Safer Renting
Nearly three years ago my colleague Roz and I, having been made redundant from running Lewisham council’s rogue landlord enforcement team as a result of cuts in funding, established ‘Safer Renting’ with £3,000 of seed funding and encouragement from Cambridge House in Camberwell, south London, an organisation dedicated to alleviating poverty and its related problems, established in 1889.
Councils being so strapped for cash that they tend to axe roles that they aren’t required to have by law, in order to keep wobbling along.
Many operational managers across London also knew that despite cuts they couldn’t run services without having people skilled in landlord and tenant law, able to protect tenants from the activities of criminal landlords.
As a result, we now provide advice and advocacy services for the licensing and enforcement teams of five London boroughs at the time of writing, with a few others in talks. We work with councils, not ‘For’ them and so aren’t on the payroll.
We are growing
Many charitable funders have also cottoned on to what we do and have put us in a position where we are employing staff, ironically some of whom are Cambridge law graduates, which is how Cambridge House started 130 years ago. Hence the name.
Trust for London provided funding for us to carry out two year’s research and produce a report on the hidden world of renting where we spend all our days. To do this we commissioned York University’s Dr Julie Rugg, of ‘Rugg report’ fame to guide us along with the academic side of things.
What we do
The Rugg Report 2018 drew much of its conclusions from the English Housing Survey, which produces figures that you see repeated all over the place, the 84% of tenants who are happy with their letting.
When I tell people what we do at Safer Renting they usually say
“Oh so you deal with the 16% who are unhappy”
I always have to correct them. We don’t. We deal with the unknown amount of people that the English Housing Survey doesn’t even talk to and go into properties they don’t know exist.
We deal with privately rented properties that are used for people trafficking, benefit fraud, tax evasion, brothels, massive overcrowding, and the occasional cannabis farm. A world away from the English Housing Survey.
Julie gave our report the title:-
“A journey through the shadow PRS”.
It should be out early in 2020.
In putting together information for our report I recently came across another, from the Legal Education Fund (who we also receive funding from) called “The Legal Problems of Renters”, published in 2015.
The aim of the research was to look into how lack of knowledge or awareness of even basic landlord and tenant law, impacts upon tenants – and its quite a read.
Stark statistics
Perhaps the most astonishing figure from the findings is that when encountering a problem with their letting, 47% of renters put the situation merely down to ‘Bad luck’, without even realising there was any legal element to their problems whatsoever.
40% of renters hit difficulties as a result of ‘Social welfare problems’, for that, read ‘Universal Credit’ and this was before it really kicked in.
Interestingly, only 5% of people in trouble sought advice from solicitors. Most didn’t even know solicitors could help. More worryingly only 5% sought advice from the “advice sector”, not specifically defined but certainly where Safer Renting sits and whose existence owes itself to the fact that so many advice agencies have closed down because of austerity cuts.
I think, had renters even realised that solicitors could help and were eligible for legal aid, the figure would still remain low, however, I was recently given a list of legal aid firms doing housing work in London and it amounts to just 17 names.
In a city of roughly 10 million, a third of whom are private renters.
Also, bear in mind that the LEF report is still unlikely to have spoken to the demographic that the Safer Renting report is plugged into. I would imagine our figures, when published will be even more stark with ignorance of the law probably one of the biggest problems and which always gives criminal landlords an edge.
Ignorance or Innocence?
Back in the autumn, I did a presentation to a group of everyday tenants, not Safer Renting’s usual clients, at the behest of Cambridge City Council. (that Cambridge connection again) and I mentioned s21 notices in passing.
One woman put up her hand and asked what a s21 notice was. I thought she was joking but asked the group if anyone else didn’t know about them. Every single hand in the room went up.
Mind you, many landlords are similarly ignorant. I was arguing with a London letting agent just last week, who wanted all the tenants in a house to leave because the council had identified it as unlicensed. He said in an offended tone:-
“Don’t tell me my job, I’m a professional, I known what I’m doing”,
before promptly serving all occupants with a s33 notice to evict. Fine if you are in Scotland where they are valid but not in Walthamstow, where his high street office is based.
So what was the LEF report’s conclusion?
That not enough use is made of the internet to disseminate legal information for tenants.
I have to say I find this a bit of a limp conclusion as a cure to all ills raised in the findings. The internet is awash with free and quite accurate information for tenants and landlords, such as this blog [and the Tenant-Law site too, Ed].
The problem doesn’t lie with the availability of information but its comprehension to ordinary people.
Let’s face it, in terms of ease of use, housing law is on par with Japanese Arithmetic, as a comment from the report notes:-
“Respondents (4,000 tenants) found legal problems related to rented housing, harder to understand than other types of problem”.
The availability and accessibility of legal advice on renting is not the problem. Its everywhere but the question is, how do you educate people to first understand that illegal eviction, harassment, poor treatment, disrepair are legal issues, not simply ‘Bad Luck’?
Secondly, you need to address how you get people to realise that there is help out there and thirdly, how do people who produce these blogs and websites make what they write, understandable to people who aren’t lawyers?
And this only deals with one aspect of the problems raised in the LEF report. It doesn’t represent where our report is going.
The LEF cites the main ‘At-Risk’ groups being young, single parents and unmarried couples with children.
Get the demographic right
We already know that our demographic of ‘At – risk’ renters is foreign nationals, low paid workers, young professionals, black and ethnic minority tenants and those with drink, drug and mental health problems.
Again, not the usual cases that surveys talk to or deal with in the rental market but a target group for criminals, depending on the type of scam being run.
The aim of all reports is to influence public debate and hopefully policy. The Safer Renting report will fill the data gap that currently exists in the shadow world of the PRS.
This is good stuff Ben.
“The problem doesn’t lie with the availability of information but its comprehension to ordinary people.”
And the problem with that comprehension also lies in so much of it being so contradictory. I was helping a tenant recently who had been conned into paying two month’s rent when giving their notice, cos landlord insisted they’d agreed to that. They hadn’t done, but in the course of checking the law I found a lot of incorrect information (re contractual tenancies) online. In places where you really wouldn’t expect to see it too (like the Open Rent blog).
It can send you round the houses and back again sometimes, and so much of that advice is not even worth it in the end. I will read your report with interest. Will it have happy ending? ;)
Yes law can be very contradictory at times but then at other times you see two cases together that look contradictory at first but when you stick with them you can sometimes find that there is a subtle difference that is really important distinction between the two. Times like that restores my faith in law.
So many of Safer Renting’s clients dont even know who their real landlord is and have no written contract. At such times I always advise them of s48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 where the landlord hasnt provided an address for service of documents they arent entitled to receive any rent but it doesnt mean that the tenant doesnt have to pay rent. Its an important difference and often the tenant spends the money on other stuff instead because they misunderstand the difference..
We are a long way from completing the report but I can pretty much guarantee it wont be a happy ending haha It will however set out what renting scams criminal landlords perpetrate, raising awareness among housing professionals, lawyers, renters and landlords who also get ripped off by the scammers
I hope yo will be able to get the mainstream press and TV to report on it, and a copy to every MP.
Thats the aim Michael.No point in having a report that is just an interesting set of facts. Housing enforcement laws are often drafted in such a way that criminals exploit the weaknesses. We want them to wake up
One of the advantages to having done so much TV in the past 7 years is I know how it works and how to get it out there. Its also an advantage working with Dr Julie Rugg on it who has her own profile.
We also have the friendly ears of a few MPs which we shall use mercilessly haha
Very much looking forward to this report.
The 47% who put their tenancy problems down to “bad luck” resonates with our experiences.
It reminds me of the “Learned Helplessness” phenomenon in experimental psychology: dogs given random electric shocks find it more difficult to learn how to avoid the punishment because everything they’ve done before doesn’t help.
Likewise tenants with UK tenancy law: even when there is a way out there is a reluctance to even try it.
Well I think it might be helpful for us to interview your crew Guy on RROs. We have many in the pipeline but have only done two so far and we have noticed procedural problems and loopholes with the process.
Not sure I agree on the learned hopelessness front. I think that landlord and tenant law is just so stoooopidly complicated that it is just impenetrable, even if you have the will..
I started writing for Landlord Law Blog simply because Tessa was and is, the only online law blogger who can actually explain things that non-lawyers can understand.
We would welcome that. Yes there are quite a few procedural hurdles. The biggest struggle seems to be with waking the Tribunal up to the fact that the cases brought under The Housing and Planning Act 2016 should not be assessed according to UT guidance from cases under The Housing Act 2004.
We wrote to the chamber President about this recently but it seems, from her response, that the only way forward on this may be an appeal. We have 1 appeal pending at the moment, however the grounds are unrelated to this problem. We will be making another appeal request this week, also different problem; (OK, so there’s more than 1 problem!) … a third appeal is being considered by another client which would fit…
In the mean time we are submitting with our evidence bundles our arguments on this subject. By pre-empting the arguments in the decisions we hope to create a momentum for change. I’ll send Roz a copy of these arguments which you might want to consider adding to your evidence bundles too. Will probably get them online this w/e for all to use as and when.
The biggest problem we have with RROs is simply that the offenders are by very definition, dodgy ‘Fly by nights’, with aliases and fake companies, so pinning them down is always a problem.
We have one case just now where the council have prosecuted an agent successfully for running an unlicensed property and their immediate response has been to file to dissolve the company before the money can actually recovered