Most of you will have heard about the coalition governments crack down on anti social behaviour especially in light of the recent rioting and looting. However, the coalition government is taking it that one step too far, in our humble opinion, and suggesting that those that are convicted of anti social behaviour should be evicted from rented accommodation even where the anti social behaviour has nothing to do with the rented property.
In August 2011 the Department for Communities and Local Government released its consultation on “A new mandatory power of possession for anti-social behaviour.” The consultation is aimed at making Ground 14 of Schedule II of the Housing Act 1988 a mandatory ground for possession.
Looking at the consultation itself statements that should be noted are:
“It is clearly right that eviction for anti-social behaviour should remain exceptional: the loss of one’s home is a serious sanction and eviction may simply displace the problem elsewhere rather than providing a long term solution.”
“But where landlords turn to possession as a last resort in order to provide respite to communities and as a serious sanction against perpetrators that process can take too long”.
“Most importantly though lengthy possession proceedings mean that the suffering of victims is further extended”.
“….serious anti-social behaviour and criminality beyond the immediate neighbourhood of the property can clearly be taken into account”.
The consultation then asks those that wish to respond to consider the following questions:
1. Do you agree that we should extend the scope of the current discretionary ground for possession for anti-social behaviour and criminality in this way?
2. Do you agree that we should construct a new mandatory power of possession in this way?
3. Are these the right principles which should underpin a mandatory power of possession for anti-social behaviour?
4. Have we defined the basis for the new mandatory power correctly? If not, how could we improve the definition?
5. As a landlord would you anticipate seeking possession using the mandatory power in some or all of the instances where this would be available?
6. Are there other issues related the introduction of a mandatory power for possession for anti-social behaviour that we should consider?
So how to respond in a rational and clearly though out manner, difficult, but here goes.
If Ground 14 is made mandatory both social and private landlords will be allowed to issue possession proceedings not only where the tenant is convicted for anti-social or criminal behaviour but also if the occupier or a visitor of the tenant has such a conviction. So will this lead to problems with the convicted father visiting his children? Does this contradict one of the coalition government’s aims, to promote family life, I think so.
Its quite clear that this consultation is in response to the riots in August and that there was as much though put behind it as Teresa May’s statement about the Right to Family Life and the cat. But whilst the consultation appears to recognise that the court process is too long it makes no reference to why that is and no reference to how that should be improved. Even where landlords have mandatory grounds for rent arrears the process can take too long with agents and landlords taking their frustrations out on us poor, overworked lawyers (its true!).
One has to wonder however with the current housing shortage and the problems that were recognised with the younger generation following the rioting whether moving people on is really the best we can do. We live by the principle that “if you do the crime you must serve the time” but after that time people are entitled to get on with their lives because this justice system promotes the right to rehabilitation. It is obviously very difficult for some to accept this especially where they have been victims of a serious crime but this consultation is not promoting re-habilitation it is promoting ostracising certain sections of the community which can lead to an increase in crime and looting.
This cycle must end and housing, communities and the court system needs investing. Under Ground 14 it is possible to get possession where the tenants are a nuisance in our experience and this is simply going too far.
Filed under: England & Wales, FLW Article, comment, consultations, Housing Act 1988, possession, procedure
5 March, 2014 • 17:01 0
More consultation over the Private Rental Sector
Due to the ever increasing demand for rental properties the Government have decided that a consultation on this area is needed. The discussion titled ‘Review of property conditions in the private rented sector’ is in its initial stages so no changes are imminent; but certain topics have been raised with a view to helping the system perform better and raise the standard of the housing industry to make sure tenants are protected and are able to live in a safe environment.
The intention of the consultation is to protect tenants from rogue landlords and agents but to try to balance this by not adversely affecting the good landlords/agents. The aim is to avoid imposing unnecessary legislation which could create more hassle, decrease much needed investment in private rented housing and result in further costs which will eventually be passed on to the tenant in the form of increased rent etc.
There are a number of topics that have been proposed as talking points for which they are inviting comments and suggestions. These include:
• Rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants – How can it be made clearer to both sides what is required of them and what can be done if the other side has breached their obligations?
• Retaliatory evictions – How to prevent landlords from simply serving notice to evict a tenant that has notified them of necessary repairs to the property?
• Illegal evictions – Should the penalties against landlords convicted of illegal evictions be stricter?
• Safety conditions – Should smoke and carbon monoxide alarms be mandatory in all properties?
• Licensing of rented housing – Should there be mandatory licensing for all properties? Should there be voluntary accreditation schemes for Landlords so that the good landlords can be found more easily?
• Housing Health and Safety Rating System – Is more information required to make the system clearer for all parties?
This is a non-exhaustive list and so if you have any ideas of how to improve the housing market the details of where to send your proposals are detailed below and any suggestions made should be considered and discussed.
The closing date for responses is 28 March 2014 and they can be sent to PRSReview@communities.gsi.gov.uk
We will be looking to keep an eye on this and will update the blog when there are any further developments.
Filed under: England & Wales, comment, consultations, disrepair, HHSRS, HMOs, Housing Act 2004, LACORS, tenancy agreements