How One Landlord Restructured £5m of Debt with Commercial Finance

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

How One Landlord Restructured £5m of Debt with Commercial Finance

Large portfolios can generate significant income – but they also carry significant debt. Managing that debt effectively is crucial to maintaining cash flow and long-term sustainability. This case study shows how one landlord successfully restructured £5m of borrowing using commercial finance, reducing pressure and securing a stronger financial footing.

The Challenge

A landlord owned a portfolio of 25 properties with £5m of outstanding borrowing across multiple lenders. Rising interest rates and fragmented loan expiries were creating cash flow strain. Monthly payments were rising, and the risk of covenant breaches was increasing. The landlord needed a solution that simplified debt management and reduced pressure on liquidity.

The Solution – Portfolio Restructuring

An NACFB broker recommended consolidating the various loans into a single commercial facility. This involved:

• Refinancing all existing loans under one lender with a structured portfolio facility.
• Extending loan terms to reduce monthly repayments and smooth cash flow.
• Negotiating covenants that reflected the portfolio’s overall performance rather than strict per-property stress tests.
• Freeing up equity in selected properties to create a liquidity buffer for future resilience.

The Outcome

The landlord successfully refinanced the £5m debt into a single facility at 65% loan-to-value. Monthly payments fell by 20%, administration was simplified, and a £250,000 cash buffer was released. This improved resilience against rate rises and gave the landlord flexibility to pursue new opportunities.

Lessons Learned

• Think holistically – managing debt across an entire portfolio gives more flexibility than addressing each property in isolation.
• Liquidity buffers matter – releasing equity strategically can protect against future shocks.
• Broker expertise is critical – the NACFB broker’s lender relationships ensured covenants were realistic and commercially workable.

Why This Matters for Landlords

Many landlords still manage debt piecemeal, with multiple lenders and maturities. This creates unnecessary complexity and vulnerability. Portfolio-level refinancing through commercial lenders can reduce costs, improve liquidity, and protect long-term stability.

Conclusion and Takeaway

Commercial finance is not just for new acquisitions – it is a powerful tool for restructuring existing debt. With the right approach, even large and complex portfolios can be refinanced in ways that reduce risk and strengthen resilience.

Next Steps

If you would like to explore restructuring your own borrowing with an NACFB member broker, please complete the short form below and a consultant will be in touch.

/* “function”==typeof InitializeEditor,callIfLoaded:function(o){return!(!gform.domLoaded||!gform.scriptsLoaded||!gform.themeScriptsLoaded&&!gform.isFormEditor()||(gform.isFormEditor()&&console.warn(“The use of gform.initializeOnLoaded() is deprecated in the form editor context and will be removed in Gravity Forms 3.1.”),o(),0))},initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.callIfLoaded(o)||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.scriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),document.addEventListener(“gform/theme/scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.themeScriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,()=>{gform.domLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}))},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,r,e,t)},addFilter:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,r,e,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,r){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,r)},removeFilter:function(o,r,e){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,r,e)},addHook:function(o,r,e,t,n){null==gform.hooks[o][r]&&(gform.hooks[o][r]=[]);var d=gform.hooks[o][r];null==n&&(n=r+”_”+d.length),gform.hooks[o][r].push({tag:n,callable:e,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(r,o,e){var t;if(e=Array.prototype.slice.call(e,1),null!=gform.hooks[r][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[r][o]).sort(function(o,r){return o.priority-r.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==r?t.apply(null,e):e[0]=t.apply(null,e)})),”filter”==r)return e[0]},removeHook:function(o,r,t,n){var e;null!=gform.hooks[o][r]&&(e=(e=gform.hooks[o][r]).filter(function(o,r,e){return!!(null!=n&&n!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][r]=e)}});
/* ]]> */

/* = 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_579′);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_579′).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery(‘html’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + parseInt(jQuery(‘body’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass(‘gform_validation_error’)){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).addClass(‘gform_validation_error’);} else {jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).removeClass(‘gform_validation_error’);}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_579′).val();gformInitSpinner( 579, ‘https://www.property118.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg’, true );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [579, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_579′] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [579]);window[‘gf_submitting_579′] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery(‘#gform_confirmation_message_579′).text());}else{jQuery(‘#gform_579′).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(“gform_pre_post_render”, [{ formId: “579”, currentPage: “current_page”, abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_wrapper_579″ ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( “span” ); visibilitySpan.id = “gform_visibility_test_579″; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( “afterend”, visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_visibility_test_579″ ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 579, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === ‘attributes’ && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ ‘style’, ‘class’ ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );
/* ]]> */

Published: 31 December 2025

The post How One Landlord Restructured £5m of Debt with Commercial Finance appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: How One Landlord Restructured £5m of Debt with Commercial Finance

No final decision on EPC requirements for short-term holiday lets

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

No final decision on EPC requirements for short-term holiday lets

The government has said no final decision has been made over whether short-term holiday lets will be included in energy performance certificate (EPC) targets.

The government has proposed, but not yet made law all private rented properties will need to meet EPC C targets by 2030 and 2028 for new tenancies.

The government claim they are committed to a balance of “supporting tourism and reaching net zero goals”.

No final decisions have been made

Liberal Democrat MP Charlie Maynard asked the government: “What assessment they have made of the potential impact of changes to requirements for EPC certificates on properties used as short term holiday lets.”

In response, Labour MP Michael Shanks, said: “The recent consultation on increasing minimum energy efficiency standards in the domestic private rented sector sought views on whether short-term lets should be included in the scope of our proposals for rented homes to achieve Energy Performance Certificate C or equivalent by 2030, to help ensure a consistent standard across all private rented properties.

“No final decisions have been made, and the government has proposed to maintain a range of exemptions available to landlords to ensure that required investment is fair and proportionate.

“The government remains committed to taking an evidence-based approach and will consider the balance between supporting tourism and reaching our net zero goals.”

The government is expected to release its findings from the EPC consultation in due course.

The post No final decision on EPC requirements for short-term holiday lets appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: No final decision on EPC requirements for short-term holiday lets

Government insists selective licensing and PRS Database serve different purposes

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Government insists selective licensing and PRS Database serve different purposes

A peer has raised concerns over the potential overlap between selective licensing schemes and the upcoming Private Rented Sector (PRS) Database.

In a written question, Lord Truscott asked whether the government has assessed whether the PRS Database, to be introduced under the Renters’ Rights Act, would duplicate existing selective licensing schemes.

However, the government has insisted that selective licensing schemes and the PRS Database serve different purposes.

Selective licensing and the Private Rented Sector Database have different purposes

Lord Truscott asked the government: “What assessment they have made of whether local authority selective licensing for residential properties will duplicate the private rented sector database in the Renters’ Rights Act 2025; and what assessment they have made of the impact of each of those schemes on costs for landlords and tenants.”

In response, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary under-secretary for housing, said: “Selective licensing and the Private Rented Sector Database have different purposes. Unlike the Database, selective licensing schemes aim to target specific local issues by enabling more intensive proactive enforcement strategies.

“We recognise the need to keep requirements for landlords proportionate and fair. While Database registration brings some additional requirements, we are committed to ensuring these remain reasonable.

“We will continue to review the use of selective licensing as we develop the Private Rented Sector Database, refining the way the two systems work together.”

All landlords will need to sign up for the database

Under the Renters’ Rights Act, all landlords will need to sign up for the database, which will include information about their properties that tenants can access.

If a landlord lets or advertises a property without it first being registered on the database, they can be issued with a civil penalty of up to £7,000 or a £40,000 fine if they provide fraudulent information to the database.

As previously reported, on Property118, the government previously hinted at combining the registration process for the PRS database and Ombudsman, but stopped short of confirming whether landlords will be required to pay separate fees for each scheme.

The post Government insists selective licensing and PRS Database serve different purposes appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Government insists selective licensing and PRS Database serve different purposes

Non-Disclosure and Misrepresentation – Why Insurers Decline Claims

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Non-Disclosure and Misrepresentation – Why Insurers Decline Claims

One of the most frustrating experiences for landlords is having an insurance claim declined. In many cases, the reason is non-disclosure or misrepresentation at the point of purchase or renewal. Put simply, insurers expect you to provide accurate information about the risk. If key facts are omitted or misstated, they may reduce a payout or refuse it altogether. This article explains what landlords need to disclose, common pitfalls, and how to avoid problems.

What Is Non-Disclosure?

Non-disclosure occurs when a landlord fails to tell the insurer something that could affect their decision to offer cover or the price charged. Even if unintentional, it can still void a claim.

Examples include:

• Not declaring that a property is an HMO.
• Failing to mention past claims or subsidence history.
• Not disclosing tenancy types (e.g. students, DSS, asylum seekers) if specifically asked.
• Leaving out building works or major refurbishments.

What Is Misrepresentation?

Misrepresentation is providing information that is false or misleading. This can be deliberate, careless, or even accidental.

Examples include:

• Stating that the property is occupied when it is vacant.
• Declaring that all certificates (gas, electrics, alarms) are in place when they are not.
• Claiming there are no trees nearby when they are within influencing distance.

The Insurance Act 2015 – Duty of Fair Presentation

Since 2015, landlords have been bound by the Insurance Act 2015, which requires a “fair presentation of the risk”. This means:

• Disclosing every material circumstance you know or ought to know.
• Presenting information clearly and accessibly.
• Not withholding details a prudent insurer would want to know.

If you fail in this duty, insurers have proportionate remedies:

• If deliberate/reckless – the policy can be voided with no refund.
• If careless – claims may be reduced proportionately or excesses increased.
• If innocent – claims should still be paid, but disputes may arise.

Common Pitfalls for Landlords

• Assuming “they didn’t ask, so it doesn’t matter” – material facts should be disclosed even if not asked directly.
• Relying on memory – forgetting old claims, prior works, or subsidence can still count as non-disclosure.
• Not updating changes – converting to an HMO, new tenants, or property refurbishments must be notified at once.
• Failing to read policy documents – many landlords don’t check the statement of fact they agree to at inception.

How to Protect Your Claims

• Keep a risk file for each property: certificates, licences, inspections, claims history.
• Declare all material facts – even if you are unsure whether they matter.
• Update your insurer promptly if something changes during the policy term.
• Check your statement of fact at each renewal – correct errors before cover incepts.
• Use a specialist landlord broker who understands property nuances and can frame disclosures correctly.

Case Example

A landlord submitted a claim for malicious damage after tenants vandalised a property. The insurer declined because the property had been converted into an HMO without notification. Although the landlord argued the change had only recently occurred, the insurer classed it as material non-disclosure. The claim was rejected, and the landlord had to pay for repairs themselves. The lesson: always disclose material changes as soon as they happen.

Final Thoughts

Most declined landlord insurance claims could have been avoided with accurate disclosure. The Insurance Act 2015 gives insurers proportionate remedies, but the safest route is full transparency. Treat disclosure as part of risk management, and you will avoid the most common reason for declined claims.

Request your quote or call-back

The most efficient way to get a personal quote with the best price and cover possible is to call the team on 01832 770965 so we can focus on your enquiry when you are ready and sitting down with your portfolio details to hand.

Alternatively, you can use the form below to request one of our team to give you a call back.

/* “function”==typeof InitializeEditor,callIfLoaded:function(o){return!(!gform.domLoaded||!gform.scriptsLoaded||!gform.themeScriptsLoaded&&!gform.isFormEditor()||(gform.isFormEditor()&&console.warn(“The use of gform.initializeOnLoaded() is deprecated in the form editor context and will be removed in Gravity Forms 3.1.”),o(),0))},initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.callIfLoaded(o)||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.scriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),document.addEventListener(“gform/theme/scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.themeScriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,()=>{gform.domLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}))},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,r,e,t)},addFilter:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,r,e,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,r){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,r)},removeFilter:function(o,r,e){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,r,e)},addHook:function(o,r,e,t,n){null==gform.hooks[o][r]&&(gform.hooks[o][r]=[]);var d=gform.hooks[o][r];null==n&&(n=r+”_”+d.length),gform.hooks[o][r].push({tag:n,callable:e,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(r,o,e){var t;if(e=Array.prototype.slice.call(e,1),null!=gform.hooks[r][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[r][o]).sort(function(o,r){return o.priority-r.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==r?t.apply(null,e):e[0]=t.apply(null,e)})),”filter”==r)return e[0]},removeHook:function(o,r,t,n){var e;null!=gform.hooks[o][r]&&(e=(e=gform.hooks[o][r]).filter(function(o,r,e){return!!(null!=n&&n!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][r]=e)}});
/* ]]> */

/* = 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_9′);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_9′).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery(‘html’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + parseInt(jQuery(‘body’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_9′).html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass(‘gform_validation_error’)){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_9′).addClass(‘gform_validation_error’);} else {jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_9′).removeClass(‘gform_validation_error’);}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_9′).val();gformInitSpinner( 9, ‘https://www.property118.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg’, true );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [9, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_9′] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_9′).replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [9]);window[‘gf_submitting_9′] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery(‘#gform_confirmation_message_9′).text());}else{jQuery(‘#gform_9′).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(“gform_pre_post_render”, [{ formId: “9”, currentPage: “current_page”, abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_wrapper_9″ ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( “span” ); visibilitySpan.id = “gform_visibility_test_9″; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( “afterend”, visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_visibility_test_9″ ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 9, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === ‘attributes’ && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ ‘style’, ‘class’ ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );
/* ]]> */

Publication date: Tuesday 30 December 2025

The post Non-Disclosure and Misrepresentation – Why Insurers Decline Claims appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Non-Disclosure and Misrepresentation – Why Insurers Decline Claims

Why leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations must be enacted

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Why leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations must be enacted

Article by Katherine Simpson, Partner at Edwin Coe LLP

The objectives of the Draft Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill involve enacting the remaining Law Commission recommendations on leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage.

What issues will this present to professionals and their clients?

In July 2020 the Law Commission published three reports containing over 100 recommendations to enhance leaseholders’ rights to extend their leases, buy their freeholds and take over the management of their buildings.

24 May 2024 in the pre-election wash-up, a somewhat modest number of the Law Commission’s recommendations were enacted by the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LAFRA).

In July 2024 the Government announced that it would further reform the leasehold system including enacting the remaining recommendations relating to leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage, essentially to make enfranchisement easier and cheaper, and is expected to publish a draft Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill imminently.

“Cheaper” relates to the valuation methodology and costs, which feature in LAFRA but which are the subject of a landlord driven challenge.

“Easier” relates to the qualifying criteria and the process, which have not been addressed, save for the abolition of the two-year ownership requirement for extended lease and freehold house claims, and the increase to 50% of the 25% limit on commercial parts for Right to Manage claims.

Criteria changes were absent

Changes to the qualifying criteria for collective enfranchisement claims were conspicuous by their absence.

The Law Commission recommended that the qualifying criteria for such claims should be relaxed, enabling more groups of leaseholders to get together to acquire the freehold interest in their building.

The recommendations included increasing the 25% limit on commercial parts to 50%, and so consistent with Right to Manage claims, and that, also in line with Right to Manage claims, there should no longer be a two flat limit to enable a leaseholder to qualify.

The two flat limit was originally enacted to prevent investors from qualifying for a collective claim, the thrust of the initial legislation being to protect homeowners as opposed to investors.

The unintended consequence of that limit meant that homeowners were effectively deprived of their rights.

Furthermore, it was recommended that everyone should have the right to participate and so avoiding disputes between groups of leaseholders who deliberately left fellow leaseholders out of the party, the objective being to make collective enfranchisement a collaborative process and avoid those with deeper pockets taking advantage of others.

Make the procedure easier

The Law Commission also identified the need to make the procedure easier and made a number of recommendations with that in mind.

In particular, claimants are often at the receiving end of “cat and mouse games” driven by landlords seeking to defeat claims on technicalities, increasing costs, and the attendant delays resulting in higher valuations.

It was accordingly recommended that there should be a prescribed form of notice and response, with the Tribunal having greater powers to remedy disputes.

In the same vein, assignments of the benefit of enfranchisement claims were recommended to be automatic, avoiding the potential for disputes as to the validity of an assignment.

This was identified as another area of the process that frequently provoked tactical displays by landlords at the expense of claimants both in terms of costs and valuation outcome.

The effect of the procedural amendments may well be that claimants can avoid having to instruct solicitors with specialist enfranchisement expertise, instead instructing solicitors with general leasehold expertise and at a lower cost.

Only if these recommendations are enacted will the Government have achieved their aim of making enfranchisement cheaper and easier.

Katherine Simpson is a Partner at Edwin Coe LLP and a member of the Association of Leasehold Enfranchisement Practitioners (ALEP).

The post Why leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations must be enacted appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Why leasehold enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations must be enacted

The continuing Renters’ Rights Act nightmare – what happens if the first month’s rent isn’t paid?

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

The continuing Renters’ Rights Act nightmare – what happens if the first month’s rent isn’t paid?

In a Property118 comment on 27 December, member “Spock” said:

“I have a student property. Traditionally, I have always asked for the rent payment for the first month a few days before the start of the tenancy start date. I never hand out keys until I know that everyone has paid the first month’s rent. If I can’t receive any rent before day 1, then if even one person hasn’t paid, then I can’t hand out any keys, which obviously creates problems. Have I read this correctly ? Am I unable to accept any rent before day 1?”

I’m guessing there may be other landlords wondering this. Here is my answer.

You don’t have to wait for the rent until Day 1, but you must not refuse to hand over the keys after the agreement has been signed. If you do, there is a real risk that you may have to pay fines (called “penalties”) of up to £40,000.

When both landlord and tenant have signed a tenancy agreement for a new Assured Tenancy, the tenancy is said to have been “entered into”. Usually, the agreement will be dated when the last person who is a party to the agreement has signed. If the commencement date of the tenancy is a later date then the time between the two dates is called the “permitted pre-tenancy period”.

You can accept rent in advance during (not before) the permitted pre-tenancy period, just as you have done in the past. This is limited to one month’s rent or 28 days rent if the rent payment period is less than a month. You can also accept payment of the agreed deposit up to the cap.

So far there is not really much if any, change to what you have been doing. But after the tenancy has been entered into you cannot refuse to hand over the keys even if the tenant never pays the first month’s rent, because that amounts to preventing occupation, which is equivalent to unlawful eviction or unlawful exclusion. That is an offence under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and now carries civil penalties of up to £40,000 under section 58 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 as an alternative to prosecution.

Make no mistake, refusing to hand over the keys is a serious offence.

If the tenant does not pay the first month’s rent and has moved in, then you can issue a notice under s.8 of the Housing Act 1988 specifying ground 10 and giving 4 weeks’ notice before you start court proceedings. But ground 10 is discretionary. The judge might refuse to grant an order for possession, or give the tenant time to pay, so that you would have to go back to the court again if the tenant never pays any rent.

Alternatively, you can wait until there are three months’ rent arrears and then give a four‑week section 8 notice specifying Ground 8 (serious rent arrears). You could also specify Ground 11 (persistent delay in paying rent). Note that there must be 3 months’ rent outstanding both on the date of the Section 8 notice and on the date of the hearing.

Tenants who understand this and want to game the system can, in practice, go a long time without paying rent.

Suppose the landlord and tenant meet on 1st May 2026 and both sign an agreement for a tenancy to start on 14th May. The landlord cannot ask for any rent until the agreement has been entered into. As soon as it is signed, the landlord asks for the first month’s rent, expecting the tenant to transfer the money there and then because that is what the agreement says they should do. The tenant says they will pay it on the day they move in. On 14th May, they meet at the property, and the landlord asks for the rent. The tenant says it will be paid the next day. The landlord cannot refuse to hand over the keys. They must give the keys to the tenant and let them move in.

The rent never arrives. The landlord gives 4 weeks’ notice specifying ground 10 expiring (say) 12th June and issues proceedings the next day. The court lists a hearing date of 10 August. The tenant has never paid any rent, but the court has discretion, and after hearing the tenant’s sad tale of woe, the judge grants 3 weeks to pay.

The tenant never pays. On 1 September, there are 3 months’ arrears outstanding, so rather than pursue the original claim, the landlord serves a new notice specifying ground 8 and on 30 September issues proceedings for a second time.

The hearing is on 25 November, and this time the court does grant an order for possession. The landlord pays to transfer the claim to the High Court for a writ of possession, and the bailiffs arrive at the property on 27 January 2027. The tenant has gone and has left the property in perhaps not quite as good a state as it was on 1 May 2026. The landlord has had no rent since the last tenant left, many months ago; meanwhile, they have been paying the mortgage, the insurance, and all the costs of the proceedings.

The tenant has lived rent-free for about 8 months.

All this was explained to the government during the committee stage of the Bill, but they ignored it.

Michael

The post The continuing Renters’ Rights Act nightmare – what happens if the first month’s rent isn’t paid? appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: The continuing Renters’ Rights Act nightmare – what happens if the first month’s rent isn’t paid?

Government claim LHA rates will remain under review despite freeze

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Government claim LHA rates will remain under review despite freeze

The government claim it will keep Local Housing Allowance (LHA) rates under review.

In answer to a written question, Homelessness Minister Alison McGovern says the government is working to support private renters with their rent.

The news comes after the government froze LHA rates for the second year in a row in the Autumn Budget.

LHA haven’t kept pace with rent prices

LHA determines how much rent support claimants can receive, and since the rates were frozen in April, they haven’t kept pace with rent prices.

Labour MP Jim Machon asked the government in a written question, “What assessment has the government made of levels of homelessness relative to (a) levels of affordability of rented accommodation and (b) rates of local housing allowance.”

According to government data, almost 1.7 million private rented households across the country were receiving housing cost support as of August this year, and 53% of these households faced a gap between their housing benefit payments and their monthly rent.

Keep LHA rates under review

In response, Ms McGovern said: “A lack of affordable housing is a key driver of homelessness. This government plan to deliver a decade of renewal for social and affordable housing, including with £39 billion funding for the Social and Affordable Homes Programme.

“We recognise some private renters need support with their rent. That is why we will work across government to keep Local Housing Allowance rates under review in order to deliver on the government’s priorities, including maintaining the long-term fiscal sustainability of the welfare system.”

The government have also pledged to prevent homelessness by the end of this Parliament through its new homelessness strategy.

This includes halving the number of long-term rough sleepers, ending the unlawful use of B&Bs for families, and preventing more households from becoming homeless in the first place.

The post Government claim LHA rates will remain under review despite freeze appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Government claim LHA rates will remain under review despite freeze

Landlords demand efficiency and cost control for new enforced regulation?

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Landlords demand efficiency and cost control for new enforced regulation?

The government is imposing new regulations on new landlords’ databases. As responsible landlords, we demand efficiency and proportionality in compliance.

A recent excellent article by the property118 team pointed to the disproportionate nature of regulation. >> https://www.property118.com/deposit-disputes-remain-rare-despite-rising-rents-tds/

The data points to the schemes holding 4.7 million deposits amounting to schemes holding £5.5 billion in cash, around £1,100 per tenancy.

Remarkably, only 1% of deposits are disputed, amounting to £55 million in dispute, but the suppliers can presumably earn interest on the deposits. Assuming this is 5% they earn £275 million a year. Five times the disputed deposits simply for putting the deposit in a bank.

So, if the government are demanding new databases for registration of all and bad landlords, these companies have plenty of money to cover their production and already hold 5 million landlord records.

Landlords demand that the government ensure any regulatory databases are provided free for landlords and tenants at the point of use. The money doesn’t need to be found; it is already presumably being made by the companies supplying the DPS schemes.

Let’s hope the government doesn’t run another cash cow for its preferred computer alliance and instead ensures an existing supplier extends their existing landlord database, paid for by existing DPS schemes providers. Free of Charge to cover any new regulation for landlords’ registration. If charges are made, Landlords would likely pass these onto tenants in any case.

What does the Property118 community think?

Paul

The post Landlords demand efficiency and cost control for new enforced regulation? appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Landlords demand efficiency and cost control for new enforced regulation?

From Stalled Project to Success – How a Landlord Used Bridging to Complete a Deal

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

From Stalled Project to Success – How a Landlord Used Bridging to Complete a Deal

Not every property project goes to plan. Unexpected costs, tight deadlines, and lender withdrawals can stall even the most experienced landlord’s plans. This case study shows how bridging finance, when used strategically, turned a stalled project into a success – and highlights the lessons other landlords can learn.

The Challenge

A landlord had agreed to purchase a semi-commercial property at auction. The property required refurbishment before it would qualify for a term mortgage. Their original lender withdrew just weeks before completion, leaving the landlord at risk of losing the deposit and the property.

The Solution – Bridging Finance

An NACFB broker stepped in to arrange bridging finance. The facility provided:

• Fast access to funds to complete the auction purchase on time.
• Up to 70% loan-to-value, with interest rolled into the loan to protect cash flow.
• Flexibility to cover refurbishment works required to bring the property up to mortgageable standard.

The loan term was set at 12 months, giving the landlord time to complete works and plan a refinance.

The Outcome

Within eight months, the property was fully refurbished and re-let. A commercial lender then refinanced the property onto a long-term facility at a higher valuation, allowing the bridging loan to be repaid in full. The uplift in value and income covered the cost of the bridging finance and improved long-term returns.

Lessons Learned

• Always evidence the exit – the refinance was pre-agreed in principle before the bridging loan completed.
• Factor in contingency – the landlord built a budget buffer for unexpected works, avoiding liquidity pressure.
• Use the right broker – the NACFB broker matched the case with a lender comfortable with both the property type and the refurbishment plan.

Why This Matters for Landlords

Bridging finance is not cheap, but in the right circumstances it can save deals and unlock value. This case demonstrates that when applied with discipline, bridging can be a tool for opportunity rather than risk.

Conclusion and Takeaway

Stalled projects do not have to end in losses. With the right broker and lender, bridging finance can turn setbacks into successes. The key is having a clear plan, realistic numbers, and an exit strategy that is achievable and evidenced.

Next Steps

If you would like to explore bridging finance options for your own projects, please complete the short form below and an NACFB member broker will be in touch.

/* “function”==typeof InitializeEditor,callIfLoaded:function(o){return!(!gform.domLoaded||!gform.scriptsLoaded||!gform.themeScriptsLoaded&&!gform.isFormEditor()||(gform.isFormEditor()&&console.warn(“The use of gform.initializeOnLoaded() is deprecated in the form editor context and will be removed in Gravity Forms 3.1.”),o(),0))},initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.callIfLoaded(o)||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.scriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),document.addEventListener(“gform/theme/scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.themeScriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,()=>{gform.domLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}))},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,r,e,t)},addFilter:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,r,e,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,r){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,r)},removeFilter:function(o,r,e){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,r,e)},addHook:function(o,r,e,t,n){null==gform.hooks[o][r]&&(gform.hooks[o][r]=[]);var d=gform.hooks[o][r];null==n&&(n=r+”_”+d.length),gform.hooks[o][r].push({tag:n,callable:e,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(r,o,e){var t;if(e=Array.prototype.slice.call(e,1),null!=gform.hooks[r][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[r][o]).sort(function(o,r){return o.priority-r.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==r?t.apply(null,e):e[0]=t.apply(null,e)})),”filter”==r)return e[0]},removeHook:function(o,r,t,n){var e;null!=gform.hooks[o][r]&&(e=(e=gform.hooks[o][r]).filter(function(o,r,e){return!!(null!=n&&n!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][r]=e)}});
/* ]]> */

/* = 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_579′);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_579′).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery(‘html’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + parseInt(jQuery(‘body’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass(‘gform_validation_error’)){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).addClass(‘gform_validation_error’);} else {jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).removeClass(‘gform_validation_error’);}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_579′).val();gformInitSpinner( 579, ‘https://www.property118.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg’, true );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [579, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_579′] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_579′).replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [579]);window[‘gf_submitting_579′] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery(‘#gform_confirmation_message_579′).text());}else{jQuery(‘#gform_579′).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(“gform_pre_post_render”, [{ formId: “579”, currentPage: “current_page”, abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_wrapper_579″ ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( “span” ); visibilitySpan.id = “gform_visibility_test_579″; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( “afterend”, visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_visibility_test_579″ ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 579, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === ‘attributes’ && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ ‘style’, ‘class’ ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );
/* ]]> */

Published: 24 December 2025

The post From Stalled Project to Success – How a Landlord Used Bridging to Complete a Deal appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: From Stalled Project to Success – How a Landlord Used Bridging to Complete a Deal

Council seeks views on plans to license and inspect all HMOs

admin    Uncategorized     agents

Property118

Council seeks views on plans to license and inspect all HMOs

A council has launched a consultation on proposals to introduce additional HMO licensing, which would mean all HMOs in the area would need to be inspected.

Telford and Wrekin Council has launched a 10-week consultation on the proposals and is asking landlords to have their say.

We want to make sure that homes in HMO sector are safe

Currently, in the area, only HMOs accommodating five or more people forming two or more households are subject to mandatory licensing. HMOs housing more than six people also require full planning permission, while those with six or fewer occupants can be established through permitted development rights.

The proposed Article 4 direction would remove the option for landlords of smaller HMOs to use permitted development rights, meaning planning permission would be required for any new HMO regardless of size. The council has said existing HMOs would be unaffected by the planning changes.

The council claim the proposals would allow it to identify the location of all new HMOs, while the additional licensing scheme would focus on improving safety and hazard compliance among landlords.

Councillor Richard Overton, Deputy Leader of Telford and Wrekin Council and Cabinet Member for Highways, Housing and Enforcement, said: “We want to make sure that homes in the HMO sector are safe, well-managed and meet fair standards, and the proposals we’ve put forward are designed to help us achieve that.

“The consultation is now live, and this is the moment when people’s voices are essential. Nothing has been decided yet, and we need residents, landlords and community organisations to tell us what they think so that any future approach is balanced, transparent and genuinely shaped by local people.”

Landlords in the area can view the consultation on Article 4 directions by clicking here and additional licensing by clicking here.

The post Council seeks views on plans to license and inspect all HMOs appeared first on Property118.

View Full Article: Council seeks views on plans to license and inspect all HMOs