Half of tenants have been asked to pay higher rent, says Generation Rent

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Generation Rent has urged the government to impose a rent freeze as it reports that nearly half of private renters faced a rent increase in the last year.

Its poll of 1,074 tenants reveals that nearly half who had lived in their home for longer than a year (45%) have been asked to pay a higher rent. Of those, 81% paid what their landlord asked for, with just 14% able to negotiate a lower rent.

One in five renters (20%) experiencing a rent increase during their current tenancy were asked to pay more than £100 extra per month. Just over half of them paid it (54%), while 28% negotiated a smaller increase and 13% had to move out.

Benefits

It says tenants on benefits are more likely to have been handed an increase in rent, despite Local Housing Allowance being frozen since March 2020; 46% have been asked to pay more compared with 43% of private renters not receiving benefits.

When asked by the pressure group how they would cope with the cost of living crisis, the most common answer among private renters not getting benefits is using their savings (35%) while for private renters getting benefits, 39% answered “don’t know”.

Director Baroness Alicia Kennedy (main picture) says: “Renters are terrified, knowing they face a winter of destitution. Ultimately that will lead to a further rise in evictions and homelessness.

“The government must intervene and temporarily stop landlords from raising the rent, as well as pausing evictions to keep renters in their homes.”

Market rents increased by 11.8% between Q2 2021 and Q2 2022 in the UK, according to Rightmove.

Read more: How to legally increase your rent.

View Full Article: Half of tenants have been asked to pay higher rent, says Generation Rent

Cavity wall insulation to get block down to EPC rating C?

admin    Uncategorized     agents

I have a flat I rent. It is 1 of 4 in a block. It is located on the first floor. The other flat on the same floor is also rented. The 2 flats on the ground floor are both privately owned.

View Full Article: Cavity wall insulation to get block down to EPC rating C?

Renters Reform white paper not fit-for-purpose when it comes to HMOs

admin    Uncategorized     agents

As the government continues to work on the proposed Renters Reform Bill, we will be urging them to reconsider the impact of proposals in the white paper on multiple occupancy properties.

 Although the Bill specifically exempts purpose-built student accommodation

View Full Article: Renters Reform white paper not fit-for-purpose when it comes to HMOs

Landlord faces prosecution after Tribunal uncovers illegal eviction

admin    Uncategorized     agents

A landlord who chucked a tenant out of his unlicensed HMO has been handed a £2,825 Rent Repayment Order by a First Tier Property Tribunal.

Imtiaz Khan admitted that he had not given the tenant notice but instead entered the man’s room without lawful authority and re-let it without properly terminating the tenancy. Newham Council now has to decide whether to bring a criminal prosecution for illegal eviction.

Penalties for such actions can be severe – last week a landlord in Liverpool was given a suspended jail sentence for a similar illegal eviction.

Khan’s six-bedroom HMO in Upton Lane, London, comes under the authority’s mandatory licensing scheme; Khan also admitted that he had not applied for a licence until November 2020 – after the tenant’s application for an RRO.

Legal requirement

The tribunal ruled that Khan was not a professional landlord as he only owned one property, but that as he had been a landlord for more than five years, should have been aware of the legal requirements of licensing.

It heard that he could not substantiate his claim that the tenant owed £1,200 in rent arrears, and which the tenant agreed was £725.

The arrears and the £1,900 paid to the tenant in Universal Credit between August and December 2020 were deducted from his original claim of £5,450.

Read the decision in full.

View Full Article: Landlord faces prosecution after Tribunal uncovers illegal eviction

19% inflation and 6% Bank Base Rate

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Only this week, Citibank predicted that UK inflation would exceed 18% by January next year and that the Bank of England would feel compelled to increase the base rate to 6%.

How many of us are prepared for this?

View Full Article: 19% inflation and 6% Bank Base Rate

Legal case: why should landlords fear Civil Penalties?

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Following the enactment of the Housing and Planning Act in 2016, the government introduced a range of new penalties for the use of local authorities, aimed at speeding up justice when dealing with rogue landlords. One such measure is an alternative to court action known as the civil penalty, a fine issued to landlords, and in some cases agents, depending where the responsibility for breaches of the regulations lies.

Those responsible for the management of HMOs need to be critically aware of their responsibilities under the The Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006 or face fines of up to £30,000.

What’s so alarming about this is a civil penalty fine can be issued for each individual management regulation breached – a feature of the law that means fines can escalate out of control to amount to very considerable sums.

Councils now have these considerable civil penalty powers as an alternative to prosecution for a variety of offences under the Housing Act 2004. These measures are designed to avoid the time consuming process of a criminal prosecution against the landlord or letting agent for offences.

These offences might include: not complying with improvement notices, failure to licence an HMO or failure to comply with a selective licencing scheme notice, an overcrowding notice or notices under the HMO management regulations, breaching a banning order or the right-to-rent regulations.

The landlord or agent subject to such a fine or fines has a right of appeal to the Property Tribunal, the onus being on the local authority to establish that the standard of proof is “beyond reasonable doubt”.

One such case was an Upper Tribunal appeal, that of Sheffield City Council v Hussain (2020) involving breaches of Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006 and the application by the local authority policy of civil penalties totalling £75,000 for several offences.

In this case the landlord was appealing the amount of the fine and whether his speedy carrying out of remedial action and generally complying with improvement notices amounted to mitigation of the offences, offences he did not deny.

Sheffield Council had served improvement notices on Mr Hussain in 2018 to remedy hazards which were breaches of the regulations. The civil penalties were issued for breaches of the regulations relating to: fire safety, defective heating, electrical safety, poorly fitted windows and defective handrails on staircases. These individual penalties came to a total of £75,000.

Mr. Hussain had put forward the argument that he was not the responsible person, not the manager of his HMOs which were two adjoining properties. But the council had determined his liability using its civil penalties policy published on its website.

The policy, the council claimed, followed the statutory guidance, a four-stage assessment:

1. The culpability and track record of the offender

2. The level of potential harm occupiers

3. Any mitigating circumstances to be considered

4. Proportionate adjustments to ensure fairness.

Taking into account the number of defects present, the council had put the level of potential harm at medium. But despite Mr Hussein giving assurances that the property would be brought up to standard without delay, these assurances were not considered enough to overcome the seriousness of the offences.

Mr. Hussein’s had claimed that he had been unaware of the breaches of the regulations in the properties and had never received copies of the notices issued by the council. The Tribunal rejected Mr. Hussein’s claims he had been unaware of the defects or that he had not received the notices. It considered he was liable for each of the offences. but by the time of the first hearing the breaches had been remedied.

After considering the facts, the First Tear Tribunal took the view that there were mitigating factors and reduced the overall penalty total.

The council was not satisfied with this outcome and appealed to the Upper Tribunal which concluded the most important fact was that Mr Hussein was in breach at the date of the service of the improvement notices.

His compliance, thought the Tribunal, was no more than his legal obligation, speedy or not. However, the appeal Tribunal held that a 10% mitigation reduction was justified. The notices had treated the building as two separate HMOs, but the properties were joined and breaches were the same in each, so the Tribunal reduced the overall penalty to £50,000 to reflect this.

View Full Article: Legal case: why should landlords fear Civil Penalties?

One in four landlords will sell-up if ‘no fault’ evictions are abolished

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Government plans to abolish controversial section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions could lead to a quarter of landlords selling their property, research reveals.

A poll of more than 700 landlords gauged reactions to the government’s ‘Fairer Private Rented Sector’

View Full Article: One in four landlords will sell-up if ‘no fault’ evictions are abolished

‘Resentful’ tenants push up malicious damage insurance claims, latest research shows

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Frustrated and resentful tenants pushed up the number of malicious damage claims in lockdown, according to new research.

Total Landlord Insurance reports that landlord insurance claims increased by 13% during the pandemic from 536 to 603, with malicious tenant damage among the fastest growing causes, rising by 50% from 28 to 42 claims between 2019 and 2021.

Storm damage claims saw the biggest jump, up by 93% from 70 claims to 135.

During the pandemic, the average landlord insurance claim size also increased by 29% from £5,773 to £7,429.

A liability

The biggest rise was seen in liability insurance claims, up by 270% from £1,306 to £4,827, while the average claim for storm damage increased by 140%, break-in claims rose by 101%, and claims for underground services went up by 95%.

Melissa Choules (pictured, below), the lead claims specialist at Total Landlord Insurance, says the fact landlords were largely unable to gain access to their properties, along with the direct impact of the pandemic on tenants themselves, may have contributed to an increase in claims.

“With landlords also unable to maintain their rental properties for such a prolonged period, the average size of a claim has also increased as they look to rectify multiple years of damage and wear and tear,” she says.

“It’s also interesting to see such an increase in claims resulting from malicious damage. This could suggest that, during the pandemic, tenants were feeling increasingly frustrated, trapped, and unable to move.

“At the same time, some tenants might have grown to feel resentment towards landlords who still expected them to pay the rent as normal despite significant reductions in income and job security,” adds Choules.

View Full Article: ‘Resentful’ tenants push up malicious damage insurance claims, latest research shows

Rent Smart Wales is ‘failing its users by closing phone lines’

admin    Uncategorized     agents

The National Residential Landlords’ Association (NRLA) has hit out at Rent Smart Wales after concerned landlords contacted them to say the helpline service has been closed.

As a result, NRLA contacted the organisation to discover why the service had been closed.

View Full Article: Rent Smart Wales is ‘failing its users by closing phone lines’

Landlords with leasehold properties in line for Ground Rent rip-off refunds

admin    Uncategorized     agents

More than 5,000 leaseholders – including landlords – could get refunds on their ground rent after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) secured assurances from nine firms that bought freeholds from housing developer Taylor Wimpey.

Those leaseholders who paid a doubled ground rent will receive refunds and the companies have promised to remove the terms from leasehold contracts that cause ground rents to double in price every 10 years and can lead to people being trapped in homes they can’t sell or mortgage.

“All affected leaseholders will now see their ground rents remain at the original amount – when the property was first sold – and this will not increase over time.

Sarah Cardell (main pic), CMA interim chief executive, says: “For years, leaseholders have been plagued by what we believe are unfair practices. That’s why we sought to tackle the problem by launching action against some of the biggest names in the business.”

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Greg Clark, adds: “This is good news that will see thousands of leaseholders get the refunds they are entitled to. We will work with the CMA to continue challenging industry on its practices, so we can ensure more leaseholders get the fair deal they deserve.”

The nine freeholders are: BDP Freehold Ltd, Mortgage Incentive Funds Ltd, The Bridges (Darlington) Management Company Ltd, Bessant Properties Ltd, Brigante Properties Ltd, Furatto Ltd and Long Term Reversions No 1 Ltd, SF Ground Rents No 18 Ltd, SF Ground Rents No 15 Ltd and RMB 102 Ltd, Sarum Properties Ltd and Taylor Court Ltd.

A further four national developers – Crest Nicholson, Redrow, Miller Homes and Vistry – have agreed to work with the companies who bought their freeholds to remove doubling terms.

Read more about leasehold reforms.

View Full Article: Landlords with leasehold properties in line for Ground Rent rip-off refunds