificate (EPC) ratings needing to be a minimum of C for the private rented sector but not homeowners, social housing or government buildings.

Ed Miliband was rather slovenly when sprawling over the despatch box to tell MPs that landlords will have a deadline of 2030 to meet. That’s a deadline after Labour gets voted out of office.

The big worry for me is that the EPC move will be riding on the coattails of a new Renters’ Rights Bill which will undermine and scare many landlords.

I’m also concerned that the people making the decisions don’t understand energy performance certificates.

If they did, they’d know they aren’t worth the paper they are printed on.

I fear though that we will be coerced into going down this route since BTL mortgage lenders offer the carrot of cheaper rates for those who meet the EPC criteria.

However, in all of this, no one ever appears to consider the plight of the tenants.

They will in effect – if Labour don’t bring in a rent cap – be paying for improvements with higher rents.

But what’s the payback for landlords? One year, two years, or more?

That’s a frightening prospect of not making a profit while the tenant enjoys higher rents and (slightly) cheaper fuel bills.

When campaigning, Miliband and Sir Kier said energy bills would drop by £300 a year – but they’ve been quiet on this number lately. And tenants won’t be saving £300 if the rent goes up by £1,500.

But there’s a bigger issue at stake that could put the skids under this plan.

Not only is Labour being shy about the £300 (and Angela Rayner’s vow to ban Section 21 evictions on ‘day one’), but they are also not talking about the energy price cap going up in the autumn and again January. That’s a double whammy hitting pensioners.

We can add that to the already ever-growing list of failed promises for a government that has had the shortest honeymoon period in political history.

I’m pretty sure those pensioners who won’t get the heating allowance will be dancing in the streets as their heating bill rockets.

Landlords would be happy to improve their property

Let’s face it, most landlords would be happy to improve their property if it was cost-effective and helped increase its value.

But reading Property118 on this issue highlights that the assessors have a lot to answer for by ‘assuming’ a lot of the answers. Usually, wrongly.

Different assessors find different ratings for the same property. Surely, the job can’t be that hard, can it?

Again, politicians of a left bent don’t appear to understand the private rented sector and the implications that come when imposing new rules and laws.

Especially when they cost money.

We are now looking at fed-up landlords who don’t want to upgrade or can’t afford to and have to decide what they should do next.

It also means carrying out the work in a void or putting the tenants up in a hotel. I doubt we’ll be able to evict to get an empty property.

We also need to find someone to do the work.

Good luck with that since all the builders will be busy delivering Angela Rayner’s promised 1.5 million new homes. As if!

It will be a faff organising an assessor, arguing about why it doesn’t reach a C and then being told – hopefully in writing – what needs to be done.

Then you’ll have to spend money on the work and STILL not be guaranteed a C rating.

The whole thing is bonkers.

Ed Miliband will get my support when social housing has to comply with the rules, but no one ever asks why they don’t.

And for those who will wait to see what the law will be, you could be leaving things very late and might get caught out.

Or you could carry out the work for the rule to be dropped Rishi-like when it’s convenient to do so.

How many landlords will sell up?

This brings me neatly to calculating how many landlords will sell up to avoid the C rating nonsense.

If it takes a few years to recoup the expenses, then why not dish out a section 21 notice to sell the property? [Editor’s note: This sentence has been corrected].

It might be a struggle in front of a judge, but older landlords can say they are selling up to retire and the property is their pension pot.

Younger landlords? Judges might not be so keen if there are lots of landlords doing this though I’d imagine that would be a news story.

What if it is a landlord with a leasehold property and the freeholder declines to carry out improvements?

The more I think of the potential issues, the more I think it’s just easier to bale out altogether.

It’s the lack of joined up thinking by politicians that makes me nervous.

The portrayal of landlords as being greedy and unkind to tenants isn’t going to improve soon.

It will get worse but because the good and kind landlords – that’s most of us, Ed – are already fed up, it needs action from Labour to keep us in the PRS.

To make our point we must either sell up as one body or fight the portrayal of landlords as tenant exploiters.

Politicians can’t dictate how we are portrayed with a caveat they aren’t pointing at all landlords, just the criminal ones.

That isn’t true because you could easily say we are a crucial and respected part of the housing sector. But you don’t.

You could say that landlords should be helped by the government and not victimised. But you don’t.

I’m sure that the sound of landlords marching out of the sector and reducing rented home supply might get your attention.

And if it does, you will portray us as selfish and greedy and leaving tenants homeless.

We can’t win. Things were bad under the Tories but my good goodness, Labour look set to plunge to a new low in playing the blame game.

Until next time,

The Landlord Crusader

Share This Article