New landlord registration contravenes Human Rights Act

New landlord registration contravenes Human Rights Act

15:03 PM, 10th April 2018, About 6 years ago 16

Text Size

The new landlord registration contravenes Human Rights Act and Part L of environmental pollution legislation.

The right not to be discriminated against and the right to self determination are being heavily compromised with the new registration scheme. Good landlords far outnumber bad ones, yet all have to pay in time, money, and deflection from life’s advancement and liberties with this new scheme. Landlords should fight back, there is considerable law on their side.

Because the councils do not have the resources to target bad landlords directly, they are using the available resources of good landlords to achieve their ends. This is wrong. Bad landlords should be pursued without cost to the good landlords. One should not be discriminated against because I am acting responsibly.

I would suggest landlords consider this and warn local councils of this view and the law, and that local councils should now be mindful of cases brought against them under Human Rights (of Landlords!) and the huge financial penalties to councils if they lose.

Also, to conduct a wild ‘catch-all’ chase of this nature costs unnecessary greenhouse gases, and the councils are therefore further guilty of environmental pollution through poor organisation – setting up huge edifices of bureaucracy that are unnecessary and wholly disproportionate.

This contravenes Part L of the need to act with environmental balance and minimising greenhouse gases.

Dr Jones


Share This Article


Comments

Dr Kevin Jones

15:42 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Rob Thomas at 11/04/2018 - 10:49
Disproportionate activity (hugely increased unnecessary bureaucracy, rises in rents, pressure on tenants, pressure on landlords) causes stress and poor health. Britain is a world leader in the latter with some of the highest serious disease incidents of developed nations. Why not use the 'BETTER HOMES' strategy with spot checks by a few extra council staff as a statistically penetrating way of improving standards?

Rob Thomas

16:07 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Dr Kevin Jones at 11/04/2018 - 15:42
Dr Jones

What's wrong with just letting tenants choose which is the best place for them to live given their budget? Once basic safety standards such as gas safety checks have been met, I don't think we should assume that the government knows better than ordinary people what is the best place for them to live. After all, the state can't even protect the lives of people living in council accommodation (e.g. Grenfell Tower). Why would we think they know better than a private tenant what is a fit and proper place to live?

Paul Shears

16:17 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Rob Thomas at 11/04/2018 - 16:07
Unfortunately I think you are absolutely spot on.
It would be really nice ti think just playing happy families will work, but it never has and it never will.
Certainly not on the scale that human beings operate on anyway.

Dr Kevin Jones

16:17 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Tony McVey at 11/04/2018 - 13:03
We are very poor at doing things sustainably. Please read Part L of the Building Regs and the associated supply chain, as well as BREEAM sustainability legislation. We are low down and sinking in the Human Development Index (please look this one up, it is very significant and important for all), 40,000+ deaths from street pollution (p.a), 30,000 deaths from fuel poverty (the worst in the western world, p.a.), yes now lets raise the rents of tenants again- this will inevitably have to happen with selective licensing - on the heels of the council tax rise and another fuel bills rise just announced, abetted further by the wild DISPROPORTIONATE paper chases planned..

I propose using spot checks with the Better Homes Strategy costing just a few tens of thousands per year per council.

Sean Graveney

16:32 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

I don’t think that the bureaucracy of a licensing scheme is in contravention or building regs. They’re not even related.

Dr Kevin Jones

17:30 PM, 11th April 2018, About 6 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Sean Graveney at 11/04/2018 - 16:32
Hi, Part L expands into the quintessential need to plan and act sustainably (see especially BREEAM legislation), with a positive impact on human health and well-being - see HDI. Many practices are getting better joined up now; having a bureaucracy that does not work or largely fails degrades the whole chain and the environment. I believe the equivalent outcome activity can be achieved with much less environmental footprint.

Hence selective licensing with a massive bureaucracy is not the humanistic or environmental way forward, it certainly is the councils way to protect its own interests. This ties back into Human Rights!

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 Tax Planning Book Now