Mandatory Ombudsman for Landlords - government takes first step

Excellent. Can't wait for the mandatory tenants scheme that'll be used to track and resolve tenancy breaches such as non payment and destroying someone else's property.

And who is going to pay for setting up this so called "ombudsmen"? Of course, the private landlord, and they wonder why the rents keep going up.

The problem with all this is enforcement. I reported a local landlord for no EPC and I suspect no how to rent guide but although the Council know there is no EPC they cannot enforce when notified by a third party. So nothing changes. The professional LLs do what they must, the accidental LLs dont do the required and still get away with it!

Totally unnecessary and certainly not something that should take priority over other issues such as ensuring that Landlords know where they stand in relation to the Governments other anti- Private Landlord Schemes that they have started and left us in abeyance on…. EPC ratings, scraping of Section 21 etc…..

More Bureaucracy, more Administration, more Costs,
more Unfairness, another Nail in the Coffin. another Savage attack on Private landlords to finish us off as if they hadn’t done enough already and gather more information about us there is no more, licensing Schemes done that already and a multitude of on going other sources they know the last time we sneezed. There is no one to Redress us more discrimination to stick us to the wall Mandatory.

Do they sit around a table every morning trying to brainstorm the next project they can hit landlords with. It will be compulsory and will involve a fee payable by the landlord to fund it as usual!

I have had some weird and arbitrary decisions, when a tenant has left, from the Ombudsman not based on facts or photographs or receipts BUT just based on which way the 'wind blew that day' or their political view of the PRS !

It is almost a 'given' that a tenant will go to the Ombudsman , to see what they can get, if there is a deduction claimed on the deposit

This legislation will only achieve what we now know, will increase bureaucracy, delay repairs waiting a decision and increased rents to cover the potential losses

How the Government thinks it is going to manage every rent turnover going to a compulsory Ombudsman, given that 98% of the PRS market is single property landlords, is beyond realistic

How much will it cost? A lot
How much good will it do? Nothing
Will the government sort out its own properties first? No

It won't get through this Parliament & then a Labour Govt will have its own view.

Pre-tender Market Engagement- What a joke.
This will be a group of people whom will self appoint themselves to a new industry of sorting out the so called rental crisis. Of course the joke being that a lot of these issues have been created by this Government and previous Governments for not investing in social housing.
The title is correct when read properly 'pretender' to do something! It will just be another sound bite for a Politician to claim that they are resolving the housing issue and are setting up this vital ombudsman scheme, funded no doubt by us!

It says its for English landlords but I'm sure Scotland will follow suit with something else just as stupid. We've already got the first tier tribunal lot here in Scotland who are BLATANTLY on the side of the tenant.. I know from personal experience. They will reject your application (after a 3 month or so period) to evict if you forget to cross a t or dot an i. Their standard response if you phone them and ask a question is " you'll have to seek legal advice" or "we're not allowed to advise". You get no help in finding which forms you need to fill in, timescales between sending off forms etc..... It feels like it's designed to catch landlords out on technicalities. I lost over £6k in rent due to their slow, bumbling, biased methods. No wonder I'm selling my portfolio... I've had enough of all the BS. I fee sorry l for my tenants having to find another home but I'm happy to add to the housing problems created by the government... Let them sort it out... Or not... It's not my problem. I'll be screwed over with capital gains but it's better to exit now with something in your pocket than later with nothing. Compulsory purchases will be next... (just my personal opinion)

This is the sop to removing S21. There has been trial scheme somewhere and the conclusion was it was invoked too late and too few people used it. So why bother? There is already the deposit scheme mediation service - so watch them jump in to the opportunity. Good landlords don’t need it. And bad ones won’t care.

NothIng like a bit of MORE regulation, .... to drive up rents even further ;-)
especially at a time when 83% of tenants are satisfied.
What was ole saying I recall, something about .... if it ain't broke, .....

Wake up and smell the coffee. This is a quote from Gove's Brown Paper released in June last year:

"The new Ombudsman will allow tenants to seek redress FOR FREE [SO ALL TENANTS WILL ALL BE GOING THERE], where they have a complaint about their tenancy. This could include complaints about the behaviour of the landlord [ENTER VEXAXIOUS CLAIMS FROM TENANTS JUST TO BE DIFFICULT ESPECIALLY AFTER SECTION 21 HAS GONE], the standards of the property [SOME WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT EVERYTHING] or where repairs have not been completed within a reasonable timeframe[NOT WITHIN 24 HOURS IS NOT ENOUGH FOR SOME PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY ONCE S21 HAS GONE]. We will make membership of the Ombudsman mandatory and local councils will be
able to take enforcement action against landlords that fail to join the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman will have powers to put things right for tenants, including compelling
landlords to issue an APOLOGY [WTF!!!! NOTE NOTHING ABOUT A TENANT ISSUING AN APOLOGY TO THE LANDLORD IF THE OMBUDSMAN FINDS IN THE LANDLORDS FAVOUR] [ON THE SCALE OF 1-10 WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY THAT THE OMBUDSMAN WILL EVER FIND IN A LANDLORD'S FAVOUR?], provide information, take remedial action, and/or pay
COMPENSATION of up to £25,000 [WTF! AGAIN ALL ONE SIDED]. As part of providing compensation, we also intend for the Ombudsman to be able to require landlords to reimburse rent to tenants where the service or standard of property they provide falls short of the mark. In keeping with standard practice, the Ombudsman’s decision will be binding on landlords, should the complainant accept the final determination. Failure to comply with a decision may result in repeat or serious offenders being liable for a Banning Order [BANNING ORDER: THIS SEEMS LIKE THE ONE BIT OF GOOD NEWS FOR LANDLORDS. THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING BANNED IS MUCH MORE PREFERABLE THAN BEING A LANDLORD] The government will also retain discretionary powers to
enable the Ombudsman’s decisions to be enforced through the Courts if levels of compliance
become a concern."

"Cannot provide a quick solution to complex problems. Complainant has no control over the investigation i.e. the Ombudsman does not act for the complainant specifically and they can refuse to deal with a specific matter." -------Source Google: disadvantages of an Ombudsman.
Obviously, Another Useless Idea. The government always fuelling a fight and conflict between landlords and tenants. We believe this issue is for social housing and not for the PRS. The government should be
very cautious not to turn the country into anarchy by having too much control. This lip service goes nowhere but to divide the tenants and landlords.

You vill rent ze house for ze peanuts and you vill eat ze bugs

This is only about more tax, the one thing HMRC doesnt have enough of is landlord data.

The civil service and councils have resorted to confirmed common law ‘woke’ ideology in what is a 6-year cover-up with God’s top-down plan fused loop (statute +common law) pitted against the ‘status quos’ upside down unlawful common law ‘woke’ ideology breach of good faith agreements. Did the civil service know their job measured against comparable fair contracts fused loop?
This is system’s failure and unfair trading FRAUD cover-up: The customers are not giving up their GOD’s focus top-down plan in a 2-way stalemate when FUSION did not exist when about 50% of power group (Letting agents, Property Mark, Landlord Law, SAL, NRLA, solicitors, media groups (Mashroom/ NRLA/Landlord Law), course providers) ‘U’-turns have turned to unlawful practices, wiping out good faith agreements – when implied statute customer protection has not been supplied UK wide. Show customers Implied statute for customer care?
Google Common law vs Implied statute (Uk) and Richard Heaton’s talk at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies on common law and statute law, the ‘verbal and written’ diarrhoea common law groups (Letting agents, Property Mark, Landlord Law, SAL, NRLA, solicitors, media groups (Mashroom/ NRLA/Landlord Law), course providers) ‘U’-turns have turned to unlawful common law practices, breach of good faith agreements in say 50% of negligence cases as Government's 'woke' ideology common law Policies in-turn the power groups in 50% of negligence cases
In investigations, the civil service or councils have resorted to a cover-up unfair trading – criminal practices in a 2-solicitor legal context as the FUSED loop (Implied + common law) has been breached in all civil-service/councils common law ‘woke’ ideology Policies at the start in a system’s failure
The good faith agreements (Implied statute + common law) is delivered as solicitor's confirmed common law, breach of the law of the land making all agreements ‘null and void’ in what is an unlawful ‘verbal and written’ diarrhoea ‘common law’ system.
The 'U'-turn System's Unfair Trading was reported because of the FUSION MISTAKE, which led to instant TERMINATION for repudiatory breaches of good faith agreements. The government's 'U'-turn common law 'woke' Policies do not stack up, UK wide as Implied statute FUSION loop is missing in the Government’s MISTAKE, eg PSO/RICS’s £50 offer in a divided system
In the government’s ‘woke’ ideology turns Lawful (top-down) Policies upside down and smashes customers. The customers tenants and landlords are badly abused, called ‘rogue’ landlords by the top civil service ‘woke’ ideology common law unlawful trading business (manipulation, misrepresentation, defamation) in a ‘verbal and written’ diarrhoea REFUSAL system that does not make any sense, in turn with about 50% of the common law power groups being well protected with customer’s denied implied statute for customer protection or redress when letting agents or solicitors are negligent with the missing FUSION (implied statute + common law)

What he meant was that we have heard enough nonsense. Talk a lot, waste everyone's time but no constructive solutions. Did you get it?

Sandra. So you reported a landlord for having no EPC but there are 100’s of thousands of those. I counted 12 in one Road alone and on checking loads in other Roads and areas whether expired or never existed. This is all Public knowledge on the web for all to see so the Council would have open access to this already.
Sandra it seems this is not your landlord if it was you would have known if you received the “Right 2 Rent “ guide when taking the property and signing the Contract.
Landlords are required to have a multitude of documents and give to Tenants prior to granting a Tenancy.
It follows it should be illegal for Tenants to Rent a property that don’t have those documents and Tenants should be prosecuted.
The Contract should be declared null & void and Tenant required to leave immediately for illegal occupation, too many are happy to take the property and complain when they are in.
Landlords so from the comment I am responding to if you have problem Tenants get a third Party to report you to exempt you from Council action.