Landlords should not be allowed to let their own properties

1.
Landlords

2.
Are

3.
Legally

4.
Responsible

5.
For

6.
Everything

7.
That

8.
Happens

9.
In

10.
Our

11.
Rented

12.
Properties

13.
And

14.
Cannot

15.
Devolve

16.
That

17.
Responsibility

18.
To

19.
Anyone

20.
Else

1.
Landlords

2.
Are

3.
Legally

4.
Responsible

5.
For

6.
Everything

7.
That

8.
Happens

9.
In

10.
Our

11.
Rented

12.
Properties

13.
And

14.
Cannot

15.
Devolve

16.
That

17.
Responsibility

18.
To

19.
Anyone

20.
Else

For Mike: what is the difference between a landlord and a letting agent?

Brilliant and emphatic response Mary
Couldn't have put it better myself!!

If Mike had made the point that landlord licencing should be introduced - as recommended in the Rugg report I think - and that we should all belong to a professional body (such as the National Landlords Association) - and that we should, perhaps, undergo "Continued Professional Development" to retain our licence etc ....

I would have supported him in principle .......... but would have challenged how this might be implemented .... and policed ........

But to suggest - because landlord licencing does not exist - that landlords should rent out their properties by using a letting agents (who are usually less qualified than the landlord) .... or an ESTATE AGENT (who are usually less qualified than letting agents or landlords or pond life) ...... is absurd.

I do think the whole letting industry needs much tighter regulation and that is something that we should all be lobbying for ....... so that we can get rid of rogue landlords, rogue letting agents and rogue estate agents so that our tenants are protected.

I actually understand all of Mike’s points, including the
belief that housing is very important but I’m not so strident in support of
them.

I think his car/MOT analogy is a good one.

I am fully behind Mark’s suggestion of cheap licensing with
a 3 strikes and out rule. This is basically what is being proposed in the Welsh
model. I don’t believe it has to be expensive, landlords aren’t cash cows to be
milked by local authorities and the value of licensing isn’t in income generation,
its in the ability of enforcement officers to take swift and effective action.

As you all know I’m a TRO but I rarely get the chance to
enforce because the legislation at my disposal is criminal in the main and we don’t
have the support of either the police or the courts when we try to take action
against a criminal landlord (I refuse to use the term ‘Rogue’ its too all
encompassing and vague at the same time) Plus, even if you are successful the
criminal that you just prosecuted still gets to go on trading.

Licensing on the other hand gives us a quick solution, in
that we can pull the license on the criminal and take them off the board, just
like points on a driving licence. In the Welsh model you have to pass
management of your property to someone with a licence.

Because the vast majority of breaches of landlord/tenant law
that I see are committed in ignorance of the law I would like to see compulsory
training as part of that licence, so that landlords would at least know that
the laws they are breaking are there.

I start training my council’s PRS tenants next month too.
Every tenant who seeks property through us has to go on a training course so they
understand their rights and obligations too and what can happen to their future
lettings if they screw up. We are also guaranteeing to indemnify the landlord
against rent or damage with a bond scheme but that is underpinned with a loan
set up through our credit union and the tenants have to pay into it for the
period they are in the tenancy. Working this way if the tenant leaves with a
clean sheet they actually have some savings and if they default we lose less
money.

Working in this way we hope it will professionalise the industry
and promote self responsibility among our tenants.

Mike is right, housing is too important to leave things
being run as they have been but unlike Mike I don’t believe landlords shouldn’t
run their own lettings. It can be fun and inspiring and we would lose much.
Look at HMO Landlady and what a star she is. What agent could run an HMO like
her? Treating them as if they are part of an extended and dysfunctional family.

I agree with you on many things Mark but this is going to be one of those exceptions. Landlords voting for regulation would be like turkeys voting for Christmas. The reason I feel this way is that I pushed VERY hard for the regulation of SARB (Sale and Rent Back) in the hope it would clean up the industry. The result was that SARB no longer exists and that, I believe, is to the detriment of society. If you see the OFT report which lead to SARB you will see that my former company "The Money Centre" pulled together a group of 800 landlords called NASARB - the National Association of Sale and Rent Back. We provided more research and insight than any other contributor, warts and all and clearly demonstrated good practice and working models. Several beneficiaries of the scheme were interviewed by the OFT who said it was a positive life changer for them. Obviously some had also been fleeced by rogue operators. The bottom line though is that regulation hit the industry like a nuclear bomb and killed off the innocent as well as the bad guys. SARB no longer exists. Be careful what you wish for.

"We are also guaranteeing to indemnify the landlord against rent or damage with a bond scheme but that is underpinned with a loan set up through our credit union and the tenants have to pay into it for the period they are in the tenancy."

This is VERY interesting Ben and certainly worthy of an article in it's own right

No time for an article this weekend but basically many
councils come up with bond schemes which promptly go bust because they just
chuck money into it and the tenants aren’t expected to do anything themselves,
not even pay it back. Its the most shortsighted way of working you can imagine.

I didn’t want that to happen when we got the money from govt
so sat down with the brilliant Liam and Janet from our Credit Union and we
adopted their ‘LoanSaver’ account system.

We put up the bond against rent arrears and damage. The
landlord doesn’t get the money, we just guarantee it in the event of a default.

The CU sets up a loan account the tenant has to pay into
from the start. Many cant afford much but they have to put something in,
usually they just sign child benefit over for 1 child. One of their previous
customers took out a loan a few years ago and signed her child benefit over to
clear it. She forgot she had done it and went back in recently for another
loan, only to find she had nearly £4,000 savings. She cried with relief
apparently.

So this isn’t just about bonds, its about encouraging people
to save and change their attitudes to budgeting ahead of the disaster that is
going to be Universal Credit next year

If the tenant leaves without arrears or a damage claim then
they have savings to move on with. If we pay out then the money they have put
in gets put towards our liability and we chase the tenants for the rest. That’s
the other radical part of the system, they have to pay us back haha

The training bit is linked to the London Landlords
Accreditation Scheme in that the tenants goes on a database as a trained
accredited tenant which we encourage London’s 22,000 LLAS accredited landlords
to take on. Just like we can place criminal landlords on our naughty step
database we can remove tenants from the accredited list.

As this grows over time we hope it will become the London
norm

An agent can screw up by "forgeting to renew his PI and CMP" and his Limited Company can go bust leaving the landlord to pick up the pieces and potentially risk personal bankruptcy and/or imprisonment if/when:-

1) a tenant dies due to fire or carbon monoxide
2) the agent forgets to get a gas safety certificate
3) the agent fails to complete adequate due diligence on tenants
4) the agents inventory is defective
5) the agent forgets to protect a deposit
6) the agent enters a tenanted property without permission
7) the agents serves the wrong notices
8) the agent illegally evicts a tenant

Oops!

Mike only wanted 6 reasons didn't he?

I could go on but having invested £millions into establishing a property portfolio these are just a few reasons why I believe that I (and other landlords) should be allowed to be in control of my own destiny and choose whether I want to appoint an agent.

These answers to Mike's questions are just a few spin off from the one point that Mary made in 20 parts LOL.

Feel free to add more please.

Sounds VERY promising Ben, I hope it takes off. You might even win over the Paul Barrett's of this world with this LOL