An Update on The Renters Rights Bill

The bill is scheduled to return to the House of Lords on October 14, following the government’s return from the conference recess. This means that the Bill will not receive Royal Assent until late October at the earliest.

The Bill passed through the Commons and was subjected to a second read in the Lords in May of this year but has currently not moved any further forward. The Bill will be subjected to a further reading in the Lords before moving to the Final Stage to receive Royal assent.

It had previously been mooted that the act would be enacted by spring, but due to delays this wasn’t the case.

This Bill will result in the most significant changes to the legislation applicable to the private rental sector since the introduction of the Housing Act 1988.

My previous blog set out the key changes which the Bill proposed to introduce.

On the 8^th of September, the amendments made by the Lords were considered by the House of Commons.  The main points which were considered were rent increases and tribunal pressure and the removal of the pet insurance requirement.

In respect to rent increase, the proposal meant that any tenant who received a rent increase could delay it until the FTT made a ruling. Which could result in Tenants tactically delaying rent increases pending the outcome of the FTT decision.  However, the Government has confirmed that it will be able to backdate rent increases in the event that the FTT becomes backlogged by a surge in cases.

The second major point related to pet insurance. Initially, landlords sought to require tenants to take out a policy covering potential pet damage. But as insurers are unlikely to have suitable products ready in time, the Government doubled down on its decision to remove this requirement. As it stands, landlords will no longer be able to insist that tenants purchase such insurance.

In respect to the other amendments which the Lords had proposed, Pennycook on behalf of the Government said the Government “welcomed the scrutiny and challenge” but could not support changes that would, in its view, undermine the Bill’s core principles. He reiterated the Government’s reasoning for rejecting these amendments, essentially repeating arguments already set out during earlier Lords debates.

So far, the Government has rejected all the proposals made by the oppositions parties and Backbenchers, it is therefore likely that they will continue with this approach and will push the Bill through in very much its current format.

One of the key concerns for us, is the fact that there will be a substantial increase in the number of possession claims having to be issued and requiring a court hearing under the section 8 process. The court system is already struggling with the existing case load, the government response to the amendments to this section were that they were committed to improved efficiency within the courts with digitisation of the process.  Anyone who regularly uses the County Court will know that they are a long way from achieve any level of digital efficiency.

We will continue to monitor the development of the Bill and will provide a more substantial update once we have the final text of the Bill.