Alternative to licensing/accreditation? Bad landlords, look away now!

Reply to the comment left by "Dunsaw " at "21/09/2013 - 07:49":

Thanks Dunsaw - great to know people can see what we can see! All properties will get a discount on a Rating Survey if they do within a certain time period & the reason they are doing it is that they have made improvements & want us to re-grade it.

We are still working on the time period we'd allow (because some improvements may take months, but we don't want LL abusing the system and use the re-grade option to just extend their rating at a lower cost than a full survey), so I think we'll be agreeing a suitable timescale on a case by case basis with the landlord if that's what he wanted to do.

But we know that the cost of a re-grade would be one-third of the original cost he paid for the Rating survey in the first place, with a minimum of £50.

Hi Kirsty,
I really don't think the star rating system will be any use to anyone.
In most areas demand is outstripping supply for rental property, tenants can't be choosy, they have to take what they can get - this is why bad landlords & bad properties can flourish.
Bad properties & bad landlords are almost always dealing with the most vulnerable in society, those on benefits who have no choice where to live - they are lucky if they get offered anything and will therefore have to accept the bad property.
Star ratings of properties or landlords will not change this fact!
Many years ago before LHA came to be, there used to be a rent officer who visited the property on a regular basis to ascertain a fair rent which would be paid in Housing Benefit direct to the landlord.
This is the best way to control bad properties, working people would generally run a mile from a damp house or move on quickly from a bad landlord but HB tenants are stuck with it because no-one else will take them.
The LHA system took away the rent officer, now every 1 bed flat for example, is paid the same - whether it's fab or trash, therefore the bad landlord is the winner because they don't spend money on the property but get the same rent as the good landlord. Star ratings will not affect this.
Bring back the variable rents & rent officer - the rent officer can determine if the flat is uninhabitable or below par and refuse any HB payments on that property until it is upgraded. When it's habitable, the rent officer can decide on a fair rent, therefore the good guys will always do better than the bad guys & properties receiving the top rate can have rent paid direct - every landlord can get tips from the rent officer on how to bring up to par and receive best rent and so getting the education they need - GOOD GUYS HAPPY - BAD GUYS EDUCATED - PROBLEM SOLVED!

Reply to the comment left by "Yvonne B." at "27/09/2013 - 01:48":

... but the cost of employing the rent officers?
.

In my area the 1 bed rate is £80.77 but some flats would only generate £55 pw in the private sector due to lack of space, etc.
A rent officer would save the government a fortune if a fair rent was paid for each property.
The environmental health officers of each council are already spending a lot of time checking HMOs and self contained flats. In my area they are checked around every 2 years.
The councils can amend there job descriptions and increase training so they can also become a rent officer, they are already visiting properties on a regular basis, know whether they are average or above average for a particular area, they deal with the landlord and know if the landlord is good or bad. They can use the HHSRS system but also measure the properties for space, look at quality of furnishings, EPC ratings,etc and agree a fair rent with the landlord, They can then encourage the landlord to improve the property to increase the rental value.
The carrot is much more effective than the stick.

The councils should be able to apply to the government for extra cash to fund a few extra officers required to deal with the extra workload, but as the government would be saving a fortune on Housing Benefit I think they would be in agreement.
Also, if the flat reaches the top value (of £80.77 in my example) then the benefit should automatically be paid to the landlord - another carrot!

The good landlords will have nothing to fear and will gain from their cooperation with the environmental health officers.

The bad landlords, who normally avoid environmental health, would lose some or all of the rent money until it was brought upto standard.

Environmental health officers suddenly find themselves dealing with lots of 'Friendly landlords' who want to do whatever they ask!

Happy tenants in better properties where everyone is working to achieve the same goal.

Everyone's a winner!
No accreditation schemes, etc, etc. bad landlords just don't sign up and operate under the radar - but they also have the most HB tenants - that's the only way to get to them.

Yvonne

Hi Yvonne, sorry only just seen your original post.
I'm a bit confused, because the star rating system is doing exactly what your Rent Officer would do, albeit:
- it's voluntary at first for landlords, therefore it's only when it gets more widely recognised in the market that 'bad landlords' will be forced to adapt to it, or lose out on rent/tenants to those that have it; and
- it isn't linked to LHA directly...yet. We are definitely starting to explore how the LAs may use these star ratings.

You said "They can use the HHSRS system but also measure the properties for space, look at quality of furnishings, EPC ratings,etc and agree a fair rent with the landlord, They can then encourage the landlord to improve the property to increase the rental value. The carrot is much more effective than the stick." = that is exactly, 100% of what our ratings are doing.

Reply to the comment left by "Kirsty McGregor" at "27/09/2013 - 21:46":

Sorry, I don't agree, I would never want to get involved with a star rating system - why?

Because I don't need too, my flats are very good and reasonably priced and I look after the tenants - I have a waiting list of prospective tenants - why should I PAY for a star rating I don't need?

In other words, good landlords shouldn't need to sign up - they don't need it.
Bad landlords definitely won't sign up - they're definitely not going to pay for your rating to tell them they're bad!

The system won't work unless everyone signs up - in other words it needs to be compulsory.
Compulsory regulation/fees - that is the STICK not the carrot and good landlords again have to pay for bad landlords - not something I would ever agree to.

When there is under supply of property and your property has the worst star rating (bad landlord) there will still be many DSS tenants chasing it - there will be no improvement to the property - this is all just a fee collecting exercise - NOT GOOD!

You said "Because I don’t need too, my flats are very good and reasonably priced and I look after the tenants – I have a waiting list of prospective tenants – why should I PAY for a star rating I don’t need?" - because you will let it quicker than the competition. If you're voids/gaps in tenancies are manageable because demand is so high in your area vs supply, then I agree, you don't need to....yet.

But as soon as we start seeing more voids & gaps between tenancies getting longer, some landlords in your area will do it, and then you'll have to follow suit.

We don't want this to be mandatory by the way. I agree with you, 'stick' is not the right way to go. But market forces will provide the carrot in time.
In 12 months time you may be proven right...or the way properties are marketed may be changing forever.
I also know in 12months time that I have a large developer/landlord who wants these ratings on all their new properties to show their quality, because they are obviously chasing those tenants that will pay more for better quality. And there are some tenants out there in the PRS that will do that...and will love this!

Time will tell...if we don't try, I'll never know if I could've made a positive difference, so I have to try.

As Kirsty was excluding London where my properties are based I rather dropped out of this debate but have read everyone's comments and opinions with interest. Sadly Kirsty I would back Yvonne's position - this star rating is for the good guys who really should not need it if they are letting good properties at fair rents.

What is needed is a system to get the bad landlords who often have the most vulnerable tenants to improve their standards. I know local authorities feel they do not have enough money and resources to check housing provided to people on housing benefit but something should be done since much of the rent given to these rogue landlords comes direct from the taxpayer so the state has a responsibility. The rent officer sounds a lot more useful than many of the 'elf and safety team who seem to proliferate at will.

I agree with most of what you say Gina. But there's good landlords with nice, good properties, and then there's great, amazing properties (also with good landlords). But the problem is, there aren't many of these around for the pickier tenants. Why? Because there's a glass ceiling on rentals, because of the way properties are marketed - it makes it too hard for tenants to differentiate the best quality properties.

So why should a landlord invest over and above the norm on his property, when he/she isn't going to get a return? So...INITIALLY...that's where Rental Ratings will get its entry into the market. Allowing the highest quality properties to get that attention.
Not for the majority of steady-eddie landlords..all which are needed, don't get me wrong. I know we need a spread of different priced properties. But at the moment we've hardly any at the top end, because it's not commercially viable to supply them.

Then in time, other landlords with more normal properties will follow suit, because they'll see the benefit in differentiating themselves from similar properties around them - a 3* star rating vs No rating will be more preferable to a tenant to view first.
Then in time again...the bad landlords will be spotlighted, because they won't have ratings.

It's not an overnight solution. This is a long term strategy.

I'm a business woman, I'm not a saleswoman. So I'm not in it for the fees. I'm in it to make a commercial difference to businesses in the rental sector ie landlords, and to give tenants what they need to.
Does that make sense?

We are having a bit of fun today in advance of the launch of Rental Ratings on Monday! We are going to choose one landlord to win a free rating survey from all those that have registered on our holding page http://www.real-surv.co.uk by the end of today. So if you were thinking you may be interested, stick your details on here & you might win a free one! We'll announce the winner tomorrow, in advance of our full launch on Monday.