Yesterday I published Ben’s Friday Newsround – but as the more perspicacious of you may have noticed – yesterday was Thursday, not Friday.
I was not aware of this until about 10.30 am. For some reason, I genuinely believed it was Friday – until the penny dropped while I was talking to Graeme. But by then Ben’s post had been published.
However, Ben’s post contained less news than usual as he got carried away with stories about Iceland. So I thought that I would step in today and report on two new important new Acts which have just become law.
The Housing and Planning Act 2016
This became law on 13 May and is reported on the gov.uk site here.
Among other things it
- Continues the dismantlement of our social housing system by extending the right to buy
- Introduces new enforcement measures against rogue landlords (and crucially, allows Councils to keep the costs to fund enforcement work)
- Introduces banning orders
- Allows Councils to access data held by the deposit schemes,
- Allows the government to impose client money protection (see the article here on Nearly Legal) and
- Gives a process for landlords to recover abandoned properties
You can see it online here.
So far as our social housing system is concerned, this act is a disaster. However so far as the private sector is concerned, it is generally quite good (unless of course you are a rogue landlord).
The Immigration Act 2016
This became law at around the same time and ramps up the government’s rules to prevent illegal immigrants from renting property in England.
You can read about some of the other things it does here but here we are mainly concerned with how it affects landlords.
In a nutshell, it will impose greater penalties and introduces ways to recover possession of properties occupied by people who do not have a right to rent without having to get a court order first.
You will find an excellent guide from David Smith on Property Industry Eye
You can see the act online here.
Generally
These acts are ‘enabling’ acts and so far as I am aware are not actually in force yet. We will be writing further here when more is known about them.
You may also want to sign up to my weekly tips service where I keep people informed.
‘ it is generally quite good (unless of course you are a rogue landlord). ‘
The problem is rogue can mean someone who literally tries there best but falls foul of 1 of many regulations and as such abused by ‘rogue tenant’ rather than a real rogue rachman.
The use of such a general word as ‘rogue’ within law is not helpful as it can mean different things to different people, as Sam indicates. The Database provisions however do create other issues and complications given that the Database provisions of S28 & S29 requires that a person must have been convicted of a specified housing offence before the LA can include a person on the list.
During my time in Illegal eviction & harassment enforcement I encountered several landlords who regularly engaged in conduct that breached the harassment/eviction provisions but for who it was not able to prosecute due to the unwillingness of victims to give evidence 6-9 months down the line and were content to be free of the landlord or having been reinstated by TRO intervention, knew that the landlord would not do it again. (One however did illegally evict the same tenant who had learning difficulties 3 times in four weeks and his family advised that he would be unable to give evidence)
It is those type of landlords for whom there is considerable evidential basis for entry on the database but whom it is not possible to do so. It also raises the dilemma where a provable offence has taken place but the Council declines to take formal action due to lack of staff or as Ben Reeve Lewis often indicates his feeling that it is not worth it, preferring to refer for civil action. The ‘Fit & Proper’ persons guidance is due to be reviewed next year so it may be possible to refuse a person licence status although they have not been convicted of an harassment eviction offence. My reading of the Act so far suggests that a person refused a licence would not go on the Rogue database
Sam rightly raises the issue of what constitutes a rogue landlord. The legislation actually looks quite good as it provides for discretion as to whom should be included on the Register, taking into account the circumstances. Under Sect 28 a council has a DUTY to include a landlord on the Register if a Banning Order has been made by a Tribunal. However Sect 29 provides a POWER and MAY make an order to include on the register if an offence has been committed. The LA is not required to make the entry if it decides it is not appropriate.
In addition under Sect 15 a Tribunal MAY make a Banning Order (on application by the Council) following conviction for a Banning Offence but MUST consider the seriousness, circumstances and any previous convictions. It therefore provides for the situation outlined by Sam of an inadvertent breach.