What are Labour’s likely plans for landlords and renters?

It looks as if our next government is likely to be a Labour one.

This could happen any time next year or possibly the year after, but most people seem to think it will be within the next 12 months.

So what are Labour’s proposals for the Private Rented Sector?

They were a bit cagey at Conference, and private renting was hardly mentioned.  This may be because they are apparently due to publish a review of the PRS in November.

However, in the meantime, there are a few clues from the ‘Full final policy platform’ published on the Labour List website.

You will find them under the heading ‘Support Private Renters’ in the ‘a future where families come first’ section.

What does it say?

Fundamentally reform the private rented sector, overhauling its regulation to markedly drive up standards and conditions and provide tenants with long-term security and better rights. Introduce a renters’ charter that will abolish ‘no fault’ Section 21 evictions, introduce a legally binding Decent Homes Standard for the private rented sector, ban landlords from refusing to rent to those in receipt of benefits or with children, provide for longer notice periods, introduce a national landlord register and introduce a right to have pets

Seek to close loopholes that disreputable landlords might use to exploit tenants and jeopardise their security of tenure following the abolition of Section 21

Lets take a look at these.

Fundamentally reform the private rented sector, overhauling its regulation to markedly drive up standards and conditions and provide tenants with long-term security and better rights.

A bit vague but the words ‘fundamentally reform’ imply that the reforms will not just be arranging the deckchairs.  A serious overhaul is indicated.

Introduce a renters’ charter that will abolish ‘no fault’ Section 21 evictions

This is a given, bearing in mind that all parties have pledged to abolish section 21 (and this is included in the Renters Reform Bill).

The big question is “What will they put in its place?”

Introduce a legally binding Decent Homes Standard for the private rented sector

Of course, we already have disrepair and fitness for human habitation legislation, so this will presumably take things further.  Labour introduced a ‘decent homes standard’ for social housing when they were last in power which was effective in driving up standards in the social sector.

The Tories have also promised to introduce a decent homes standard, but it is not included in the current Renters Reform Bill.

However, the big problem with poor standards in rented accommodation is a lack of enforcement action.  I am not convinced that more legislation will help.  What really needs to happen is for Local Authorities to be properly funded so they can recruit the staff to carry out enforcement work.

This is the only way we will get rid of those bad landlords.  They are not going to take any notice of another statute when they are ignoring the legislation we have already.

Ban landlords from refusing to rent to those in receipt of benefits or with children

This is effectively already happening.  Recent case law has awarded compensation to renters whose applications to rent property have been rejected because they are on benefit.  Which has now been found to be ‘indirect discrimination’.

We have a video here from 2020 where I discussed one of these cases with barrister Tessa Buchanan.

There are, so far as I am aware, no cases involving indirect discrimination against applicants with children, but in a recent decision, the Property Ombudsman found in their favour and no doubt case law will come.  I discussed the current state of the law in this post.

However, if these rules are specifically set out in law, it will make it easier for tenants to complain.

Be aware, however that prohibiting indirect discrimination does not mean that landlords have GOT to grant tenancies to applicants with children or who are on benefit.  It just means that they can’t refuse to consider their application.

If there are, say, ten applications for a flat, eight of them from people in full-time employment and the other two from single mums on benefit, the landlord or agent will almost certainly choose one of the applicants in employment.

Provide for longer notice periods,

It depends on what these notice periods are for.  Presumably, there will not be long notice periods for anti-social behavour cases where one tenant is making life a misery for neighbours.

Introduce a right to have pets

This is a very contentious issue, and lawmakers will have to balance the positive effect that pets can have on people’s mental health and family life, with the undoubted damage that some pets cause.  Which can cost hundreds and sometimes thousands of pounds to put right.

Then there is the fact that some people are allergic to pets.  So it would be wrong (for example) for an incoming HMO tenant to be able to insist on having cats, when one of the other HMO tenants has a serious cat allergy.

I discuss here some of the unintended consequences of the Tenant Fees legislation from 2019, which has made it far more difficult for tenants to keep a pet.  Any legislation will have to be drafted with enormous care.

Some campaigners are asking for the Tenant Fees legislation to be amended to allow landlords to require tenants to pay for insurance as a condition of being allowed to keep a pet, and that may be a way to go.

Seek to close loopholes that disreputable landlords might use to exploit tenants and jeopardise their security of tenure following the abolition of Section 21

This is probably in response to the Renters Reform bill, where there are several clauses which could arguably allow bad landlords to evict tenants.

In particular, the new right to evict tenants where the landlord wants to sell the property, and the amended ground 6 which is the redevelopment ground.

However, taking away these grounds could discourage reputable landlords.

It’s worth remembering that until section 21 came along, we did not have a proper private rented sector, as I explain in my post here.

However, in the 1970s to the 1990s, property was less expensive, and there was more social housing.  As it had not then been sold off under the ‘right to buy’.  Things are different now.

The big problem that labour has to face

We have a housing crisis just now, and the government needs there to be a private rented sector to house those who are unable to buy their own home.  Which includes millions of people.

Even if they start building new housing immediately and use quick-build methods such as modular housing, it is going to take some time for these properties to be available.

In the meantime, it is important that landlords are not scared away as otherwise, the number of available properties to rent will drop substantially, causing major problems.

If hundreds and thousands of low-income families are not going to be made homeless, private landlords need to be treated with respect (rather than as pantomime villains) and the tax system reformed to allow them to make a decent profit.

I appreciate that it may be politically unacceptable for Labour to be seen to treat landlords too favourably, and they will have to step carefully here. However, it must be remembered that landlords do not have to be landlords.  Treat them too harshly, and they will sell up and invest their money elsewhere.

Resulting in fewer properties available for low-income families and considerably higher rents.

That is the problem that Labour faces.  It could be one reason why they are keeping quiet about their plans.