Outlawing "revenge" evictions

[ReallyTired]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29156186

I think that this new law is a good idea, but I am not sure how enforceable it would be in practice. Such a law would need very careful drafting.

Its fair to evict a tenant who refuses access for desperately needed maintaince work? For example my rental contracts allow eviction if the tenant refuses access to do the gas safety certificate. What about if the building needs such major work that it will not be fit for habitiation for months. I feel that if a landlord evicts a tenant to allow work to be done then they should be banned from renting out the property for 2 months.

Should landlords be allowed to raise the rent to fund fixing a major flaw/ improvement? Would this be indirectly be evicting a tenant? Is it fair for a landlord to be allowed to increase the rent for dramatically improving a property? (For example putting in double glazing or a new heating system in place) In my area some landlords have raised rents significantly without any improvements.

There are residental letting tribunals, but the cost of justice is out of reach to many tenants.

As a landlord, I feel the best way forward is to make it illegal to let out a substandard property in the first place. Maybe a property could be inspected and passed as fit for human habitation before the tenant moves in. The only major requirement for a residental let is a yearly gas safety certificate. At the moment landlords have to have an energy performance certificate which I feel is completely useless to anyone. I feel the energy performance certificate could be scrapped and replaced with a certificate of being fit for habitation.

I had an email from Shelter about it - the proposed change looks quite well crafted.

Hang on, I'll dig it out.

"Landlords have a legal responsibility to carry out certain repairs. The Tenancies (Reform) Bill will restrict the use of no-fault eviction notices when landlords are not meeting this responsibility.

"Landlords who have not protected their tenants’ deposit or have not licensed their property when they are required to do so are already prevented from serving no fault eviction notices. This Bill is simply applying the same principle to poor conditions."

Shelter Policy Blog: Tenancies (Reform) Bill

Shelter's guess at the contents of the Bill (which is still in draft):

"Landlords will be prevented from evicting their tenant(s) in response to a local authority intervention about the condition of their property. They will be unable to serve a no-fault ‘Section 21’ eviction notice for 6 months following the issue of a local authority improvement or hazard awareness notice.

"Landlords will be prevented from evicting their tenant(s) in response to a legitimate, written complaint about the condition of the property. Local authorities will have to confirm that this complaint is legitimate."

Looks a good bill to me.

Not as proactive as an annual fit-for-habitation certificate, which would be nice. But better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, as some landlords have been wielding.

From the landlord POV, it should only have any impact on landlords of unfit properties who then try to evict.

"
Landlords will be prevented from evicting their tenant(s) in response to a local authority intervention about the condition of their property. They will be unable to serve a no-fault ‘Section 21’ eviction notice for 6 months following the issue of a local authority improvement or hazard awareness notice.
Landlords will be prevented from evicting their tenant(s) in response to a legitimate, written complaint about the condition of the property. Local authorities will have to confirm that this complaint is legitimate.

"

Who is going to pay for local authority inspection? Most maintaince issues are not health and safety issues. For example one of tenants has complained about a noisy extractor fan in the bathroom.

"Landlords who have not protected their tenants’ deposit or have not licensed their property when they are required to do so are already prevented from serving no fault eviction notices. This Bill is simply applying the same principle to poor conditions."

The problem is what is considered "poor conditions" is very subjective.

If a tenant is at the point of applying for a court order then its quite easy to give them protection. The problem with court orders is that few tenants can afford to go to court.

Surely local authority improvement or hazard awareness notices already exist - the mechanism is already being funded?

I haven't seen mention of the thresholds for intervention changing. IIUC this just prevents landlords from punishing tenants who alert the authorities.

Do you believe your noisy extractor fan fails to meet current local authority hazard or fitness of habitation standards? Surely not. But if it does, why haven't you fixed it already?

What we need is landlord tenant court, as in the States or the Residential Tenancy Office, as here in BC, Canada. Easy to access, quick, cheap binding arbitration for landlords and tenants. Information Officers at the front desk, giving advice and information. Repair orders if needed, orders to stop paying rent if needed.

How would the new law protect this family. They phoned up their landlord to say that the boiler was not working and were landed with an evcition notice.

www.theguardian.com/money/2014/may/02/tenant-evicted-hot-water-landlord-wilson

Most tenants do not register every comment about maintaince with the council. A decent landlord would sort out a boiler problem within hours. If a tenant misunderstands how a system works then a decent landlord would go out and show him. Evicitng someone for writing an email is really unfair.

"Do you believe your noisy extractor fan fails to meet current local authority hazard or fitness of habitation standards? Surely not. But if it does, why haven't you fixed it already?"

I believe that every property has niggles. My new tenant is complaining that the staircase is too steep and I have offered to put in a stair rail for her. There really isn't anything I can do about the staircase! The extractor fan issue has been resolved by showing her how to clean the filter.

Most maintaince issues are annoying rather than damaging to health. The tenancies (reform) bill is for major problems like no electricity, a leaking roof, structural problems, pest control or any other issue that affects the health of the tenant. Prehaps a certificate of habitation could make a tenant aware of any niggles before they accept the tenancy. The certificate of habition could replace the inventory so that costs to the landlord would not be increased (and passed to the tenant.)

You're looking for obstacles where there are none, ReallyTired.

Do you believe your extractor fan contravenes local authority fit-for-habitation standards - as opposed to being a niggle? No? Then the proposed new law doesn't touch this.

As for your example about the evicted family - they precisely WOULD be protected by the new law! They didn't phone the landlord about the problem, they emailed it. So they made a " legitimate, written complaint about the condition of the property".

If the law is passed with that exact wording, then it's a weakness from the tenant's POV that they need to be aware communication has to be in writing not verbal, but I can see that that wording protects the landlord from retrospective claims of complaints.

BTW, I'm a bit worried about your comment about the stairs.

If your stairs didn't previously have a stair rail, that may have been in breach of regs. I've recently been dealing with a similar property and the first thing everyone from the builder to the estate agent said as they came through the door was, "Those stairs will need a rail if you're planning to let it out."

It doesn't matter if you would be happy to accept this risk for yourself in your own home. It doesn't matter if it will be difficult for you to fix the problem. If the property can't be made to meet regs, then you can't rent it out.

But even then, this new law wouldn't touch you. Because when the tenant made you aware of the problem, YOU FIXED IT. You didn't give her notice.

I would like a system where a certificate of habitation says what needs to be done before someone hurts themselves. It is not acceptable find out that stairs needed a stair rail AFTER someone has broken their neck.

A certificate of habitation would protect all parties. Annoyances like a noisy extractor fan could be an advisory, a bit like a car's MOT. A tenant could decide whether they can live with creaky door BEFORE they move in.

Agree whole-heartedly!

The new law sounds like a long overdue measure.