Renters’ Reform Bill, Report Stage, House of Commons, Amendments briefing, March 2024

NC1 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member’s explanatory statement

This new clause would remove the ability of local housing authorities to designate areas as subject to selective licensing.

LGA view

Selective licensing schemes will continue to be an important tool for councils to manage and improve private rented sector properties in their areas as the reforms, including the establishment of the national Property Portal, are introduced. We continue to call on Government to amend the Housing Act 2004 to remove the requirement for councils to seek approval for larger selective licensing schemes. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the reforms to ensure they are delivering the anticipated outcomes (including an enhanced ability of councils to regulate the private rented sector), should be undertaken before any consideration is given to phasing out local authority selective licensing. 

NC2 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member’s explanatory statement

This new clause would enable local housing authorities to impose financial penalties on certain individuals when it believes a housing offence has been committed by a body corporate.

LGA view

We agree that local housing authorities and tenants should be able to seek rent repayment orders in case where a housing offence has been committed by a body corporate. We consider that this would act as an additional deterrent for non-compliance. It would also incentivise tenants to understand their rights and identify and report non-compliance.

Amendment 3 (Helen Morgan)

Member’s explanatory statement

This amendment would increase the time which must elapse between a landlord taking ownership of a property for the purposes of them or their family occupying it and making the property available to rent from three months to six months.

LGA view

We recognise that there must be mechanisms in place to give landlords the flexibility to recover their property when needed. However, to act as a sufficient deterrent from misuse of this new ground for possession, we support extending the time which must elapse before a property is available to rent to six months. Government must also introduce statutory guidance that requires landlords to provide robust evidence to prevent these grounds being used erroneously. Consideration should also be given to this six-month rule applying to a landlord wishing to let a property as a short-term or holiday let.

Amendment 5 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member's explanatory statement

This amendment would mean that the ground for possession for student properties could also be used for properties occupied by just one or two students, which would not otherwise be considered as HMOs.

LGA view

We support this amendment that would give confidence to student landlords, who rent properties not considered as HMOs, that they can offer properties each academic year. It would allow them use new ground (4A) to regain possession in line with the academic year. 

4 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would only require a residential landlord to be a member of the landlord redress scheme introduced by Clause 45 if they are not already a member of another independent redress scheme which has been approved by the Secretary of State.

LGA view: We are not opposed to this amendment however we would like to work with the government to understand how this proposal will work in practice. There is a risk that having separate routes of redress will add unnecessary complexity and confusion to the system, as well as potential duplication of activity. Clear, unambiguous guidance and close collaboration between the redress scheme and local authorities will be critical to ensure that there is consistent approach to resolving issues for tenants as quickly and efficiently as possible.

7 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member's explanatory statement: Leave out Clause 78.

LGA view: 

We oppose this amendment, which would exclude the introduction of Rent Repayment Orders (RROs). RROs would act as an additional deterrent for non-compliance. We have concerns about local authorities’ ability to enforce compliance with the ban on landlords reletting or remarketing their property for three months after using ‘no-fault’ eviction grounds, as this is wholly reliant on former tenants noticing that the property is back on the market after they have been evicted. We therefore believe that local housing authorities and tenants should be able to seek RROs from landlords that do not comply with the landlord register, property portal, or mis-use grounds for eviction. RROs would act as an additional deterrent for non-compliance. They would also incentivise tenants to understand their rights and report non-compliance, which would strengthen councils’ enforcement work and reduce the burden on local authorities.

 We also continue to call on Government to expand the use of Rent Repayment Orders (RROs) to the following additional circumstances:

• reletting or remarketing a property within the ‘prohibited period’ (currently three months) – while we agree with Government that the ‘prohibited period’ will be a helpful mechanism to prevent the eviction grounds from becoming Section 21 by the backdoor, RROs will provide a far more robust deterrent and incentivise tenants to be proactively aware of their landlord’s compliance with the new regulations
• letting a property without active relevant entries in the database
• letting out a property that fails to meet minimum energy efficiency standards.

8 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment is consequential on Amendment 9.

9 (Anthony Mangnall)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would require the Secretary of State to publish a review of the operation of residential possession proceedings before determining the commencement date for the provisions of Chapter 1 of Part 1.

LGA view: 

We oppose this amendment on the basis that it would further delay the implementation of the abolishment of Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions. We are already very concerned by the commencement clause that would allow the Secretary of State to delay the implementation of the ban, while the Government addresses court backlogs. Without a sufficient strategy, including timescales to address the alleged backlogs, this delay could be indefinite.

Court delays have fallen to pre-pandemic levels and do not justify delaying the ban. While court delays are far from ideal, a robust judicial process must take time to account for proper case making. 

We maintain that the introduction of a ban on Section 21 evictions will not have such a profound impact on the court system to warrant a delay in its introduction. The abolition Section 21 is likely to, as designed, dramatically reduce the overall number of evictions. While there may be an increase in Section 8 evictions, the current number of Section 21 evictions will not translate into Section 8 evictions following the ban. 

12 (Caroline Lucas)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would require Energy Performance Certificates in relation to relevant dwellings to be provided to the database operator and details to be recorded in the database.

LGA view: We support this amendment which requires the energy performance certificates of relevant dwellings to be provided on the Property Portal. This would create a more transparent system for tenants, by providing a ‘single front door’ to check important information about prospective properties and landlords.

NC5 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This new clause would require the Government to publish a review of the impact of the amended grounds for possession within two years of the Act coming into force.

LGA view: We support this amendment as it will be important to evaluate the effectiveness of the new legislation and make changes as necessary to ensure that the appropriate balance is being struck between the rights of tenants and landlords.

NC6 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This new clause would require landlords or persons acting on their behalf to state the proposed rent payable in the advertisement for the premises.

LGA view: We support this amendment as it will help create a more transparent system for tenants and reduce the practise of bidding on rents.

NC9 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This new clause would ensure that rent repayment orders can be made to the landlord under the relevant tenancy in any instance where a financial penalty or offence is made relating to clauses 9, 10, 24 or 27 of the Bill.

LGA view: We support this amendment. RROs would act as an additional deterrent for non-compliance. They would also incentivise tenants to understand their rights and report non-compliance, which would strengthen councils’ enforcement work and reduce the burden on local authorities.

We also continue to call on Government to expand the use of Rent Repayment Orders (RROs) to the following additional circumstances:

• reletting or remarketing a property within the ‘prohibited period’ (currently three months) – while we agree with Government that the ‘prohibited period’ will be a helpful mechanism to prevent the eviction grounds from becoming Section 21 by the backdoor, RROs will provide a far more robust deterrent and incentivise tenants to be proactively aware of their landlord’s compliance with the new regulations.
• letting a property without active relevant entries in the database.
• letting out a property that fails to meet minimum energy efficiency standards.

NC10 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This new clause would require private landlords to deal with hazards affecting their properties.

LGA view: We support this amendment that would extend the provisions of Awaab’s law to the private rented sector (PRS) and believe that everyone deserves a safe, decent, warm, and affordable place to live regardless of whether they are in the PRS or social housing. This amendment is a positive step in empowering tenants to tackle rouge landlords. 

We are concerned that the enforcement of this law is likely to lead to an increase in demands from PRS tenants to the local authority as the responsible body for conducting health and safety standards for rented homes (HHSRS) assessments to identify hazards. Councils are facing severe budgetary constraints and multiple inquiries and reviews, including the Department of Levelling Up Housing and Communities (DLUHC) own research, identified that many local enforcement teams do not currently have the resources and capacity to proactively tackle poor standards in the PRS. The government must conduct a full and realistic assessment of the resources councils need to regulate the PRS effectively, and provides them with adequate, upfront new burdens funding. 

NC11 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This new clause would ensure that blanket bans on renting to families with children or those in receipt of benefits are presumed to be unlawful discrimination unless proved otherwise.

LGA view: We support provisions that outlaw ‘no DSS’ policies that unfairly discriminate against benefit claimants and families with young children, as committed to in the A Fairer Private Rented Sector white paper. We would like to see the bill go even further and include protections for other groups that have experienced blanket bans, such as non-UK passport holders and prison leavers, to deliver a fairer PRS for all.

There is a risk that in practice this law could be difficult to enforce as tenants and regulatory authorities would have to point to evidence that applicants are refused on the basis of being in receipt of benefits and/or having children. 

15 (Matthew Pennycook)

Amendment text: “(4) The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a review of the changes to grounds for possession made under this Act within two years of the date of Royal Assent.”

LGA view: We support this amendment as it will be important to evaluate the effectiveness of the new legislation and make changes as necessary to ensure that the appropriate balance is being struck between the rights of tenants and landlords.

21 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that in instances where a private landlord increases the rent without issuing a section 13 or section 13A notice the tenant can seek to recover costs through a debt claim in the court. It also provides the government with the power by regulation for such claims to be recoverable by tribunal.

LGA view: We support this amendment which would allow tenants to recover the cost of court proceeding where the landlords is at fault by not fulfilling their legal obligations when issuing a rent increase. The court process can be costly and not being able to claim back expenses incurred may discourage tenants from seeking justice. 

22 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that where a rent assessment is carried out by a tribunal, the rent subsequently determined by that tribunal cannot be higher than that originally requested by a landlord in a section 13 notice.

LGA view: We support this amendment which would provide clarity and reassurance to tenants that a tribunal cannot propose a higher rent than that initially proposed by the landlord. Determining the market rent of a property is not a simple task, hence why challenges go to through the Tribunal. It is unreasonable that the burden of accurately assessing the rent should fall to the tenant in order to have the confidence to seek a determination from a tribunal. If a tribunal were able to propose increases to tenants’ rents above that proposed by a landlord, it will inherently discourage the use of this process and undermine its purpose of providing tenants with stronger protections against excessive rent hikes. It is therefore vital that the Tribunal can only confirm or reduce a proposed rent increase – but not increase it.

23 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that in cases of undue hardship tenants would have a minimum of two months from the date of determination before a new rent became payable.

LGA view: We support this amendment that would set a minimum of two months from the date of the decision when courts are determining the discretionary date for new rent to be payable in cases of undue hardship.

32 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment ensures that a tenant may keep a pet for the duration of their tenancy once consent has been given.

LGA view: We support this amendment that would ensure a tenant can keep their pet for the entire duration of their tenancy and consent cannot be withdrawn by the landlord. It is important that the changes are fair for both parties. We therefore support the proposal to enable landlords to require the tenant to take out an insurance policy, to cover any potential damage to the property caused by a pet. 

27 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would require the database to record details of notices of possession served by a landlord in respect of each dwelling of which they are the landlord.

LGA view: We support this amendment that would require the Property Portal to record details of notices of possession served by a landlord in respect of each dwelling of which they are the landlord. This would help to create a more transparent system for tenants, by providing a ‘single front door’ to check important information about prospective properties and landlords.

28 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that the abolition of section 21 evictions would come into force on Royal Assent, with saving provisions for any notices served before that date.

LGA view: We support this amendment that would ensure that there is no delay in the abolition of Section 21 eviction notices. The ending of a private rented tenancy is the most common reason for a household being at risk of homelessness and it is vital that Section 21 evictions be brought to an end as soon as possible.

33 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment covers the full scope of reasons that private registered providers of social housing may wish to use the new ground for possession 1B for to offer properties to another tenant.

LGA view: We agree with this amendment which would see social housing providers able to offer properties to another tenant, rather than only selling the property, when a rent-to-buy agreement has not been fulfilled. This gives flexibility to support other high-priority cohorts waiting for social housing. This amendment should also be extended to include councils as landlords.

30 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that an intermediate landlord retains possession of the property and remains as the landlord of the occupying tenant until the conclusion of possession proceedings.

LGA view: We support his amendment that would ensure that an intermediate landlord remains the landlord of the occupying tenant until possessions proceedings are completed. This would provide greater security and protections to tenants that are subject to 2ZA grounds.

19 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would move new Ground 8A from the list of mandatory grounds for possession (in Part I of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988) to the list of discretionary grounds for possession (in Part II of Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988).

LGA view: Regarding the mandatory ground for eviction for rent arrears, eviction should always be the last resort after other options, such as repayment plans, have been exhausted in order to reduce the risks of eviction and the threat of homelessness for tenants. We agree that making the ground for eviction for rent arrears as discretionary, rather than mandatory, strikes the right balance that allows the court to judge whether rent arrears are severe or problematic enough to warrant eviction.

20 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would maintain the existing definition of anti-social behaviour as being conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance, rather than being defined as behaviour “capable of causing” nuisance or annoyance.

LGA view: We are concerned by the ambiguity of the Bill’s definition of anti-social behaviour. Including all behaviour that is ‘capable of causing’ nuisance or annoyance, sets a low bar for what constitutes anti-social behaviour. Therefore, we support this amendment that would utilise an existing definition of anti-social behaviour and remove the risk of eviction caused by the actions of one-off visitors. We also want to work with the government to better define anti-social behaviour in the context of renting to provide robust guidance for tenants and landlords alike.

25 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would maintain the homelessness prevention duty owed by local authorities to persons who have received a notice to vacate a property and would extend it to notices for possession issued under section 8 of the Housing Act 1988. 

26 (Matthew Pennycook)

Member's explanatory statement: This amendment would ensure that the homelessness prevention duty owed by a local authority cannot end whilst a valid notice under section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 has been issued in respect of the only accommodation available to that person.

LGA view on amendments 25 & 26: We oppose these amendments and agree that, in line with our LGA response to the technical consultation on consequential changes to the homelessness legislation, that the Government’s Clause 18 in the Renters Reform Bill has taken forward Option 1 from the Government's technical consultation on consequential changes to the homelessness legislation. Local authorities will always assist households facing homelessness and this amendment will remove local authorities’ discretion over when to accept a homelessness duty and decide if it can appropriately be discharged, in cases where they believe that an individual is not at risk of homelessness.

However, homelessness services continue to be at the sharp end of the housing emergency and are facing unsustainable demand. An increasingly unaffordable private rented sector, a shortage of social housing, the rising cost-of-living and the impact of supporting new arrivals and refugees is creating the perfect storm for a homelessness crisis.

To address current pressures, we continue to call for Government to take a cross-departmental approach to homelessness prevention which tackles the drivers of homelessness and provides adequate funding for councils’ homelessness prevention work. While re-aligning LHA rates with at least the 30th percentile of market rents is a positive step, a significant funding gap remains.

Elliot Gregory
Public Affairs and Campaigns Advisor

Phone: 020 7664 3059 

Mobile: 07766252833

Email: [email protected]