I read the Labour Party’s promises as worded on their own website. Here are just a few thoughts to vent my anger.

I am a strong supporter of tenants’ rights.

However, one must not forget that without landlords, there would be no tenants and as such, landlords are a service provider.

Considering the shortage of properties in the PRS, anything which discourages good landlords can only have a negative effect on those whom Ed Miliband claims to help.

In the following points, the opening sentence in italics is the Labour party’s own wording.

* Legislate to make longer-term tenancies with predictable rents the norm.

There are very few agents which discourage long lets as commission is based upon rent reserved.

In my experience, both landlord and tenant resist long lets and prefer no more than a year, with the option to renew. In fact, many tenants insist on a break clause in case their situation changes or the landlord fails to perform their obligations, whilst many landlords insist on the same in case the tenant fails to perform their obligations.

A request for a tenancy longer than a year is rare, but very welcome.

Further, many freeholders, particularly in prime London, expressly prohibit longer tenancies, and whilst statute of course overrides contract, can simply refuse to grant permission. Even if this requirement was enacted, there are still mandatory grounds for possession which the inventive landlord could employ.

I wonder whether Labour will address the awful situation where a good tenant is evicted when a landlord is repossessed and the mortgagees in possession simply change the locks?

Finally, if the courts could speed up the eviction process and local authorities stopped advising tenants to simply not pay rent and stay in a property until the bailiffs arrive, landlords would have more confidence in the system.

* Regulate letting agents so that instead of a free-for-all, consumers get a fair deal.

Absolutely. The industry has been saying this for years, but the myriad of Labour housing ministers refused point blank so to do.

The Conservatives haven’t been much better, but their proposed requirement to compel letting agents to be part of an independent redress scheme is a step in the right direction.

Grant Shapps also asked the industry to start the process through self-regulation and consumer awareness. SAFEagent was just such an initiative and extremely well supported by Government.

I can think of no member of ARLA, NAEA, RICS, NALS or the Law Society who would resist regulation.

Not only does it help protect consumers, but it also creates a level playing field on which agents can compete.

Too often, landlords go with cheap agents who do not incur the costs of self-regulation and consumer protection, not realising the risks this ‘saving’ carries.

The issue remains: how many non-regulated agents have holes in their clients’ account?

If regulation is thrust upon industry, many consumers will lose money. For consumers, read voters.

Recently, a woman was sent to prison for two years for stealing customers money from her letting agent employer.

Sadly, when a firm does the same thing, no one acts as it is deemed to be ‘overtrading’. There needs to be regulation, proper policing and a deterrent.

* Crack down on complicated letting agents’ fees to ensure rip-offs do not happen.

Assuming Mr Miliband is aware of the recent ASA ruling and the requirement for letting agents to display compulsory fees before a tenant enters into a transactional making decision, then I am not sure whether he is criticising the work of the ASA and suggesting it remains inadequate.

He may be right, as there are a large number of agents which have simply ignored this requirement.

The key here isn’t the regulation, it’s the policing and enforcement.

Policing to date has been consumer led, as until a consumer complains, there is unlikely to be any action.

The issue is that very few consumers know the rules and many still say nothing as they just want to secure a property at a time when there is a shortage.

I have always believed a simple law could resolve this stating: “Any fee or charge an agent imposes and which was not disclosed in writing prior to the commencement of the tenancy cannot be charged at a later and any attempt to do so is an offence punishable by [a multiple] of that proposed fee or charge.”

Additionally, Miliband is seeking to abolish tenants’ fees altogether.

Many agents are struggling to make profits, and let’s not forget, many of these agents provide a service to tenants as well as a duty of care. If fees were abolished, these fees will be passed on to the landlord and ultimately rents will rise. Combine this with longer-term tenancies, and tenants will probably pay more. Much has been made of the abolition of tenants’ fees in Scotland, but it is well known that a number of agents still impose charges. The key isn’t regulation – it’s transparency to ensure tenants have an informed choice.

* Introduce a national register of landlords so councils can take action against the minority who exploit their tenants.

A national register would only serve to be a register of landlords who comply with legislation.

Even a landlord fiddling his tax would resist signing up, and again, how would this be policed?

The most vulnerable tenants would still use rogue agents to secure a home through landlords driven further underground.

Regulate the agents and give someone teeth to police the legislation … and we will start to get somewhere.

* Eric Walker is managing director of Northwood