Twitter Tips

Reading an article about twitter this morning, I suddenly thought ‘Why not have some special tips accounts? One for landlords and one for tenants?’

Well, not being one to mess about (particularly where there is a free marketing opportunity), I have now set these up. Every week, on a Wednesday afternoon, tips will be posted:

For landlords to : http://twitter.com/LandlordsTips

For tenants to : http://twitter.com/TenantsTips

If you have a web-site or blog, particularly if it is about property, you can also add a feed for either (or both!) to your site. This will give your site some extra content which will be updated weekly, and will also help me. It would be nice if you could let me know if you do this.

In point of fact I have already written quite a few of the tips (up to the end of April actually) and they are going to be drip fed into the sites by a great application I have discovered called Tweetlater.

I have never really caught on to facebook and myspace, but I have to say that twitter is great!

More on drug factories in rented properties

Further to my earlier post on this topic, I have spotted an interesting item on the BBC News web-site. This gives more information about the signs to spot a cannabis factory, and is well worth reading, plus there is an informative video.

Generally though landlords need to do regular inspections, and if a tenant consistently refuses to allow access, this should alert you to the possibility of criminal activity. If you just ignore the signs, you may have problems claiming for any damage later, on your insurance.

Also, if you are a landlord, it might be an idea now, to check to see whether this sort of thing would be covered on your current policy.

Advance rent = deposit??

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

***

There is a report of a new tenancy deposit case on the Nearly Legal website. Although this is a County Court decision and therefore cannot bind Judges in future cases, it is interesting, and may be worrying for many landlords.

It appears that in this case there was a dispute as to whether the deposit money was actually a deposit or ‘future rent’ as alleged by the landlord. The Judge decided that the regulations say that any money paid (although in this case it was money from a former deposit paid to the same landlord in respect of a previous property) will be deemed to be paid as security, and therefore will be covered by the tenancy deposit regulations.

Many landlords have sought to evade the tenancy deposit regulations by taking two months rent in advance instead of one month in advance and a deposit. This case implies that this strategy may be more risky than has previously been thought, as if the Judge finds that in fact the payment was a deposit, the landlord will be liable for the penalty ‘fine’ of three times the deposit amount.

For more information about this case, read the Nearly Legal Report.

Legal Services Commission is arrogant and devious says former supervising solicitor

Although it is not directly related to housing law, I feel I ought to draw readers attention to an excellent comment in the Law Society Gazette from Michael Burdett who previously helped the Legal Services Commission (LSC) to set up the CDS (i.e. Criminal Defence Service) direct scheme.

As someone who has worked with the LSC he ought to know something about them. His view is that the savings claimed for the expanded CDS Direct scheme are misrepresented and that the LSC have failed to answer his request for a breakdown of how they have been calculated. He goes on to say that the expanded CDS is probably of questionable legality, that the ‘hypocritical and bureaucratic attitude’ shown by the LSC in this is being replicated elsewhere, and that their ‘arrogant and devious approach’ towards reform of both civil and criminal legal aid has destroyed the goodwill of the profession.

This is all so sad. In the 1940s when legal aid was first set up, it was conceived as a twin service to the National Health Service. So people of modest means would have access to both medical and legal help. When I first started work as a lawyer all firms did legal aid, even the very large ones. Now hardly anyone does. When tenants on benefit ring me up asking for representation, it is very difficult to think of anywhere I can refer them other than our local Shelter office.

As Michael Burdett says in his article, it is worrying that people’s right to legal help is being circumscribed at a time when the police and the state are being given unprecedented powers over the citizen.

We are told that all this is in the interests of the taxpayer as it will cost less. But this just reflects my blog item below – things being valued solely on the basis of how much they cost. And is a miniscule reduction in our tax really an adequate compensation for being unable to receive independent legal help if we are unjustly detained by the police? As others have pointed out, compared to the National Health Service budget and defence costs, the Legal Aid Budget is miniscule.

It is all very worrying.

Looking at things the right way

Reading the Sunday papers, in an excellent article on various women’s comments on the current crisis and whether it was fuelled mainly by male gung ho testosterone driven attitudes (very probably in my view), I was struck by a comment made by Emma Howard Boyd:

I have spent a lot of time thinking about how you value things socially and environmentally. If you value things purely from a financial perspective then you possibly end up with the wrong type of metrics. Look at some of the happiness data. How do you measure people's general welfare? Looking at purely monetary data is not the right way to do it.

I have long thought this. Our world today often seems to be driven purely by money, and that is the standard by which we are all judged. But I know that many people find this distasteful, quite rightly.

I can remember, during the recent heady years of property investment, I was invited to go to a property evening event in London (I had better not say which one it was!). The speakers and their soundbite talks were all quite blatently driven by greed. This was epitomised for me by one of the speakers making some sort of offer, saying those returning a completed form first would receive an offer or inventive and a young man jumping up and running, running down the room so he could get his form in first. They were certainly were not interested in what I had to say about landlords responsibilities (no money to be made there!). Although some of the people there were quite nice, I found whole ethos of the event repellent, and it quite turned me off the whole property investment thing, and attending any other such events. I remember I took great pleasure in advising a young Australian there (I think he was a driver for one of the delegates) on his problems with his landlord.

The valuation thing can perhaps be illustarted by our new wood stove (which I wrote about here). From a purely financial point of view, it has not perhaps been a huge success. We have had to buy rather a lot of wood and it has been a bit more than we expected. However from all other viewpoints it has been brilliant. Our living room is warm and friendly, and we love looking after and caring for our fire. I often just sit and watch the flames, which I am sure must be great therepy. We buy all our wood locally from sustainable sources, and are thus helping to save the planet. By what standard should it be judged?

Perhaps we should try to live our lives more by non financial values. Had more bankers done that in the past, we would not be where we are now.

Tessa on the Radio with Graham and Karen

I did my radio bit today with Graham and Karen on Radio Norfolk, and it was great! Not like work at all. I think I now want to be a radio presenter when I grow up.

Radio Norfolk is based in Norwich’s Forum building, which also houses the main public library. There is also an exhibition space on the ground floor where they sometimes have concerts and other events, and which currently houses four (I think it is four) fabulous dragons made by children at local schools - well worth a visit if you are in Norwich.

The radio studios are upstairs, there are two of them, so they can switch seamlessly from one to the other. (And also, I was told, so they can keep on going if one breaks down!) I was fascinated to see how it all worked as I have never been in a radio studio before (my previous radio experience was by telephone).

I suppose I was with Karen and Graham for about 1/2 hour? Not sure exactly. We chatted about silly things (mainly school playground games based on an article in the local paper) and I did a bit of talk about landlord and tenant stuff. Of course you can only scratch the surface in that time, there is so much to say, but I did my best. They seemed to think it was OK anyway. I only lost it once.

I thoroughly enjoyed doing the show, party because Graham and Karen are so nice, and partly because it was such fun being silly on the radio. They did say they might have me back one day, which would be brilliant if it happened. I’ll let you know if I do.

Unlock Democracy - Charity of the Month (February 2009)

On my Landlord-Law site I have a book reviews section, and from time to time I get sent books to review. Generally they are landlord and tenant related, but I was quite excited, some time before Christmas, to receive a copy of Unlocking Democracy.

I am ashamed to say that I was completely unaware of the Charter 88 organisation which preceded Unlock Democracy, a cross party organisation set up to campaign for democratic and human rights. However it is certainly something of which I approve.

I decided that this was a book I was going to read in some detail before doing my review. I did actually read quite a lot before it got buried in the pile of things to do. That detailed review never did get written. However instead I am making Unlock Democracy my February Charity of the Month.

If you are at all interested in democracy and human rights, I would suggest that you buy the book, and sign up to the web-site. Because however good a political party sound when in opposition, as soon as they are elected they become ‘the government’. And it is not normally in 'the government's' interest to give power to the people, unless forced to do so. However well meaning they may be.

We need organisations like Unlock Democracy to watch out for our interests and tell us when our rights are about to be eroded. If we agree, we can then mobilise the power of the internet, to make our views known by emails to MPs and the press, arranging protest meetings, and signing online petitions. This is the new democracy. Use it!

Two talks - a day in London

Had a reasonably pleasant day in London today, although I never enjoy rising at 5.00 am. I also had the embarrassment of having to ask the taxi man to return twice, once for my watch and the second time for my railway ticket (!). Still he was a cheery chap and didn’t seem to mind too much.

The scenery on the train down was rather beautiful, especially the bit between Ipswich and Manningtree - creeks and rivers under a haze of low lying mist and snow, with the sun just rising above. Lovely.

Arriving in London, I walked, as usual, to my lecturing venue, which was by the Pru building on Holborn. Just the thing to wake you up, and I dislike traveling by underground. I don't go to London that much so it is nice to see it - it was positively sparkling in the sunlight today. And St Pauls must be the most beautiful thing in the City - I took a picture of it just for you!

Of course after rising at 5.00, a two hour train journey, and a walk across half London, what you really need is bacon, fried eggs and a cup of tea - a nearby greek cafe obliged for a very modest £3.50.

The CLT talk went more or less as normal. I have been speaking at this particular conference for several years now, and it is always nice to see the other speakers again.

However the Legal IT Show was a bit of a damp squib. Not that many people present and hardly anyone at my talk. I suspect the recent snow had something to do with it. Never mind, thats life! I attended a couple of the other talks which were very interesting and had a look at some of the stands.

But it is really nice to be back home again! There’s no place like it. A quiet day tomorrow I think.

Radio calling!

Funny I should have written about radio last night. Because today a nice man from Radio Norfolk rang up and asked me to go on his program next week. Next Wednesday in fact, fact fans, 10.00 to 1.00, with Graham and Karen. For a program on renting property.

Of course, as is the way of things, when he rang I was in the middle of having a new printer installed, and our talk was punctuated by the creaking and grinding noises of a printer being set up and tested. So I probably did not sound as intelligent as (of course) I really am. Well thats my excuse anyway.

So if you are at a loose end next Wednesday, why not tune in and see how I do? He promised that they would not do a Jeremy Paxman on me, so hopefully I won’t be gibbering with fear. It looks from the Radio Norfolk site as if the program cannot be downloaded via iplayer so you will only be able to listen to it live.

Anyway, thats enough blogging. I have two talks to do in London tomorrow. A talk for CLT on repossession proceedings in the morning and a talk about Landlord-Law at the Legal IT Show in the afternoon. Thankfully it looks as if the snow won’t be too bad for my journey, But I will have to get up at 5.00 am to catch the early train, which is never nice. And I still haven’t packed my bag!

Blowing in the wind

One of my favourite songs by American singer songwriter Suzanne Vega is Gypsy, in particular these words:

And we'll blow away forever soon
And go on to different lands

And please do not ever look for me
But with me you will stay
And you will hear yourself in song
Blowing by one day

I always loved that image of walking down a busy road and suddenly hearing yourself float by in sound, perhaps from a cafe, perhaps from a radio carried by someone on the street, none of them realising ...

Well in a sense it is going to happen to me now - not alas a romantic song from a former lover (I wish), but something a bit more prosaic. Yes, we have invested in a radio campaign!

Ever the optimist, I have decided that the current hard times should be a good opportunity for us, as our service is aimed at people wanting to save money. All that is necessary is for them to find out about us ... Hence the radio ad.

Let me know if you hear it.

My Deposits open to all

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

***

I have seen quite a few news and other items on the internet reporting the statement from the ‘my deposits’ tenancy deposit scheme confirming that, unlike Tenancy Deposit Scheme (run by the Dispute Service), they will not be withdrawing cover from unaccredited agents (see my report here).

However this is hardly surprising as my deposits is a partnership between the National Landlords Association and Hamilton Fraser Insurance. Presumably Hamilton Fraser are more minded to provide cover to all, being part owners of the business, than the (unnamed) insurers of the Tenancy Deposit Scheme. Even so, the press release states that my deposits will be introducing more stringent financial checks.

The third tenancy deposit company, The Deposit Protection Service, as the ‘default’ provider, is always open to all landlords and agents (see further here).

Good luck President Obama

When I watched the inauguration yesterday I half wished I was American. When I watched the Panorama programme on American healthcare later on iplayer I was thankful to be British. America is a wonderful country with a great history and heritage, but we have things to be proud of too.

It is ironic that at a time when the USA has a president which the majority of British support after the hugely unpopular Bush, we are warned that the ‘special relationship’ is about to take a nose dive.

However no matter. We are not the problem, so perhaps it is right that we take a bit of a back seat in the presidential intray. And hopefully our scientists can work together now to save the planet.

I wish him all the best.

Centrepoint – Charity of the month (January 2009)

Centrepoint is a charity which for 40 years has been helping homeless young people in London, and more recently in the North East. Young people are given temporary accommodation, and are then helped to sort themselves out. The aim is that those helped will then move on and be able to live useful lives.

With unemployment rising, there are likely to be more youngsters on the street rather than less.

To read more, and to make a donation, click here.

Obtaining credit – small firms penalised

I feel I should record my recent (successful, sort of) attempts to obtain credit. We are actually doing fairly well at the moment (all things considered) but I decided I needed a small one year loan of about £3,000 to help me pay my tax, and help fund the purchase of a new printer and a few other bits and bobs.

About five days ago I telephoned Exclusive Benefits Plc, a finance company originally recommended by the Law Society, which I have often used in the past to get business loans. The first news I received was that they had been told that they could not lend to solicitors firms with less than three partners. "I’m so sorry" said the nice man at EB, "I know it goes against all that the government has been saying, but that is what we have been told by lenders". He then went on to say that they could make a loan to me, but only on a personal basis. The main difference, it turned out, was that the money would be paid into my personal account rather than the business account, and as the main purpose of the loan was to help me pay my tax, that would be all right.

He then broke the news to me that the APR would be 17.9%. "What!" I yelped, "But bank base rate is 1.5%!!" “I know, I know” he replied "but the banks are very unwilling to lend and, as the loan is only for £3,000, that is the best we can do". Well I need the money so I told him to go ahead.

The next day he rang back, even more apologetic, to tell me that he had now been told that the APR would be 24.4%. "I’m really sorry about this" he said "I don’t like having to quote interest rates at over 20%, but that is all that is available". However we worked out that the actual difference to me would be about £9 per month, which looked at in that light is affordable, if annoying. "And you can always pay back the loan early if you wish" he reminded me. We agreed that he would send out the paperwork to me, but that I would have a word with my bank, Lloyds TSB, to see if they could do any better.

I then rang my bank manager, a new manager who I have not yet met or spoken to. His assistant said that he was on an appointment, and could she help? I told her that I was enquiring about a small one year loan of £3,000 to help pay my tax. "Well", said the assistant, "I think you had better make an appointment and come in and see him". I explained to her that I already had an offer of a loan elsewhere but only at a very high interest rate, and was ringing up to see if my own bank could do something better for me. However it would not really be economic if, to obtain this, I had to give up half a days work. Could I perhaps speak to my bank manager about it, and see what the prospects were? She said that she would pass my message on and that he would get back to me. I am still waiting for the call.

So reader, I have now signed the paperwork for the 24.4%APR loan and will hopefully receive the money in the next few days. The lender, in case you are interested, is the Co-operative Bank. I suppose I am lucky to have got a loan at all in these days. But is it very disheartening to learn that small firms are being discriminated against by lenders in this way, after all we have been told by government. Something should be done about it. Gordon?

The Dickens case

Those who have read articles here in the past about ASBO landlord Dickens will find an excellent report on the Nearly Legal site here.

The new MacBook

I treated myself to an Apple MacBook over Christmas. I am still feeling a bit guilty about it because, frankly I could have got something much cheaper - but I wanted to try a Mac! Having got it though I am really pleased I did.

The MacBook I bought was the cheapest available, the small white one, not the new and more expensive aluminum. I did wonder if I could get something in the sales, but it seems that Macs are not included in the current frenzy of discounting. Somehow I find that comforting.

It was apparent as soon as I had taken it out of the box, that I was dealing with a quality product. For example, the power supply box has neat little prongs which slide out for winding excess cable around, and where the cable plugs into the machine it is magnestised so it does not wobble. I was a bit worried about not being able to use the machine easily but actually it was all fairly straightforward and intuitive - for example it logged itself into our wireless network without me really having to do much at all.

The screen is wonderful! I am gradually watching all my DVDs again, just to see how great they look. On the Mac you just shove the CDs into a slot at the side, which I think is much better.

In order to get best use out of my new mac, I bought Mac OS X Leopard: The Missing Manual by David Pogue, which has been brilliant. I have worked through it over the past week and it has taught me lots I would never have known otherwise. So, after about 2 weeks use, what do I like and what do I dislike?

Likes:

• The screen! Much better quality that any other screen in the house I think!
  
• The ability to scroll by using two fingers on the touch pad
  
• The spotlight search facility - a great way to find things
  
• The dock (which I have put on the left, where my MS Office tool bar goes on my PC) - and I like the way the icons bounce up and down as the programs open
  
• The helpful menulets at the top
  
• I also quite like the finder box design, used for all folders
  
• The fact that I don’t have to worry about viruses as apparently macs are immune to them
  
• The MacBook is much lighter to carry around than our clunky old Dell laptop (now taken over by my son)

Dislikes:

• For someone whose eyesight is getting gradually worse, the icons and font (on the macbook at any rate) tend to be a bit small (this is presumably something the young things at Apple who do the designing won’t have a problem with, yet ...)
  
• I rather miss the links in the bar at the bottom of the screen for moving from one program to another that you get in PCs (there’s a thing called expose (fn and F9) which tiles all your programs so you can find a hidden window, but I have not really got used to it yet)
  
• It is confusing that the buttons to close programs are at the top left rather than at the top right as in windows, also they are very small (although quite pretty)
  
• I don’t like Pages very much - I bought iwork to get the full mac experience (plus it is cheaper) but I think that this was a mistake, I should have got Office for Mac. At the time though Office seemed the boring option
  
• There are also problems in that some of the specialist software I use on my PC won’t work on the mac, this also includes the admin area of Landlord-Law which was designed for me using a PC! So I don’t think I will be replacing the office PC yet.

Generally I am finding the mac better for recreational use (such as watching DVDs and messing around on the internet) rather than work stuff, which I find it easier to do at the desktop PC. The screen is so much bigger on my PC (albeit of a lesser quality) so I can see everything better, and I prefer using Word. I suspect however that as time goes by I will get to like the mac more and more. I am gradually becoming as it were bilingual.

Overall it has been a good experience. However if you do get a mac, do get the missing manual book too.

Preventing drug factories in rented properties

I have recently been provided by Suffolk Police with an excellent guide to spotting and dealing with drug production in rented properties. This is an increasing problem, for example drug producers renting houses for the sole purpose of growing cannabis. This is very bad for the landlords as not only will it affect their reputation, but also considerable damage can be done to their property, plus it will have a very negative effect on the neighbourhood as a whole.

All landlords should read the full document (which you will find here) but here are a few tell tale signs of cannabis production:

• Windows permanently covered from the inside
  
• Visits to the property at unusual times
  
• A large number of pots and lights being moved in to set up the ‘factory’
  
• Tenants not living at the property
  
• A vent protruding through the roof or a rear window
  
• A pungent smell coming from the premises
  
• Large amounts of soil and pots in the back garden
  
• Noise coming from equipment such as cooling fans
  
• Shared walls in terraced houses being damp to the touch

The leaflet also gives guidance on how to spot and avoid drug producers as tenants. For example:

• Be very suspicious if you are offered a substantial cash sum ‘up front’ for immediate access – insist on all tenants going through your application process
  
• Be rigorous in referencing potential tenants and take photo identification
  
• Be suspicious if tenants ask you not to visit the property, particularly if they ask to meet you to pay rent in cash rather than have you visit the building

Apparently also many drug criminals use a ‘Front Couple’. These people will appear to be a genuine average respectable couple looking to rent a property for their own use. After they have been shown around the property by the landlord and have taken
possession of the property, they will disappear without trace. They will then be replaced by members of the drug gang who will convert the property for drug production or cultivation.

The leaflet ends with the following warning:

If you have reason to believe there is an illicit lab on a property and you have been exposed directly, leave immediately, wash your face and hands. Call 999, request the police and report what you observed. If you have reason to believe your exposure has been extensive, contact your doctor. Some of the chemicals involved in creating these drugs are toxic, corrosive and carcinogenic.

You can also ring crime stoppers on 0800 555 111

Tenancy deposit protection award made to tenant in new case in Birmingham

I have learned from the excellent 'Recent developments in Housing Law' section of Legal Action Magazine, of Ferguson v. Jones (November 2008) a new tenancy deposit case in Birmingham County Court.

Here Mrs Jones was an assured shorthold tenancy. Her landlord failed to protect her deposit within the prescribed 14 days. It was only protected after he had commenced proceedings for possession (we are not told whether these were pursuant to section 21 or section 8, presumably section 8) and after Mrs Jones had counterclaimed for disrepair, plus the ‘fine’ of three times the amount of the tenancy deposit, as prescribed by s214(2) and (3) of the Housing Act 2004.

District Judge Sheldrake held that the court had no discretion under s214(4) and had to order the landlord to pay the fine. The Judge commented that the statutory provisions would be otiose if the landlord could escape the penalty in s214(4) by placing the deposit in an authorised scheme after the 14 day period. To have interpreted s214(4) in any other way would have been contract to parliaments intention.

Just to remind you, the relevant sections of 214 read as follows:

214 Proceedings relating to tenancy deposits:
(1) Where a tenancy deposit has been paid in connection with a shorthold tenancy, the tenant or any relevant person (as defined by section 213(10)) may make an application to a county court on the grounds—
(a) that the initial requirements of an authorised scheme (see section 213(4)) have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit; or
(b) that he has been notified by the landlord that a particular authorised scheme applies to the deposit but has been unable to obtain confirmation from the scheme administrator that the deposit is being held in accordance with the scheme.

(2) Subsections (3) and (4) apply if on such an application the court—
(a) is satisfied that those requirements have not, or section 213(6)(a) has not, been complied with in relation to the deposit, or
(b) is not satisfied that the deposit is being held in accordance with an authorised scheme,
as the case may be.

(3) The court must, as it thinks fit, either—
(a) order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant, or
(b) order that person to pay the deposit into the designated account held by the scheme administrator under an authorised custodial scheme,
within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(4) The court must also order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

(5) Where any deposit given in connection with a shorthold tenancy could not be lawfully required as a result of section 213(7), the property in question is recoverable from the person holding it by the person by whom it was given as a deposit.

(6) In subsection (5) “deposit” has the meaning given by section 213(8).

You can see the whole section of the act on tenancy deposits here

Landlords should take note of this decision, and make sure that the deposit is always protected within the 14 day period.

DPS open to all landlords

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

***

Having seen comments on forums about the Deposit Protection Service refusing to accept deposits from landlords, for example if the money is paid over more than 14 days after it is paid to them (putting them in default of the scheme, unable to evict tenants under s21, and vulnerable to being sued for the ‘fine’ of 3 x the deposit sum), I thought I had better check this out with the company itself.

However I am pleased to confirm that the rumour is incorrect, and that there are no rules preventing landlords from being able to protect deposits, with the DPS as any rate (things are different with the other two schemes).

Or to quote my DPS contact:

"We accept deposits at anytime, there is no validation on the system preventing payment. We issue reminders if payment is not received within four weeks but that's as far as our enforcement remit allows. We are the default scheme open and inclusive to all."

Note however that the fact that the DPS will accept deposits out of time, does not mean that landlords are in any way excused from complying with the 14 day rule!

TDS ditches unregulated agents

TDS, the tenancy deposit scheme aimed at letting agents, has now announced that it will only accept agents and landlords who are members of recognised professional bodies as members from now on. With effect from 6 April 2009 they will be withdrawing membership from current non regulated members.

This action, it appears, has been taken at the insistence of TDS insurers. Another manifestation of the credit crunch perhaps?

The official press release states that they will be writing, not only to all their unregulated agents but also to the tenants of unregulated agents.

Indeed I have learned of one case where TDS have already written to an agent and his tenants (on 2 Jan, before the press release). The agent (who is very reputable) is not surprisingly very upset about the effect this is having on his tenants, particularly as he was given no warning that TDS were going to do this, and therefore had no opportunity to contact his tenants first to explain what action he will be taking regarding their deposits. I understand that a formal complaint will be going in very shortly to TDS about this. Surely it is not beyond the wit of TDS to leave a week or so between writing to the agents/landlords and their tenants?

The press release suggests that agents should be a member of either the Association of Residential Letting Agents (ARLA), The National Approved Lettings Scheme (NALS), the National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA), or the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). They do not mention other relevant professional organisations such as the Law Society and the Guild of Letting and Management. Presumably members of these organisations are not going to be ‘evicted’ from the scheme also?

My correspondent (the solicitor of the aggrieved agent) points out that TDS action appears to be excessive, as they should have weeded out any ‘bad apple’ agents at the time of application. He also queries whether this action is within the government guidelines for TDS schemes to be available to all.

It certainly seems to be an unfortunate glitch, and will undoubtedly cause a lot of upset among blameless (albeit unregulated) agents, who it should be pointed out, are already paying a considerably higher membership fee to TDS, than for example ARLA agents are.

Two other questions to ask are:

1. Have TDS considered finding alternate insurers (admittedly probably difficult in the current economic climate), and
2. Are there any grounds for the unregulated agents, about to be evicted from the scheme, to sue?

I would be interested to hear from any affected parties as to the effect this will have on them and what action, if any, they are taking against TDS.

Credit crunches I have known

I met one of the partners of the firm I used to work for this morning, and chatting to him reminded me of the crashes and crunches of the past.

I was at school in the 1970s and the winter of discontent. It seemed great fun as a kid when the power went off. We had to use candles. My dad cooked our dinner on a makeshift barbecue in the yard (he never did it again, much to my disappointment) and we had a coal fire. But other than that I can’t really remember much about it.

Then there was the depression in the early 1980s. I was just out of University and living up north. It is the only time in my life I have been completely unable to find a job. No-one was interested in my geography degree. I cheered myself up by reading War and Peace in about 5 days, reading non stop all day. Its a funny feeling when you read non stop all day like that. But it helped.

Mainly as a result of the early 80s crunch, I moved down south to live with my parents, and started the long process of qualifying as a solicitor (London external law degree while working, and then the Law Society finals). During this time I bought the smallest flat in Blackheath. After passing my last set of exams (and taking a lifelong vow never to do any more, ever), I took a year off to travel, after which I planned to move up to Norwich to do my articles (thats what we called it back then, articled clerks, not trainee solicitors).

That was 1988. During that year the government decided to get rid of MIRAS. Couples all over the country were desperate to buy before the deadline. I can remember sitting in the British Embassy in Mexico City reading in The Times about the selling frenzy back home. “Well”, I thought, “Should be all right selling the flat when I get back”. Ha! I arrived back to the property market crash. It took me nearly a year to sell my flat. (Later of course I wished I had kept it ...).

The property crash went on for some time. Lots of people were in negative equity. Sales went through the floor. During my stint in the conveyancing department at work (articled clerks did 6 months in four different departments then, I don’t know what they do now), I had hardly anything to do. I can remember sitting in my office and reading the Yellow Pages (not as boring as it sounds, I was researching local services) and looking up obscure points of law in Halsbury.

So here we are again. Crunch time. They say it is the worst ever (apart from the 1930s depression), but in many ways many of us are much better off (in England that is). When I was a child, for a long time we had no fridge or TV, and I don’t think we were particularly unusual. Personal computers had not been invented. When I was at University, no-one had a car, we all used bicycles. Things feel more prosperous now.

But we will have to see how it goes during this new year of 2009. Good luck to you all. And a happy new year.

Musings on the tenancy deposit protection scheme

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

One of my landlord clients who has successfully defeated a nuisance claim brought by her tenants under the tenancy deposit protection legislation, has reported an interesting conversation she had with the Judge. Apparently the Judge said that the judiciary generally are unhappy with the legislation. The main reason being the automatic aspect, as they do not like having their decision power taken away from them.

That’s fair enough and I can understand their point of view. The trouble is, that if the Judges have a discretion whether to make the award or not, it makes it impossible for us advisors to give any meaningful advice. Inevitably different Judges will decide similar cases in different ways. This will result in injustice overall, as it is inequitable for a tenant’s right to an award to depend on the particular viewpoint of the Judge concerned (who may not be experienced in housing work). If the award is automatic then people know where they are.

It is important also to understand the reason for the legislation in the first place. It is to force landlords (many of whom are still in denial) to use the tenancy deposit protection scheme. A scheme set up to protect tenants from the injustice of landlords (not all of them by any means but a fair number) effectively stealing tenants money by unreasonably refusing to return deposits.

If landlords see a window of opportunity many of them will continue to refuse to protect deposits, rendering the new scheme useless. It will of course mostly be the ‘bad landlords’ who will do this – ‘good landlords’ are on the whole already compliant.

So automatic penalties are the best way of preventing avoidance. It is harsh justice on those who offend through ignorance, however this is not the only field where ignorance of the law is no defence – and there are many sources of free help and information. This legislation has been in force for over a year now - there is really no excuse for non compliance any more.

Incidentially, my client had protected her deposit and had the paperwork to prove it.

Painsmith Blog

I have just discovered the excellent blog from Landlord and Tenant specialists Painsmith Solicitors. It has some really interesting posts, as one would expect, and I shall certainly be reading it in future. Highly recommended to anyone interested in landlord and tenant.

Homeless hostel too comfortable says VAT man

Reading the recent issue of Roof Magazine, I came across this utterly bonkers decision by the VAT authorities.

Byker Housing Association has built a new 31 bed hostel for the homeless in Newcastle – however the VAT authorities have deemed it to be a commercial building (i.e. a hotel) rather than a residential one - because it is too comfortable! This means that it becomes liable for VAT of £315,000 – which will put Byker Bridge out of business.

Under the VAT rules, hostels should be exempt from VAT if they are for a residential use, designed as a dwelling, or used for a relevant charitable purpose. Despite this, because the VAT office does not have a workable definition of a homeless persons hostel, and because the new hostel is quite nice, they are treating it as if it were a hotel for tax purposes. Even though the building was partly developed with Housing Corporation finance which is only available for non commercial ventures!

Hopefully this decision will be set aside. Otherwise Byker Bridge will go out of business, there will be 1,500 per year more homeless on the streets of Newcastle, and it will have a knock on effect on other registered social landlords developing homeless hostels

Shelter – Charity of the Month (December 2008)

Shelter is a great force for good in this country and thousands of tenants and homeless people will be forever grateful to it for its help.

As they say on their web-site "Shelter believes everyone should have a home. We help people find and keep a home. We campaign for decent housing for all".

They offer some brilliant services. For example:

• They have a free housing advice helpline - 0808 800 4444
  
• They have numerous advice offices where you can visit for free help and advice
  
• They campaign tirelessly – see here on their part in the recent assistance given to prevent repossessions
  
• They publish an excellent magazine Roof (reviewed by me on Landlord-Law here)
  
• And they also have many resources for professionals

If you want to donate – click here

Convicted HMO landlord – doing the community a service?

This is the sort of attitude that Local Authorities have to put up with. Mr Bowden in Ipswich, who recently pleaded guilty convicted in the Magistrates Court to operating a house of multiple occupation without a licence (reported here), considers he has done nothing wrong. However,

- The property had 19 people living in it
- There were minimal fire precautions
- A converted attic was only accessible via an unsafe staircase
- A woman was living in a room with no natural light,

to name just a few of the problems. Yet Mr Bowden claimed "It seems a ridiculous thing to go to court about. It's something over nothing. Yes, I should've had a licence to rent a third floor, but I wasn't aware I needed one. … I've given people a roof over their heads that they otherwise couldn't get. Some people can't afford a deposit so I asked for very little. In some respects I was helping the council out but obviously they took a different view - I think I was doing the community a good service."

There is of course some force in what he says. It is generally better for the homeless person to be in an unsafe building than on the street. However an unsafe building threatens everyone around it. If there was a fire, all of the 19 occupants could have been killed, along with those living in adjacent properties. It cannot be allowed.

Mr Bowden, despite his protestations, is no doubt aware of this. Apparently when Environmental Health Officials made an appointment to view the property he made sure his tenants were out of the way.

It is good to see that there are more and more reports of Local Authorities using their powers under the Housing Act 2004, for example a report here of a landlord fined in Oxford.. I firmly believe that Local Authority action is the best way to deal with defective property, and that it should not be up to individual tenants to do this.

Landlords responsiblities for fire safety

I have been sent a press release by the Fire Brigade regarding a sucessful prosecution of a landlord who was found guilty of breaches of fire safety legislation and ordered to pay nearly £13,000 in fines and costs. The press release reads:

Uxbridge Magistrates' Court fined Armajit Singh, £5,600 for seven breaches of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Mr. Singh did not own the premises but was managing it for his uncle and had responsibility for the property’s maintenance and repairs.

The prosecution followed a fire at the house converted into flats on Wood End Green Road, Hayes on 14 September 2007. A man and a woman were woken by the blaze and tried to escape via the staircase but it was engulfed by thick black smoke. They escaped by smashing the first floor bedroom window and jumping out. The woman broke her ankle in the fall and the man suffered deep cuts to his hands.

Fire safety inspectors visited the premises and found that there were a number of faults including no smoke alarm or fire extinguishers in the property and none of the doors were fire resistant.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 came into force in October 2006. In a landlord and tenant context it provides for those in control of properties and responsible for the maintenance and repairs (generally this will be the landlord) to carry out a fire risk assessment (which must be kept up to date), and to implement appropriate fire safety measures to minimise the risk to life from fire.

Note that the two pictures showing the damage done by the fire are copyright of the London Fire Brigade.



Mind you, maybe Mr Singh got off lightly. In October, Mr Mehmat Parlak was sentenced to four months imprisonment and his company, Watchacre properties limited, was fined £21,000 following a similar prosecution under the Regulations. Landlords be warned!

VAT changes – how these are being dealt with on the Landlord-Law site

Mr Darlings reduction of the VAT rate to 15% from 17.5% has created a bit of a headache for myself and doubtless lots of other UK traders. This blog seems to be the best place to explain the way I have decided to deal with the various prices on Landlord-Law.

For me to change the Landlord-Law membership fees (4.70/£15/£70.50) would involve my web-designer doing work to the site (which I would have to pay for), as online membership purchase is completely automatic and done via a secure server. Were I to drop the prices, the benefit to the customers would be very small - £0.10p, £0.31p, and £1 respectively. As the Landlord-Law service is (in my view) pretty good value anyway, I am going to leave these prices as they are. Sorry!

For the other prices, I have decided to deal with them as follows.

Where the online price is based on an ex VAT round figure I have reduced my price to take account of the VAT fall. This includes Kits 1, 2, 3, and 4 non member prices, all the possession proceedings, and the tenancy amendments service.

Where the total price was chosen because it is a nice round figure, in particular the £75 advice fee, this has been left as it is. I put a lot of work into the advice given and I think clients can (effectively) pay another £1.60. I have also left the possession notice drafting fixed fee of £75 (although this is not used much as most people use the online forms), and the members kit prices for kits 3, 4 and 5. Members buying kits get a lot of support via the online forum so I am not going to reduce these prices.

The other two prices are the non members kit 5 price, which I have reduced to £95 (a bit more than the VAT drop) and my tenancy agreement check price, which has gone up to £391 (a slight increase on the previous fee).

I will take a view on prices generally next year if Mr Darling puts the VAT up again.

Student lettings - new agreements on Landlord-Law

I am just finishing a fairly long running project (about 2 months) to develop some new special tenancy agreements for student lets, for my Landlord-Law site.

Developed initially in response to a query from one of my members on the discussion forum, they are designed to deal with two particular problems with student lets:

• The fact that they are generally signed when the previous tenants are still in occupation (which could potentially cause major problems if they refused to move out, as legally they are entitled to do), and
  
• The fact that landlords will want to let the property for the whole year, but many students will not want to live there over the summer.

It was initially just going to be one agreement. However when I put it out to consultation with the membership, some of them wanted one part and others wanted another, and some said that they would definitely not want that part, so in the end I decided to do a number of different agreements using different combinations.

Then another member sent me his standard agreement for out of season holiday lets so I thought that perhaps I would do one of them too.

So there will eventually be four different types, although at the time of typing this I have not yet loaded up the out of season holiday let one.

Its been a bit of a time for tenancy drafting recently. Apart from these student agreements, I have been asked by clients to do an under 18 tenant (signing jointly with her guarantor), an assured tenancy for an elderly couple renting a flat intended for the rest of their lifetime, and a memorandum for protected tenancies. Heigh Ho!

HMO licensing – tenants entitled to rent refund

I was interested to read the report here about a landlord in Liverpool who was convicted of operating a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) without a license, and fined £3,000 plus costs. The Council then wrote to all his tenants, who successfully claimed back a part of their rent.

The rent refund application must be made to the Residential Property Tribunal (RPT) who can order the landlord to pay back up to 12 months rent to his tenants. In this case the RPT ordered the landlord to refund three months rent. This totalled £3,900, so in total this landlords failure to obtain a license for his property has cost him over £7,000 (if the costs order is taken into account).

Tenants wanting to make a similar application will find a pdf giving guidance and other information linked from the right hand margin of this page on my web-site www.landlordlaw.co.uk.

Landlords who are worried that their property might need a license, should contact their Local Authority asap. For contact details see the Landlord-Law Local Authority Directory.

Note that we are still compiling our list of HMO licence fees charged by different Local Authorities.

Stop the traffik – charity of the month

Those of us who live independent lives in the west are very privileged. Many people are not so fortunate. Some are bought and sold as commodities. Children stolen or sold by their families into slavery. The reason (or one of them) – so cheap goods can be sold to us. Our clothes, coffee and chocolate.
.
Human traffic is the ultimate indignity. So this is why Stop the Traffik is the first Landlord-Law charity of the month.

One way you can help, is to only buy chocolate which is from ethical sources. Download a good chocolate guide from the Stop the Traffik web-site to find out more.

Landlords credit checks and happy tenants – two surveys

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

***

I have recently been given information about two surveys in the private rented sector.

First survey – credit checks
The first survey is perhaps the more serious of the two. The Letting Protection Service have commissioned a survey of 1,389 private landlords which shows that most landlords do not carry out proper checks before letting tenants in to their property. Their statistics show that:

• 63% of landlords are happy to entrust their home to tenants based on little more than a hunch
  
• Amongst those with bad experiences, 71% of private landlords have been left out of pocket because of unsuitable tenants
  
• 24% of UK landlords allow tenants to move into their property after just one face-to-face meeting
  
• 11% have received threats to themselves or their family as a result of a rogue tenant

Out of the landlords surveyed, only 13% of those questioned cited using a reference or credit search package as their usual method of vetting prospective tenants.

I have to say that I agree with the Letting Protection Service that this is not good news. All the experts agree that the most important aspect of letting property is having a good tenant. Although most tenants turn out to be fine, credit checks and references are essential. For example con men appear respectable and are very persuasive, that is why they suceed. You can’t always trust your judgment, particularly if you are not experienced at letting property.

There are some interesting geographical differences thrown up by the survey, which found "the North West of the country to be worst affected by bad tenants, with 82 percent of landlords faced with bad experiences at one time or another. Landlords in the West Midlands had the least trouble with their tenants, although 63 percent still reported having experienced problems. Their North-Eastern counterparts proved to be the country’s most cautious but, nonetheless, 55% give away the keys to their houses based only on a first impression."

The bigger percentage of problems in the North West may have something to do with Blackpool, which has a massive private rented sector, with many bedsits, and which is said to be the ‘drug death capital of the UK’ – see my blog entry here.

The press release goes on to say "The survey identified the UK landlord’s ideal tenants as middle aged couples - with 15 per cent of respondents finding the demographic the most suitable and reliable. Students and pet owners top the list of the least-preferred tenants and landlords would generally rather have women than men renting their properties."

The Letting Protection Service have of course carried out this survey to give publicity to their new online service. "The LPS" runs the press release "provides landlords with a range of services that have traditionally only been available through letting agents, including the first online quick tenant reference to offer an instant rent guarantee, comprehensive reports on a tenant’s suitability, gas safety inspections and emergency breakdown insurance cover." You can see their web-site here.

Good for them, however it is not true to say that these services have been previously unavailable to landlords. The Tenant Verify service from LettingZone has a good reputation, and further companies can be found via this link. There are many companies doing gas certificates, just look in yellow pages. However if you are a landlord, the new Letting Protection online Service is worth checking out.

Second survey – happy tenants

The second survey was provided to me by the Deposit Protection Service (one of the three companies running tenancy deposit protection schemes). Their survey says:

"84% of tenants get on well with their landlord and nearly a quarter of these described their relationship with their landlord as ‘fantastic,’ while 39% of tenants described their relationship as ‘okay.’ Only 16% of respondents said that they did not have a good relationship with their landlord."

This, they say, disproves the myth that landlords and tenants are always at odds. I would add also that it disproves the poor view often held of landlords in general by people who should know better. Most landlords provide an excellent service (although sadly not all of them).

The DPS Director, Kevin Firth goes on to say "Our figures show that since deposit protection legislation was introduced, relatively few disputes have needed to be resolved through the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Service".

So that’s nice then. Maybe tenants are a bit choosier in looking for landlords than landlords are in looking for tenants.

Burning wood

A couple of years ago we had an energy audit of our house. One of the suggestions made was that we had a wood burning stove in the living room. So when a small savings policy matured recently we decided to have one installed.

Our energy audit man had recommended a local firm so we duly went to see them in July. They recommended Clearview stoves which they said made the best stoves on the market. So we duly put down a deposit, and arranged for the stove to be installed in October, which was when the policy matured.

The installation, which took 3 days, was a bit of a business. We had to have a new flue liner installed which meant that the installer and his boy spent a lot of time on the roof. Our old gas stove was taken out, the original brick fireplace revealed, and a nice hearth made of old fashioned brick tiles cemented in. Our little black stove now stands demurely on this, its round black stove pipe leading up into the chimney.

Of course if you have a wood burning stove you need wood. We had an initial delivery from a man recommended from our stove supplier some time ago, before the fire was installed. That was fairly expensive but turned out to be very good slow burning wood. We have also had a delivery from a local tree surgeon, which was cheaper but not quite such good quality. The stove seems to eat up wood at quite a rate so we will have to keep getting it in.

I have of course thought about making bricks from our newspapers, and indeed have had a newspaper brick making machine mouldering in the outside shed for some 15 years. I made a few last week but they did not turn out very well. They also took about five days to dry out enough to be able to burn, plus during the drying out process they started to disintegrate. I haven’t given up though. On reflection maybe I need to soak the newspaper longer before putting it in the mould. However, I can see the drying time is going to be a problem.

But it is lovely having the fire. We can watch the flames through the glass door, and the wind in the chimney gives out a soothing background wuthering. It’s a bit more work lighting a wood stove than just switching on the gas heater, but it has much more personality, and has given a whole new look to the sitting room (along with the new hearth rug, and the wood store). It is also nice to know that our heating is not at the mercy of whoever controls the few gas pipelines into this country, plus at a pinch we could also cook our dinner on it (I did do a steak and kidney casserole the day after installation, but my husband said it marked the paintwork).

I will go back on topic with my next post I promise!

God Bless America!

I am not often excited about politics. Certainly not foreign politics. But like many, I have been swept up and away by the Obama campaign.

In common I suspect with many British, I had never heard of Barack Obama until recently, and I suppose vaguely wanted Hilary Clinton to win because I had heard of her, sort of agreed with her, and she was a woman. (And surely anything must be better than the Bush administration …) But then Obama won the nomination and we all thought, who is this man? Learning on the internet that he had written two books, I popped into Waterstones and bought Dreams of my Father to find out more.

It is a wonderful book. Many times I found myself in tears, not only because of the powerful writing and the ideas expressed, but at the thought that this man, writing these words, might one day be president of the United States of America. Having finished it, the following week I snuck in and bought the Audacity of Hope as well (and I think, took the only copy in the shop – surely they should be piled up on the tables?).

This is a remarkable man. I think he brings hope for us all. Not just because in himself he crosses the divide between black and white, but because he is an intelligent man who thinks about things, and he is a powerful speaker who can communicate his vision to his people. Depressing times are ahead. If he can inspire his people, he can help them overcome their problems. Our problems.

Another beacon of hope, is the fact that his campaign was mostly funded, not by big business, but by the ordinary people of America. This means that he owes loyalty to them, not the big corporations. If anyone can stand up to the corporate bully boys it is him.

It was on the bus that I read these remarkable words in The Audacity of Hope :

"Instead of subsidising the oil industry, we should end every single tax break the industry currently receives and demand that 1 percent of the revenues from oil companies with over $1 billion in quarterly profits go toward financing alternative energy research and the necessary infrastructure …"

I was so thrilled by the vision of hope that this presented, that I was tempted to chuck a tenner myself into his campaign fund, although of course I can’t because I am not American.

The environmental problems facing our planet are so huge, we have no hope of dealing with them without America. The depressingly negative attitude of the Bush administration put the whole future of our planet at risk. In private moments I have even wondered if perhaps one day, if things did not improve, the rest of the world might be forced to unite to take hostile action against them. But Obama has changed all that. There are some wonderful scientists and initiatives in America (and also in Britain of course) which only need some support and help to get going. Hopefully they will now get it. And where America leads, the rest of the world will follow.

I am also enormously encouraged by his ability to get people to come together and work together. Like many, I loathe the negativism which pervades politics, and my usual reaction when politicians start their 'yes you did, no you didn’t' routine is to either switch off the TV or (if that is not possible) to walk out of the room. Obama has shown that co-operation and inclusivity can be popular and win votes. Let us hope that we see more of it.

Another tenancy deposit decision

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

***

This is a report of a case kindly provided to me by Simon Parrott of Palmers Solicitors (Bedford).

I am writing following a recent hearing at Bedford County Court on 28th October, to let you know the result of my case. I act for the landlords.

The circumstances of the case were that the tenancy deposit had not been protected at the time that it was taken (1st June 2007). Then, approximately 13½ months later (mid July 2008), this was discovered by my clients after receiving a request from the Tenants for confirmation of the Deposit Protection Scheme. My Clients immediately took steps to protect the deposit with DPS that same day and then served the “prescribed” information upon the tenants. The tenants denied receipt of various letters and documents but they had received proof of the protection three times over by the end of July, and by the time they issued their proceedings claiming the penalty (mid August). We made an application to strike out the case under CPR24 and the hearing on 28th was our summary judgment application.

The Judge granted our application and struck out the claim on the ground that there was no real prospect of success. The essence of the judgement was that, considering the wording of Section 214 of the Housing Act, the Judge was satisfied that because we had paid the money into DPS we were able to satisfy the initial requirements of “an authorised scheme”. Having then served this information upon the tenants, the tenants were then able to obtain confirmation from the scheme administrator that the deposit was being held in accordance with the scheme. The tenants were therefore not able to get over the initial test of Section 214(1). The Judge also had quite considerable regard to the notes to the Housing Act, and in particular note 503, and was satisfied that the time for consideration of the Landlord’s rectification of his default was at the Court hearing.

One particular issue of the case was that my clients were unable to use any of the group insurance schemes available to them because by the time they discovered their mistake the tenancy had outlived its contractual term and was therefore a statutory periodic tenancy. Neither TDS nor MyDeposits would allow them to protect the deposit in those circumstances and my clients were, therefore, only able to protect the deposit by paying it into the statutory scheme (DPS). Whilst we were therefore unable to satisfy the initial requirements of Section 213(3), the Judge accepted my submission that by accepting payment of the deposit out of time the DPS scheme “initial requirements” allowed a late payment into the scheme which then enabled the Landlord to escape the penalty provisions of Section 214(4).

I am grateful to Richard Jones at Bury & Walkers for letting me have a copy of the Harvey v Bamforth report and whilst our District Judge was persuaded to read the report, he stressed that he didn’t feel himself bound by that as precedent.

This case makes it clear that, as things stand at present, tenants are unlikely to succeed if their landlord has protected the deposit before the issue of proceedings, and possibly if it is protected afterwards so long as this is before the hearing date.

I understand that these proceedings were issued by the Money Claim Online procedure. I recently came across this practice note here (you can also locate it by putting tenancy deposit in the search box on the Court Service web-site home page) which indicates that section 214 claims should really be made using the Part 8 procedure. It appears that in due course the CPR will be amended to provide for this.

Two B&Bs and one Hotel – three book reviews in one

From time to time I do book reviews on the Landlord-Law site, and several of these have been for a publisher called How to Books. They specialise in publishing really nice self help books on a wide range of topics. Books reviewed for them in the past include Tony Booths excellent Buy to let Handbook and How to Invest in the UK Property Market by Gerry Fitzgerald.

The publishers recently sent me three books, two on running B & Bs (one in England and the other in France) and one on buying and running a hotel. As they are not really landlord and tenant books, I decided to review them on this blog instead of on Landlord-Law, and as they form a theme I thought it would be nice to review them together. I will review them in the order that I read them.

Running a B&B – a landlady’s guide by Christabel Milner
This is an absolute gem of a book, which I enjoyed reading very much. I expect we have all at some time or another thought about running a bed and breakfast. Ms Milner, who has been a landlady for 27 years, is very experienced and it shows in her book.

The book is very clear and precise as well as entertaining. She starts by telling us how she started in the business, and the properties she has developed and run as B&Bs. Part One then looks at what is involved in running a B&B, for example whether your home is suitable and how it can be adapted, and also considering whether there will be a market for your business locally. Part two then goes into the reality of running the B&B covering practical matters such as linen, keeping the room in readiness, bookings, taking payments, marketing, and of course the breakfasts. There is also an excellent chapter on personal safety.

Although I have no intention of running a B&B I found the book enchanting. How wonderful it must be to arrive at Ms Milners house on a cold and rainy day, to be ushered into a warm welcoming room, with its crisp clean linen and generous hospitality tray! With Ms Milner herself, there to assist if you need her, but discreetly withdrawing to her own quarters when you don’t. A touring holiday staying at B&Bs is one of the great ways to see Britain, and this book will help anyone who want to be a part of that. Highly recommended.

How to Buy and Run your Own Hotel by Mark Lloyd
We all think we could run a B&B, but what about a hotel? Mark Lloyd had worked for years in the hospitality industry organising events, but had always wanted to run a hotel. This is the story of how he and his wife, together with their two young children, took the plunge and bought a hotel in Chipping Sodbury in the Cotswolds (in fact this hotel here).

Although this book gives a very good description of what is takes to buy and run a small ten roomed hotel, it is very uneven and I felt could have done with a lot of tidying up. Reading it from cover to cover, I found I was continually reading the same stories and the same points (good ones admittedly) over again. For example a detailed description of the day they took over the hotel is given twice – once in chapter 5 and then again at the end of the book. As a book it seemed to be at one time looking at things chronologically and at other times by topic, which was a bit confusing. However there are some great stories and Mr Lloyd is an entertaining writer.

The book paints a very clear picture of what it is like to take over a hotel, and the amount of work involved. In fact so busy are they that I am surprised that Mr Lloyd found the time to write a book at all. At the time of writing the book Mr Lloyd and his family had been there some 18 months. It was rather a shock to discover towards the end of the book, that fairly shortly after taking over, he had had a serious accident and had been hospitalised for several months. What a nightmare that must have been for him and his family!

For all its organisational inconsistencies, this book really is essential reading for anyone considering buying and running a hotel. I now know for sure that it is not something I want to do!

How to start and run a B&B in France
Do you sometimes tire of dreary old England with its constant rain and cold? Why not up sticks, buy a run down property in La Belle France and run it as a B&B? This is what Deborah Hunt and her husband did, and this book tells you how to do it.

This is a very well organised book and an excellent guide. Mrs Hunt and her husband are both architects and not surprisingly the whole process of renovating French property is gone into very thoroughly. In fact I would recommend this book to anyone who is considering buying and doing up property in France, irrespective of whether they intend renting out rooms. Mrs Hunt is also very clear about the different system in France and the process of buying French property and running a business.

If you are intending moving to France, obviously you will need to speak French. The book helpfully gives many lists of suitable words ands phrases, and every chapter ends with a hint on how you can improve your French (e.g. watch the TV news in French and read a French newspaper).

The book is very helpful on the different culture in France and the differences in what you will be expected to do as a B&B landlady in France as opposed to England. The author also looks at the different characteristics and expectations of different nationalities. Shamingly, English children are the worst behaved.

One charming feature of this book is that it is illustrated by Deborah Hunt’s own line drawings, which show different types of property and features. I also liked the cover illustrations (Susie Home - www.leperchoirdespaons.com).

At the end of the book, Mrs Hunt recorded interviews with five other English proprietors of French chambers d’hotes. These were fascinating and served to give a more rounded view of what can be done. All in all I would thoroughly recommend this book to anyone considering moving to France.

Generally
It has been fun reading these three books end to end and I have thoroughly enjoyed them all. They are all far more informative that I can describe here, and are all good reads in their own right, whether or not you are considering becoming a B&B landlady or hotelier.

Happily however they have not convinced me to change my job or to uproot and move to France. I enjoy running my legal and internet business too much, and however pretty France may be, I have no desire to always be a foreigner, plus I am dreadful at languages! But for a short period I lived the dream vicariously through these books, and that was enough for me.

NB If you want to buy any of the books, you will find them in the Amazon box in the right hand column of this blog.

The Deposit Protection Service – problems answered

Note - the Landlord Law Blog has now moved to www.landlordlawblog.co.uk.

Since the tenancy deposit protection regulations came into force in April 2007 I have done quite a few blog entries on this subject, and there have been many comments from landlords and tenants. Some of these have been highly critical of the company running the custodial scheme, The Deposit Protection Service (DPS). In view of this, I thought it was only fair that I should contact them to give them an opportunity to respond to the criticisms which have been made about their service.

The DPS do not think it appropriate that they respond directly in this blog. However from what they have said to me, it appears that most of the problems complained of can be answered as follows:

• It is essential that the information inputted when registering the deposit is correct. For example, if incorrect bank details are given then the claim cannot be progressed. If this happens the DPS will write to the landlord telling them that the information inputted is invalid and inviting them to deal with this so that their claim can be progressed.
  
• When making a claim to have the deposit repaid, it is essential that the correct repayment ID is given otherwise the claim will be rejected.
  
• The DPS also need to hear from both the landlord and the tenant before the deposit money can be repaid. It is up to the party seeking repayment to chase the other party. The DPS will not do this for you.
  
• If the other party refuses to co-operate, then the single claim process can be followed. This may end in Adjudication if the other party does respond, otherwise the claim will be settled without the other party. Alternatively, if both parties are contactable and cooperating then the adjudication process can be used. In both these instances the party wanting to claim the money will have to apply to the DPS for the necessary forms.
  
• The DPS do not deliberately delay payments to accrue more interest, they cannot do this even if they wanted to - they can only claim their agreed fees. They also point out that the Government have no access to these funds and do not make any financial gains from this scheme

For more information about the DPS service, you can visit their web-site at www.depositprotection.com, and there is a telephone helpline 0870 7071 707.

Tenancy Deposit Protection – test case?

I have been contacted by a London tenant who is bringing a claim against his former landlords and their agents under the tenancy deposit protection legislation. He is looking for a local firm of solicitors to assist him with his claim (preferably on a pro bono or ‘no win no fee’ basis), which he hopes will be a ‘test case’. He tells me that the facts are briefly as follows:

- A well-established London based Estate Agency accepted a deposit to be held against a 1-year AST. The Agent registered the deposit with TDS over 5-months after the 14-day window allowed by UK Housing Law. The Agent never notified the Tenant of the deposit registration details despite repeated requests from the tenant.
- When the tenancy concluded, the Agent returned the deposit back to the tenant only after the tenant threatened legal action, and even then it was returned after a reasonable deadline was given by the tenant for its return without legal action.
- The tenant has filed a claim in West London County Court for 3x the deposit as per UK Housing Law. The Agent has stated that they will fight the claim and have retained the services of specialist housing solicitors.

Anyone interested in assisting can contact the tenant at tnhill@london.edu.

Twitter update

I wrote a blog entry about twitter when I first signed up. However on reflection perhaps this was a bit negative. Having used twitter for a couple of weeks I feel it is time to give a more positive update.

I have found it really good. I am now putting notifications of all new developments on Landlord-Law onto twitter so anyone who want to know what I am doing can follow me and find out. I know that a few people have set up twitter accounts just so they can do that, which is nice.

However I have also found some good twitter accounts to follow. The most fun must be Stephen Fry. At the time of writing he is filming in Kenya, and us twitterers following get regular updates, including pictures. However perhaps the most interesting are the news accounts – I am now subscribing to the Guardian, Law Tweets, The Times Law, the Times Property, BBC breaking news, UK Parliament and Number 10 Downing Street.

Following twitterers is also a good way of letting them know that you exist, and often they in turn follow you. So, for example, my tweets are now being followed by Stephen Fry, No 10, and the UK Parliament to name but a few. This is initially very flattering until you realise that they are also following lots of others. Stephen Fry for example is following over 7,000 so I doubt whether he reads them all or he would do nothing else!

I have particularly enjoyed the news tweets, and it is nice when my husband tells me a news item to be able to say ‘I already knew that’. Smug but true.

As a lawyer it is also very interesting to be kept informed, on a day to day basis, of what is happening in Parliament. As a result of this I may check out more the development of housing related bills and read the online information in the excellent UK Parliament web-site.

So all in all I would recommend twitter. It allows me in easy way to keep people informed of new Landlord-Law content, and keeps me up to date. A good combination.