PDA

View Full Version : Mandatory Landlord Licensing?



Ahmed
23-01-2009, 12:03 PM
Has anybody had any problems with this. Council being unreasonable and inflexible?

jta
23-01-2009, 12:05 PM
A Council being unreasonable? Sounds unusual, what have they done?

Ahmed
02-02-2009, 15:25 PM
I've received my invoice for the selective licence but finding that council is not willing to budge on payment terms. They either want the licence fee in full or max instalment of 6 months. Now I've offered to clear it in 12 months on affordability grounds but they just won't accept that. The licence will run for 5 years, and I can only afford to pay what I have? Do they expect me to borrow money to pay it?

Ericthelobster
05-05-2009, 06:39 AM
Well it had to happen, didn't it...

http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article6223112.ece

mind the gap
05-05-2009, 07:36 AM
Well it had to happen, didn't it...

http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article6223112.ece


Yes, it did, although landlords of licensable HMOs are already subject (and rightly so), to more stringent regulation than what is proposed here.

I appreciate that many people, especially those with leanings to the economic right, are opposed in principle to regulation in itself (and even more so, when it affects them personally!). However, the provision of housing, especially for people who have little or no choice whether to rent or buy, is not like opening a DVD rental outlet or hiring out luxury yachts. It is not just a business venture like any other. Once you have secured your 'customers', they are legally committed to being on the receiving end of your service, for months on end, even if that service is - or becomes - dreadful. Decent housing is a basic human need (some would argue a basic right) and a quick read through these forums reveals that tenants in the private rented sector are at the mercy of some disgracefully sloppy landlords. I am not referring to most of the landlords who contribute regularly to this forum, since they seem to me to be professional in the positive sense of the word and committed to offering and managing good quality accommodation where tenants can live with their dignity intact.

However, the grim end of the rented accommodation business in this country is not regulated by market forces alone (in the way that a burger bar would be, for example. There is a nationwide shortage of good affordable housing, so there will always be customers if the price is low enough, even if the accommodation is appalling. And even fast-food outlets are closed down if they poison people). For tenants to force essential health and safety repairs to be done at present via their local council EHOs can be time consuming and frustrating. It would appear that the rationale behind this regulation is to reduce the need for tenants to have to go down that route in the first place. Good idea.

Having seen some of the abuses perpetrated by landlords catering for students and other low-income tenants, at the greedy end of the the buy-to-let boom, I welcome this. Anything which makes it difficult for these cowboys - even gets rid of them - cannot come soon enough. Apart from the fact that rents will no doubt go up by £1 per week to cover the licence fee (£50 being a crippling sum for most landlords to fork out, of course) and assuming the system is efficiently implemented, it would seem to be in tenants' interests; the only losers should be bad landlords.

This will no doubt unleash a pandemonium of squealing.

jeffrey
05-05-2009, 09:20 AM
It's of dubious legality, despite those well-founded grounds justifying it. Explain why the law should prohibit an owner from using his/her own property for sub-letting. On what underlying jurisprudential basis is that appropriate? If it is, would a law prohibiting an owner from living in (or mortgaging or selling) own house also be OK?

mind the gap
05-05-2009, 09:32 AM
It's of dubious legality, despite those well-founded grounds justifying it. Explain why the law should prohibit an owner from using his/her own property for sub-letting. On what underlying jurisprudential basis is that appropriate? If it is, would a law prohibiting an owner from living in (or mortgaging or selling) own house also be OK?

There is clearly a difference between allowing people to live in, or sell, their own houses and allowing them to make money out of letting other, often more vulnerable, people, live in them. Most would recognise that human nature being what it is, there is less motivation on the part of the property-owner-turned-LL, to ensure a high standard of accommodation, than when he (and his family) live there. His motivation, when tenants move in, is to make a profit.

Most business ventures are regulated in some way to prevent customers being ripped off or put in physical danger by entrepreneurs interested only in making a fast buck. Does this type of proposed regulation not come under the same aegis (if that's the right word)?

My understanding is that the licensing of HMO LLs is provided for statutorily; could this not simply be an extension or amendment of the same Act?

Mars Mug
05-05-2009, 09:42 AM
Doesn't such a scheme already work in Scotland?

http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/housing/landlordregistration/

Beeber
05-05-2009, 10:27 AM
Yes, its in place in Scotland, and one of the worst landlords in Glasgow now cannot now let property.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7613087.stm

http://govanhill.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/slum-landlord-loses-appeal-to-rent-flats.html

Beeber
05-05-2009, 10:30 AM
My understanding is that the licensing of HMO LLs is provided for statutorily; could this not simply be an extension or amendment of the same Act?

In the case of Scottish HMOs, it was found that the small fines that resulted didn't act as a deterrant to non-licenced landlords.

Therefore, in Scotland, the legislation relating to landlord registration means that a rent penalty notice can be issued to non-registered landlords which requests that the tenant stops paying rent. This is a much more effective way of flushing out 'ghost' landlords and ensuring compliance.

Paragon
05-05-2009, 11:16 AM
Good idea. Hopefully, it will decrease the competition and I can raise my rents.

reb223
05-05-2009, 11:31 AM
Doesn't such a scheme already work in Scotland?

http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/housing/landlordregistration/

Although the scheme is in place in Scotland, it is debatable whether it actually 'works'. The case that Beeber has referred to is one of the few exceptions.

The system from my experience is a disorganised mess. Even now, 3 years on from registering, my properties do not show through the public search facility, so if a prospective tenant took the time to check that the property was registered they may go elsewhere thinking I am one of the rogues who avoid the scheme.

I volunteer for the Citizen's Advice Bureau and a year ago I called to report a potentially unregistered landlord on behalf of a client only to be told the system wasn't yet in place (2 years after the deadline).

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with complying - I just wish they would take time to make sure that the system they say is so important, is working okay.

Hopefully England and Wales will learn from Scotland's mistakes.

reb223
05-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Furthermore, (apologies if this is already mentioned in another thread) letting agents are to be subjected to licensing:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8032825.stm

Again, a similar scheme is already in place in Scotland - "Landlord Accreditation Scotland". It is entirely voluntary and dependent on attending so many training events, and following a code of practice. It is open to private landlords and letting agents, although not both for the same property.

P.Pilcher
05-05-2009, 12:09 PM
Wheras I have no objection to becoming a "licensed landlord" provided the fee charged is not another way of restoring the governments now seriously depleted coffers, I notice that nobody has mentioned the concept of the licensed tenant. I mean think about it! If a tenant does not hold a license, then he can't rent a property and he will loose his license if he receives a CCJ due to unpaid rent, his license muct be shown to his (licensed) landlord before his AST is signed and the landlord retains the details of this license so it can be withdrawn if there are legally proven grounds to do so.

I bet it'll never happen!

P.P.

GillsMan
05-05-2009, 12:14 PM
Wheras I have no objection to becoming a "licensed landlord" provided the fee charged is not another way of restoring the governments now seriously depleted coffers, I notice that nobody has mentioned the concept of the licensed tenant. I mean think about it! If a tenant does not hold a license, then he can't rent a property and he will loose his license if he receives a CCJ due to unpaid rent, his license muct be shown to his (licensed) landlord before his AST is signed and the landlord retains the details of this license so it can be withdrawn if there are legally proven grounds to do so.

I bet it'll never happen!

P.P.

Great idea, and having seen a number of articles on "professional tenants" I'd back this scheme. But I agree, it won't happen.

I have no problem with paying a small nominal fee to be licensed, though. Most LLs are scrupulous and honest, and this would presumably help differentiate us from the dishonest and, perhaps, naiive.

mind the gap
05-05-2009, 12:24 PM
Wheras I have no objection to becoming a "licensed landlord" provided the fee charged is not another way of restoring the governments now seriously depleted coffers, I notice that nobody has mentioned the concept of the licensed tenant. I mean think about it! If a tenant does not hold a license, then he can't rent a property and he will loose his license if he receives a CCJ due to unpaid rent, his license muct be shown to his (licensed) landlord before his AST is signed and the landlord retains the details of this license so it can be withdrawn if there are legally proven grounds to do so.

I bet it'll never happen!

P.P.

Shop doorways, council offices, prisons and park benches up and down the land (not to mention people's back gardens) would fill up with homeless, unlicensed, non-tenants. Tenant's Licences would change hands on eBay between people who no longer need theirs (e.g. bought a house) and people deemed unfit to be accommodated. LLs desperate to rent out their property at any cost would end up illegally packing in large numbers of the Licence-less at inflated rents. Resentment would fester.

It would make a good dystopia movie.

Poppy
07-05-2009, 08:50 AM
Licensing? Another level of bureaucracy? What the heck for?

Surely we already have plenty of legislation that allows both landlords and tenants to take all necessary action against the other when issues arise? It's the grumbling minority who do nothing to resolve their woes that the government are listening to at present.

Part of the way forward is to Stop selling off the council/social stock and start building some new ones. Let them focus on that - like they used to. :rolleyes:

lavy
07-05-2009, 09:00 AM
All these new rules seem to make more work for the landlords and protect the tenants. Its about time laws were looked into regarding getting possesion and rent arreas and rouge tenants / profesional rouge tenants. Whilst I agree that licencing landlords is ok i think the other side also needs looking at including how tenants are paid housing benifits etc as it is all open to abuse from tenants as well as landlords and the process for possesion takes far to long and tenants can disapear owing thousands and most of the time get away with it, data protection law comes to mind as couincils will not disclose tenants whereabouts I think there needs to be some lobying on these isues to make things fairer and get rid of the loopholes rouge tenants use.
mark

rajeshk4u
07-05-2009, 11:54 AM
I am just wondering if this licensing can be used to blackmail landlords.

1. In one property, we found tenants complained of mould. My father was shocked at the condition of the property, mould was everywhere. The property had never any problems for 10 years. My father discovered the tenants had turned OFF every radiator and were using a single electric glow heater in a single room - to save have on bills. They blocked air vents with tape etc... Yet if looked at the photos - you would think that we were running a slum!. In my view tenants could blackmail landlords to say you will loose your license and get it repainted without changing their behaviour...... there is nothing to enforce tenant behaviour e.g. turn heating on, open windows and extractor fan if cooking etc...

2. I hate charities like Shelter - because misrepresent Landlords. I mean they claim landlords provide unfit homes etc.. - yet why don't they ask - why did this tenant choose to live in a slum? - was it a slum in the beggining? Has it not occured to Shelter that some tenants live like pigs.....

Beeber
08-05-2009, 12:10 PM
Licensing? Another level of bureaucracy? What the heck for?

Surely we already have plenty of legislation that allows both landlords and tenants to take all necessary action against the other when issues arise? It's the grumbling minority who do nothing to resolve their woes that the government are listening to at present.

Part of the way forward is to Stop selling off the council/social stock and start building some new ones. Let them focus on that - like they used to. :rolleyes:

I live in a tenement in Scotland and have first hand experience of the problems that result from absent landlords who won't pay towards common repairs, do not have insurance and who let their properties out to anti-social tenants.

All 3 elements are covered by housing law and can be addressed through civil means but the penalties that come from non-compliance with the landlord registration scheme are more effective, in my opinion - it has the power to effectively ban rogue landlords from letting their properties and can issue rent penalty notices to effect this.

I believe the owner occupiers in my tenement think the landlord registration scheme is a positive step to dealing with the most neglectful landlords who aren't deterred by other penalties.

For example, Glasgow Council dealt effectively with one landlord using the legislation from the scottish landlord registration scheme after the landlord had ignored several court orders relating to non-payment of council tax, failure to cooperate with HMO legislation, failure to attend to urgent safety repairs and so on. The ultimate sanction is that tenants are ordered not to pay any rent to a landlord who is deemed not to be fit and proper to let, due to breaches of housing law, etc.

This landlord's former portfolio was situated in an area that has been nicknamed 'ground zero' for the way that greedy absent landlords have failed for decades to contribute towards maintenance of their properties to such an extent that entire streets have been brought to their knees and are regarded as slums.

In other scenarios, entire blocks of new properties have been badly affected by the buy to let mania which again mean that owner occupiers lose out due to a high proportion of ghost landlords who won't pay towards factoring (property management).

I do think landlord registration schemes can flush out and tackle the worst landlords because of their ultimate sanction of preventing the landlord from receiving rent or from letting out property if they are convicted of breaches of housing law.

SALL
08-05-2009, 13:38 PM
I live in a tenement in Scotland and have first hand experience of the problems that result from absent landlords who won't pay towards common repairs, do not have insurance and who let their properties out to anti-social tenants.

All 3 elements are covered by housing law and can be addressed through civil means but the penalties that come from non-compliance with the landlord registration scheme are more effective, in my opinion - it has the power to effectively ban rogue landlords from letting their properties and can issue rent penalty notices to effect this.

I believe the owner occupiers in my tenement think the landlord registration scheme is a positive step to dealing with the most neglectful landlords who aren't deterred by other penalties.

For example, Glasgow Council dealt effectively with one landlord using the legislation from the scottish landlord registration scheme after the landlord had ignored several court orders relating to non-payment of council tax, failure to cooperate with HMO legislation, failure to attend to urgent safety repairs and so on. The ultimate sanction is that tenants are ordered not to pay any rent to a landlord who is deemed not to be fit and proper to let, due to breaches of housing law, etc.

This landlord's former portfolio was situated in an area that has been nicknamed 'ground zero' for the way that greedy absent landlords have failed for decades to contribute towards maintenance of their properties to such an extent that entire streets have been brought to their knees and are regarded as slums.

In other scenarios, entire blocks of new properties have been badly affected by the buy to let mania which again mean that owner occupiers lose out due to a high proportion of ghost landlords who won't pay towards factoring (property management).

I do think landlord registration schemes can flush out and tackle the worst landlords because of their ultimate sanction of preventing the landlord from receiving rent or from letting out property if they are convicted of breaches of housing law.

Why do tenants stick around if they don't like the state of a property? Why rent it in the first place?
Maybe they want top end property at a low end rent?

jeffrey
08-05-2009, 13:42 PM
Why do tenants stick around if they don't like the state of a property? Why rent it in the first place?
Maybe they want top end property at a low end rent?
What, people wanting something for nothing? That'd never happen, surely.

mind the gap
08-05-2009, 14:18 PM
Why do tenants stick around if they don't like the state of a property? Why rent it in the first place?
Most of the disrepair/gas safety/health and safety/lack of heating/vermin infestation problems from which tenants suffer and about which some LLs seem not to care, are not necessarily evident in the property at the commencement of the tenancy. As to why they 'rent it in the first place' (assuming you mean, if it's a rat-hole?) Some people have no choice, except the choice between one rat-hole an another.


Maybe they want top end property at a low end rent? No, I think they just want somewhere clean and decent to live, like most people.

jeffrey
08-05-2009, 14:27 PM
I think they just want somewhere clean and decent to live, like most people.
Probably- but what if (after it started out that way) the property is subsequently rather less so due to T's actions or omissions?

SALL
08-05-2009, 14:42 PM
Most of the disrepair/gas safety/health and safety/lack of heating/vermin infestation problems from which tenants suffer and about which some LLs seem not to care, are not necessarily evident in the property at the commencement of the tenancy. As to why they 'rent it in the first place' (assuming you mean, if it's a rat-hole?) Some people have no choice, except the choice between one rat-hole an another.

No, I think they just want somewhere clean and decent to live, like most people.

I agree that there are some bad LLs around that disregard the well being of their tenants. Which is a disgrace and any decent human being wouldn’t do that. But there are also many bad tenant’s who just take the pi$$ and use disrepair as an excuse to live rent free. Average AST’s are for 6 months. If LL has failed to keep the property in good repair then tenant can simply leave at the end of the term. A tenancy would be periodic by the time a gas safety certificate renewal is required, T can leave if LL doesn’t arrange for a check of the gas equipment.
I can not see any justification of living in a property without paying rent for months and blame the LL for disrepair. If the property is good enough to live in rent free then it is good enough to pay rent for.

theartfullodger
08-05-2009, 16:43 PM
Look guys a few points...as I see them: Others will disagree but...

a) Petitions to #10 are (check 'em out)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-469726/BNP-linked-petition-new-megamosque.html
very popular with the loony fringe... That petition ain't gonna do anything.
b) Unless all the LL organisations & CaB & Shelter agree licensing is a bad thing & lobby government/MPs/MEPs/whoever it will still happen. regardless of it being a good ideaa or not, so
c) Get yourselves organised, get all the LL organisations & CaB & Shelter to come to some sort of semi-rational consensus of what a good licensing scheme would be and go for that: Hopefully that will mitigate the worst effects of a daft scheme.
d) Anything else is like re-arranging the deck-chairs on the SS Titanic!
e) So, join an existing scheme, if there is one, to learn what you're gonna have to do eventually (Memo to self - Look out details of Runymede Licensing scheme.. bugger, more ££)

Cheers Guys!

(A registered Scottish Landlord & Accredited also - better say that & wait for the flak!).

Lawcruncher
08-05-2009, 16:51 PM
The problem is it seems to be working in Scotland.

jta
08-05-2009, 16:56 PM
I agree with Artful there, it wont do nuffink!
With G B keeping one eye on when might be a propitious time to lose the next election, well......, I was going to say he had his other eye on what's happening elsewhere, but eye can't, can eye. :p

mind the gap
08-05-2009, 18:09 PM
Probably- but what if (after it started out that way) the property is subsequently rather less so due to T's actions or omissions?

Then that is a completely different question from whether or not landlords should be licenced and is largely irrelevant here.

However, the answer obviously is :assuming he has taken the trouble to conduct detailed inventories on check-in and check-out, LL has the evidence he needs to deduct costs of restoring property from T's tenancy deposit.

Beeber
08-05-2009, 19:03 PM
Why do tenants stick around if they don't like the state of a property? Why rent it in the first place?
Maybe they want top end property at a low end rent?

My assumptions are that the tenants in the area known as 'ground zero' stick around because they are either immigrants with low or no wages and limited knowledge of housing law or English language, plus HB tenants who are rejected by the majority of landlords and can't be picky. This area has the highest BME ratio, the highest crime rate, the lowest rates of employment and therefore the most vulnerable and undesirable tenants.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/07/11/exclusive-snp-housing-campaigner-exposed-as-slum-landlord-86908-20639199/

The tenants in the block that was originally built as luxury riverside apartments are probably now largely HB tenants because its poor reputation means it is shunned by private tenants. The owner occupiers are pretty much stuck there since their properties no longer sell, caused in part by ghost landlords failing to pay towards factoring (property management). Allegedly, one landlord owns 40 flats in the property and would not pay their factoring fee - a rent penalty notice that prevented them from receiving the rent on their properties until they registered is far more effective than trying to identify who/where to serve papers to take them to court.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2034648.0.0.php#comments
http://www.atfreeforum.com/kingstonquay/viewtopic.php?t=221&sid=f869108ccc0acafea784694510d4cea1&mforum=kingstonquay

The main beneficiaries of landlord registration will be owners who can take action against absent landlords who fail to contribute towards the cost of maintenance and cleaning of common areas. In our tenement, two out 8 flats are rented and both owners failed to pay their share for years and though the landlord forum maintains that rogue landlords are rare, this is an extremely common scenario that plagues many properties in Scotland.

Since landlord registration was brought in, we've been able to make one absent landlord register and get him to pay back his outstanding share of costs for 3 years. It's not perfect, the other absent landlord has also failed to contribute for 2 years but as he lets it out to a relative, doesn't need to register. But we think the landlord registration scheme has helped us make landlords more accountable.

This doesn't mean its without flaws.

http://www.residentiallandlord.co.uk/news1829.html

Garym
10-05-2009, 15:14 PM
This has got to be another tax on people who have the means to pay. Another shining example of the Government taking a molehill and making a mountain out of it in a bid to rake in more cash. Rouge landlords are not a new breed, but instead of barring them from renting out properties when they are caught bang to rights, the Government thinks it better to penalise all decent landlords at the same time.

As has already been said, licencing wont drive rouges out of the market, and the main point I can see is that landlords property income will be more visible to the Inland Revenue.

Whats next from GB the reinstatement of window tax?

Would it not be more straight forward to have a licence automatically granted when a landlord pays membership to a deposit registration scheme? after all, in registering we are showing ourselves to be decent and compliant, so why should we pay more.

If a bad landlord had their licence taken away, surely as they still have their properties they would simply put someone else up as landlord to obtain a licence, Thats what happens with pub landlords.

agent46
10-05-2009, 16:20 PM
and the main point I can see is that landlords property income will be more visible to the Inland Revenue.

.

So licensing would reduce the prevalence of landlords failing to declare rental income, and thereby both decrease the amount of money needed to be spent by HMRC on investigation and enforcement and increase the amount of money available to spend on schools and hospitals?

Now you've pointed that out, I'm convinced. It sounds like a great idea to me - the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned! :D

Garym
10-05-2009, 16:31 PM
So licensing would reduce the prevalence of landlords failing to declare rental income, and thereby both decrease the amount of money needed to be spent by HMRC on investigation and enforcement and increase the amount of money available to spend on schools and hospitals?

Now you've pointed that out, I'm convinced. It sounds like a great idea to me - the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned! :D

So are you in agreement that it has less to do with rogue landlords as far as landlord/tenant relationships go, and more to do with filling the coffers so MPs can buy more kitkats? LOL

Rodent1
10-05-2009, 16:40 PM
I agree with making LL face their responsibilities in everyway, to T & to HMRC.
I also think it should be done in the most cost effective and organised way - bolting it onto DEP pro is an excellent idea - why create another data base and the cost to fund an extra small army to run a "new" and seperate organisation ?

If LL doesn't take a dep then dep schemes not aware of LL - so centralise the lot and while we are at it same data base could be used to record ga safety checks and possibly defaulting tenants as well ?

agent46
10-05-2009, 17:49 PM
So are you in agreement that it has less to do with rogue landlords as far as landlord/tenant relationships go, and more to do with filling the coffers

Whether it is a rare bit of joined-up thinking, or a welcome unitended consequence, either way, so far as the public purse is concerned, it would be a useful ancillary benefit to the stated intention, which is making landlords clean up their act or get the hell out of Dodge.

Izzycam
09-06-2009, 14:47 PM
Is it correct that there is a proposal that if the government bring in a Landlord registry the fee could be £500 per property (fo 5 years).

jeffrey
09-06-2009, 16:24 PM
As it could at most be only a proposal at this stage (even if accurately reported), why worry about a proposed fee for a proposed scheme that NewLabour will never survive to implement?

Izzycam
09-06-2009, 17:03 PM
Because if they are proposing anything like this surely we should register our dissatisfaction before they go any further.
Christ talk about kick a man when he's down.
Hips, high intrest rates for landlords, crazy arrangement fees, local housing allowance, gas certs, soon to be electric certs if they have their way,and now landlord registration at this cost, me thinks it'll soon to be time to pack it all in and get a job in Tesco's, then who's job will it be to house the nation's drop out's, assylum seekers, single mothers and scroungers etc.

Rodent1
09-06-2009, 17:11 PM
Just means that rent will go up as far as i am concerned !

Ericthelobster
09-06-2009, 17:14 PM
Because if they are proposing anything like this surely we should register our dissatisfaction before they go any furtherSo where did you hear about this, anyway?

It does sound a surprisingly large sum; considerably more than originally mooted.

MrAgent
09-06-2009, 18:46 PM
Snot going to happen.

Izzycam
09-06-2009, 19:34 PM
Property Hawk has an article on it, may be just hearsay that's why I'm asking.
Rodent, how much more can you ask.

Krispy
09-06-2009, 20:24 PM
then who's job will it be to house the nation's drop out's, assylum seekers, single mothers and scroungers etc.

I'm sure someone will rent you a room.

Preston
09-06-2009, 20:37 PM
... then who's job will it be to house the nation's ... single mothers ....

Well, there are two you can cross off your list because my mum and my sister both have their own places. Thanks for thinking of them though.


... and scroungers etc ....

I'm surprised that anyone would choose to target this client group specifically, but you live and learn.

Rodent1
10-06-2009, 11:28 AM
then who's job will it be to house the nation's drop out's, assylum seekers, single mothers and scroungers etc.


Well ....if there is going to be a glut of cheap prop about and demand to fill it, I might just consider buying a few more props ;)

jeffrey
10-06-2009, 11:39 AM
But what if those whom you select to populate your cheap properties can't/won't pay your rent (what with them apparently being 'the nation's drop out's [sic], assylum [sic] seekers, single mothers and scroungers etc.)'?

Mrs Mug
10-06-2009, 11:46 AM
Is it correct that there is a proposal that if the government bring in a Landlord registry the fee could be £500 per property (fo 5 years).

There's an article in today's Independent newspaper, which says it would be about £50 a property.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/house-and-home/property/my-rental-was-a-nightmare-1700708.html

mike27
10-06-2009, 12:40 PM
Just come across this debate on the landlord licence. The NLA (http://blog.propertyhawk.co.uk/2009/06/nla-capitulates-to-landlord-licence.html) seems to be arguing a TV style licence makes sense. Bonkers!

mind the gap
10-06-2009, 14:08 PM
Just come across this debate on the landlord licence. The NLA (http://blog.propertyhawk.co.uk/2009/06/nla-capitulates-to-landlord-licence.html) seems to be arguing a TV style licence makes sense. Bonkers!

Why do you think it is a TV style licence?

I am at a loss as to why you think it is 'bonkers' for a landlords' professional association to be in favour of some kind of regulation. Theirs is an industry in which depressingly large numbers of very unprofessional landlords are operating, often putting tenants' wellbeing and safety at risk.

You would not want unqualified and unlicensed teachers educating your children, would you? Or doctors treating you who don't have to register or obey a code of professional ethics? Or a gas engineer who is not subject to a regulatory code which ensures he is safe to mess with your gas boiler? Or chefs in restaurants who poison you?

Housing is, arguably, just as important to people's lives as education, the food they buy, their health and gas safety in their homes. Just because some landlords see providing accommodation purely as a profitable milch cow does not mean it's right, does it?

jeffrey
10-06-2009, 14:27 PM
So should there need to be a licence to sell food?

mike27
10-06-2009, 14:36 PM
to breath, a licence to breath perhaps.

Remember the licence is no measure of good, bad, professional, indifferent.

Its just a licence to let.

westminster
10-06-2009, 14:39 PM
There are already many laws regulating private letting, such as the Housing Health & Safety Rating (which can be enforced by local authorities), deposit protection, anti-harassment laws, compulsory gas safety certificate, etc.

So I don't know what additional purpose a LL licence would serve to achieve. It just seems like yet another exercise in raking in cash from an easy target and generally interfering. Rogue LLs will always find a way to stay under the radar and resources would be better spent on targeting the rogues under existing laws, not rounding up the majority of law-abiding LLs. More laws are not the answer.

jeffrey
10-06-2009, 14:41 PM
Too many things now need licensing. HMG should just stop making unnecessary and ill-conceived laws. Why cannot politicians leave people to live as unrestrictedly as civil life allows? Fewer rules, please!

mind the gap
10-06-2009, 17:07 PM
to breath, a licence to breath perhaps.

Remember the licence is no measure of good, bad, professional, indifferent.

Its just a licence to let.

Perhaps a licence to spell would be a good idea :rolleyes:
Can we take it you mean a licence to breathe, (not breath)?

Please don't tell me what to remember. Apart from anything else, this licence doesn't even exist yet in England and Wales. Your reaction seems a bit knee-jerky.

mind the gap
10-06-2009, 17:09 PM
So should there need to be a licence to sell food?

What do you mean - should there need to be?

There is.

Izzycam
10-06-2009, 17:46 PM
Because if they are proposing anything like this surely we should register our dissatisfaction before they go any further.
Christ talk about kick a man when he's down.
Hips, high intrest rates for landlords, crazy arrangement fees, local housing allowance, gas certs, soon to be electric certs if they have their way,and now landlord registration at this cost, me thinks it'll soon to be time to pack it all in and get a job in Tesco's, then who's job will it be to house the nation's drop out's, assylum seekers, single mothers and scroungers etc.

I didn't actually describe these people in a derogatory way, they are what they are.....
In other words this section of society are more likely to be claiming "Local Housing Allowance" and so will find it much more difficult to obtain housing from private landlords because of this.
I have nothing against single mothers at all, in fact my best friend was a single mother left high and dry by a man who never knew the meaning of the word responsibility.
She ended up in private landlord accommodation, paid for by the council,whilst studying, she is now a highly successful lecturer, who uses her spare time to run a drama group for underprivileged kids.

jeffrey
11-06-2009, 10:09 AM
What do you mean - should there need to be?

There is.
But I was asking should there need to be? Apart from local authority Health Inspectors, why licence vendors as such?

mind the gap
11-06-2009, 10:27 AM
But I was asking should there need to be? Apart from local authority Health Inspectors, why licence vendors as such?

You are really confusing me now!

Who are licence vendors?

May one assume, from the way you have spelt it, that 'licence' is being used here as a noun?

Obfuscate
22-06-2009, 11:28 AM
It is the Landlords and Law Lords that have driven up property prices and rewritten housing laws to give the little man in the street little chance of a secure undisturbed right to live in peace in his own home.

The average cost of a house in 1984 was 28K what is the average price now?

jeffrey
22-06-2009, 12:08 PM
What drove up property prices was human greed, pure and simple (well, not so pure).
You mention the Law Lords; how did House of Lords judgments affect that?

Obfuscate
22-06-2009, 12:25 PM
What drove up property prices was human greed, pure and simple (well, not so pure).
You mention the Law Lords; how did House of Lords judgments affect that?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd970521/mann01.htm

Just one of many housing law changes to give Landlords an unfair advantage imho.

I love the bit about green or blue paper, or was it pink paper. :)

Edit: What drove up property prices was the engineered limited supply and demand and the landlords ability to be able to pay a little more for a property only to recover the difference from some poor unwitting tenant.

This also served the purpose of closing out the market for first time buyers whose only alternative was the rental market, a vicious circle established henceforth.

jeffrey
22-06-2009, 13:19 PM
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199798/ldjudgmt/jd970521/mann01.htm

Just one of many housing law changes to give Landlords an unfair advantage imho.
Aha- so you mean the House of Lords as a legislative body, not the Law Lords as the final appellate body.

Obfuscate
22-06-2009, 13:57 PM
^ Indeed.

The Law Lords in fact ignored their own directions / decision as the final appellate body in the aforementioned judgement by opposing their prior ratification of the Housing Act 1988!!

A point I was really looking forward to raising in their Lordships House. :)

The result was a different modern approach, see below...

http://www.39essex.com/documents/VN_seminar_Contracts_handout_310304_FINAL.pdf

teeps
03-12-2009, 14:18 PM
I haven't seen any articles or information recently about the proposal to require landlords to be licensed.does anyone know anything about this issue?

Moderator1
03-12-2009, 16:33 PM
To keep this thread focussed, less-serious posts have been moved (or copied) to a 'Take A Break' thread:
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=24393

TBPL
09-12-2009, 16:45 PM
In a recent article on our uk property, guest blogger Sharon Crossland, discussed the case for landlord licensing (http://www.thebigpropertylist.com/2009/12/yes-to-landlord-licensing.html) - but do you think this would be beneficial for the industry or more red tape? Punishing the many to edge out the few or a step towards a more professinal approach?

p_cas
09-12-2009, 16:51 PM
I'd be happy with LL licensing if tenants were also licensed i.e. rent payment guaranteed by government department with a 3x penalty if tenant breaks contract.

It needs to be fair on both sides.

TBPL
09-12-2009, 17:48 PM
A letting agent said to me 4 years ago that he thought it would soon be amlomst impossible for a private landlored to let residential property due to regulation - that was before the HMO rules and deposit protection shcemes. He disapeared 2 years ago with rent and deosits for about 30 properties so it turns out its not always possible through an agent either ;-)

Two interesting articles on landlord licensing below...

Landlordlaw blog:
http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2009/12/06/hmo-licensing-in-cathays-ward-cardiff/

Big Property Blog:
http://www.thebigpropertylist.com/2009/12/yes-to-landlord-licensing.html