An agent has warned that the ‘wild west’ is looming in the private rented sector if the Government does not require private landlords to be licensed once the fees ban comes in.
James Griffin, director of home counties firms James Griffin Lettings and Pilgrims, said there is a danger that the industry could slide backwards into the “bad old days” of dangerous properties being rented out under the radar.
He said that landlords, already facing higher tax bills over the next few years, will not be prepared to swallow higher agents’ fees and will go it alone.
Griffin warned: “Far less compliant property is inevitable.
“Landlords simply do not have the compliance knowledge and they will cut corners.
“The Government needs to stop and think now, before pressing ahead any further with what is, after all, populist legislation. Failure to do so will take the PRS back decades and there will be dangerous repercussions for the safety of tenants.
“I urge all agents and tenant groups, including Shelter, to lobby for landlord licensing.
“The tenant fee ban is coming. That’s a given. However, it’s the Government’s duty to make sure it doesn’t do more harm than good.”
David Cox, CEO of ARLA Propertymark, told EYE he agreed in principle with the points raised by Griffin.
He said: “There have been discussions about landlord registration for nearly a decade, but as far as I’m aware, there’s no immediate plan.
“We’re not in favour of a landlord register because how is getting a piece of paper going to improve a landlord’s understanding of how to manage their properties?
“If the Government is going to look seriously at improving the professionalism of private landlords, then any registration should be linked to training.
“However, we think that they should deal with agents first and then move on to landlords. Trying to do both at once would become a fiasco.”
Comments (5)
Licence landlords and letting agents by all means BUT on condition that tenants are also licensed and pay the same fee as landlords.
As a person who is a landlord, who also works part time at a letting agency I have to say I have seen and had dealings with a number of **** agents that operate to a far lower standard than I do myself. I would not trust my properties to any letting agent although I acknowledge there are many that are excellent. There are also many that I call “Ka Ching” agents – grab their commission and run often allowing in poorly vetted tenants with the view the tenancy will change earlier and generate more fees.
I also accept many many agents who subscribe to eye take their business more professionally than those poorer standard agents. Maybe Mr Griffin is wishing to secure a post with Shelter.
Oh dear what a nonsensical set of comments.” I would not trust my properties to any letting agent” you say and then finish the sentence by saying ” I acknowledge that there are many that are excellent.” Please make your mind up which it is.
You then say agents allow poorly vetted tenants in so that the tenancy will end earlier and generate more fees.
Firstly I am sure most agents as a minimum send copies of references to the Landlord to approve, so why would the Landlord approve a tenant with poor references.
Secondly if the tenancy took place to a poor tenant I am sure the Landlord would not be rushing back to his agent to find another “poorly vetted tenant.”
It sounds to me as though you have just started a Saturday job at an agency but in any event as a Landlord who would not trust an agent why are you involving yourself by working for one?
License the landlord because they may no longer use the unlicensed agent.
Come on there has to be a more coherent argument than this.
It seems like a course of self-destruction to me. Let’s push more landlords out of the market so that they don’t need our services. I think Mr Griffin is too far removed from his clients to understand what his proposal will do.