NLA remains hostile to landlord registration scheme

Permalink: NLA remains hostile to landlord registration scheme
by Gill Montia

The National Landlords’ Association (NLA) has published its full response to the Government’s plans to create a register of landlords in England and Wales.

Ministers want data to include the home address of the landlord and the addresses of all rental properties owned.

In return landlords will be allocated registration numbers for use in tenancy agreements, court proceedings and housing benefit claims.

The scheme would be administered by an independent body, with landlords paying a small fee.

The NLA is particularly concerned about the requirement for landlords to register the addresses of all of the properties they let, describing this as “overly intrusive”.

In addition, the body has raised questions about how the system will be policed.

In this respect the NLA refers to the licensing scheme that has been in force in Scotland since April 2006 and has met with both administration and enforcement problems.

According to the Association, research published by Shelter Scotland shows that currently one in four rental properties are not registered, with some local authorities unable to take action because of a lack of resources.

Summing up, the body believes that any new legislation in England must focus on “both driving up standards in the industry and rooting out rogue landlords” and that the proposed new scheme will not achieve the desired results.

NLA chairman, David Salusbury, comments: “In the current economic climate, the last thing good landlords need is to feel penalised. Reform must be workable for landlords and not damage the private-rented sector.”

In related news, the Citizens’ Advice Bureau (CAB) has recently issued a new report entitled “Let Down” in which it claims that private tenants in England and Wales are frequently the victims of a system that allows letting agents to operate completely unchecked.

The charity describes some tenants as being ripped-off by agents that impose “unjustified and excessive charges” and provide a poor or non-existent service.