11:07 AM, 25th January 2019, About 4 years ago 17
Dear Property118 members
The government have announced that landlord redress will be mandatory in the future and they will be authorising schemes to cover landlords. They are setting up a Redress Reform Working Group to look at the practicalities of implementation and we at the Property Redress Scheme will be members of this group. Once we have more information about the remit and process for authorisation for landlord redress we will make a decision on applying.
The Property Redress Scheme was set up in the summer of 2014 after obtaining authorisation from the government and National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team (NTSEAT) to allow property agents to comply with their legal requirement to join a consumer redress scheme. We now have just under 10,000 branches registered and dealt with over 1,000 complaints in 2018.
When we set up the scheme we also allowed property professionals including landlords to join voluntarily to offer the same redress service as property agents to their customers. I just need to clarify that for property professionals this is not the same as being legally required to join or complying with a legal requirement to join an authorised redress scheme.
We set up a discount code of Landlord50 back in early 2017 to test interest in landlords joining voluntarily. I understand that this code was sent to all property118 members so as a gesture of goodwill we have decided to reactivate it for one week and it will be live until 5pm on 1st February 2019.
The scheme is currently only designed for those based in the UK and our system does not accept non-UK addresses. This is something we will be looking at as part of any authorisation process for offering mandatory landlord redress.
I thank Mark for contacting us and asking me to clarify our current position with landlord redress. I will also be keeping him informed of any developments.
Property Redress Scheme
Previous ArticleARLA welcome strengthening consumer redress
Next ArticleDo landlords expect too much from their accountants?