Lawyer criticises Renters’ Rights Bill impact assessment for underestimating costs

Lawyer criticises Renters’ Rights Bill impact assessment for underestimating costs

9:55 AM, 27th November 2024, About 6 days ago 4

Text Size

A lawyer has slammed the Renters’ Rights Bill impact assessment, calling it “unreliable.”

David Smith, head of dispute resolution at JMW Solicitors, says the government’s assessment doesn’t “paint a true picture” of the financial impact on landlords.

The Renters’ Rights Bill is expected to cost £33 million a year, but the government insists it will not trigger a mass exodus of landlords.

Not the true picture

In a post on Linkedln, Mr Smith says impact assessments are “largely nonsense” as they are based on estimates that are “unreliable.”

Mr Smith says the government figures for the Renters’ Rights Bill impact assessment are not fully reflective of the actual costs landlords may face.

He said on Linkedln: “The impact assessment has estimated the cost to the sector of the new Bill as being £33 million. However, that is not the true picture as impact assessments ignore costs deriving from secondary legislation that does not exist yet.

“The cost when we add in the fees for the PRS Database and Landlord Ombudsman rise to £40.1 million and the cost of Awaab’s law and the widening of the Decent Homes Standard are not quantified.”

Mr Smith adds: “Looking into the detail further there are some more unusual numbers. For example, the cost to a tenant for a pet is estimated at £7, which is presumably the cost of the insurance the government is anticipating that landlords will buy and then charge back. I doubt it will be less than double that in practice, as the admin cost alone will be more than this figure.”

Gross underestimate

Mr Smith argues that the government’s £33 million figure underestimates the true costs involved.

He said: “On rents, the assessment says that they cannot see any impact on rents but admits that it is almost impossible to estimate.

“However, using the total cost of £33 million (which they know is too low) this leads to a maximum increase of 0.1% on rents. I find this very unlikely as the cost is greater and the way in which landlords set rent is likely to be far more important than the actual costs they face.”

Mr Smith challenges the claim that supposed benefits from the Renters’ Rights Bill, such as a £9 annual gain per property from reduced agent fees, are inaccurate.

He said: “The cost of learning about the changes, increased court costs in evicting tenants, providing more evidence to deal with cases, new Section 13 notices, considering pet requests etc is all costed at £22 per property per year over the ten-year impact assessment period, so a total of £220.

“I have no idea where this number comes from but I consider it to be a gross underestimate based on what I anticipate agents charging to prepare a S13 notice for a landlord.

“The cost of lost rental income caused by the Tribunal holding down rents has been ignored as it cannot be calculated. Apparently, landlords will also benefit by £9 a year due to tenants staying longer and having less void periods. I find this to be fanciful given that most tenants left property of their own accord already. The same longer tenancies are also expected to cost agents £1,719 per agent per year over the ten years.”

No substantial supply loss

Mr Smith argues that the government’s claim of no significant loss of supply is misleading, as the evidence cited is based on Scotland, where the government has since declared a housing crisis.

He said: “The government has suggested that there will be no significant loss of supply. As support for this, it has cited that the introduction of changes to the PRS in Scotland led to no substantial supply loss but this is a bit mealy-mouthed.

“Scotland made a number of changes over an extended period and the government has picked just one of them. It has ignored the more recent limits on rent levels for example, presumably on the basis that they are not comparable. But I suspect there are many who would take issue with the supply figures being quoted.”


Share This Article


Comments

Crouchender

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

7:20 AM, 27th November 2024, About 6 days ago

The NRLA should commission its own impact assessment on costs of RRB with other organisations. As Poppycock's assessment is just purely politically based to get his RRB across the line fast.

Even the bidding ban relies on what happened in ONE state in Australia middle of this year and they can't assess impact but put it in anyway.

Bidding only happens when there is shortage of supply.

paul robinson

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:02 AM, 27th November 2024, About 6 days ago

“David Smith”….formally from the RLA?

Remember years ago listening to radio 2 debate on scrapping S21, unfortunately felt his understanding of different landlord & rental demographics, plus his representation of his members wasn’t great and fast forward to today the NRLA isn’t much better!

Guess landlords have to thank the governments inept ability to pass legislation to why scrapping S21 has taken so long 🤔

Northernpleb

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:57 AM, 27th November 2024, About 6 days ago

David Smith is correct
The Government Impact assessment of the Cost and Damage resulting to Landlords and our Tenants due to The Governments war on Private Landlords and RRB is ridiculously low .

Everything is geared to extract every penny it can from private Landlords. By Legislation , Taxation and fines.

Lets see How Milliband gets on with fining the Car Manufactures .

Kev Kirkby

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:37 PM, 27th November 2024, About 5 days ago

If this bill causes a mass movement with landlords selling up...
Purhaps tenants who loose out, for they, the good ones will big time should take the government to court for making them homeless..
And there will be many many more than they think.
Politicians. They with all their new laws and licenses have made it almost impossible for both landlords and tenants.
What the politicians do not realise is that, that is exactly what they will be doing for the only ones that will win will be those corporations and banks looking for properties to house illegal migrants, as they have deep pockets given to them via our taxes.
Those that buy to rent for retirement purposes will fade away which is a shame.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Automated Assistant Read More