Following from last week’s blog about the proposed new rent review processes we are now looking at the proposed changes around letting to children/families, housing benefit tenants and those with pets.

Children/Families

Presently it could be considered discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 if a family with children are refused a viewing by either the Landlord or their agent because women are more likely to live with children than men are.

This part of the proposed legislation goes further, building upon the Equality Act 2010, to specifically say that a Landlord must consider renting to those families with children and cannot dismiss their application, subject to the property having enough bedrooms etc, even if they have not allowed children in their properties previously.

However, a landlord will always have the right to choose who they let the property to. They must not be seen to be discriminating with the property advert, at the viewing or accepting offers or refuse outright to consider families. The decision on who to let the property to can be made on merit with regards to income etc, house size, credit history etc for all applicants as you can presently.

Any restrictions from letting to families with children, either due to clauses in a mortgage, long leasehold leases (those of you that have mainly apartments on long leasehold with a superior landlord) or insurance policies will now be prohibited (made invalid) under the new legislation. This also applies to those tenants who are receiving housing benefit.

Housing Benefit/Universal Credit Tenants

Present legislation bars advertising “No DSS” or “No Housing benefit Tenants” or outright refusing such applicants a viewing or tenancy if they can meet your referencing requirements (affordability, credit history, previous eviction etc) and the property meets with their suitability. This will not change in the proposed legislation.

The primary change coming however affects the ability to issue a Section 8 notice if their rent arrears are due to administrative issues in the payment of their housing benefits by the DWP etc and therefore you will not be able to issue a valid Section 8 notice because of those rent arrears.

Pets

Presently landlords have the right to decide if they want pets in their properties or not, both for existing tenants and for any new tenants. The new legislation now changes that, on the basis that the landlord cannot any longer refuse a request from a tenant (existing or new) to have a pet without good reason.

If a landlord consents to a pet for either existing tenants or new tenants, they can insist on the tenants either providing suitable pet insurance for the property or for a landlord to purchase such pet insurance and charging the tenant the cost of the premium. This will require secondary legislation to the Tenants Fee Act 2019 to enable such provisions to become a permitted payment under the act.

What does that mean in practice:

There will be several reasons why it would be reasonable for a landlord to refuse a pet, although these are not all documented in the legislation, they will include such reasons as:

Where a superior lease prohibits pets in a building (such as a block of flats).
Where the property is not suitable, such as a room in an HMO or where it would be considered impractical for a pet (depending on that specific pet) such as a studio flat or a small property with no garden for a large dog etc.
A tenant either refuses to obtain pet insurance or to reimburse a landlord the cost of the premium each year.

Lastly, there is nothing to stop a landlord advertising the property with an additional pet rent per month to cover extra wear and tear/additional cleaning, as is the situation now, but this extra payment could be considered by a deposit adjudicator should there be an issue over deposit wear and tear charges, cleaning charges or damages to the property. Any “pet rent” must be clearly transparent in the initial advert and be a reasonable amount and therefore it is unlikely that this additional rent will be allowed with an insistence on the tenants also taking out an insurance policy as it may be deemed to be unreasonable because the landlords end of tenancy liability/damages would be covered by the insurance policy.

We, at Taylored Propman, still advocate that given good tenants living in a good condition property with a fair market rent these changes should not be detrimental to the Landlord and as always, we will be able to provide end-to end support to you through this process.

Please contact us so that we can offer advice and help you through these changes

Email us: office@tayloredpropman.co.uk