Key take-aways for tenants from the draft RRB, published 11/09/2024:
- RROs can be for TWO YEARS’ rent (doubled)
- Tenants have TWO YEARS in which to make an application (doubled)
- SUPERIOR landlords are liable for RRO applications
- Officers of LIMITED COMPANY landlords may be personally liable for RRO applications
§96, §100, §101 & §102 of the new bill details changes to a number of Acts that govern RROs
§96
- This section amends the The Housing and Planning Act 2016 (HaPA), the main Act governing RROs
- Further offences are added to the list that are available for RRO action:
•Following amendments to the Housing Act 1988 that create new offences (16J offences):
- Misusing a possession ground (16J1)
- Breach of restriction on letting (16J2- relating to the new 16E2 in HA 88)
- Continued breaches after imposition of a Civil Penalty Notice (CPN) (16J3)
•Following new offences created in the RRB/Act:
- Continued breaches with regard to any new Landlord Redress scheme
- Provision of false or misleading information for the Private Rented Sector (PRS) database
- Continued breaches under the above
- §96(3) removes the time limit for making a RRO application for the offences 16J1 & 16J2
- A similar deadline extension applies to Local Authorities (LAs)
- S44 of HaPA is amended so that it is a mandatory consideration in setting a RRO award to consider whether the landlord has previously had
- another RRO made against them
- Or a CPN
…so not just a relevant criminal conviction, as previously. This helps equalise tenant-initiated RROs with Civil Penalty Notices (CPNs) issued by Local Authorities (LAs): CPNs can be issued to officers of a Ltd company that commits an offence
- S45 extends the same s44 amendments to LAs
- S46 is then amended to build on s44 amendments to force tribunals to make the maximum award against a landlord where they have been issued a CPN or had a RRO made against them for the same offence- whether or not at the same property/tenancy
§100
The re-wording of s40 has some highly relevant details:
- Superior landlords will be liable for RRO applications: this wipes out the effect of the Rakusen judgment from the Supreme Court which overcame this principle first established by Flat Justice in the Goldsbrough case
- S43 is aligned with the new possibility for RROs to be made against multiple landlords
-
- “in respect of” instead of “during” takes in payments outside the tenancy or period applied for, e.g. arrears that were paid later. This overcomes, e.g. the difficulty we had in Kowalek where, perversely, rent arrears that had been paid after the tenancy had been determined were not available for a RRO award
- Tenants can apply for 2 years of rent payments (instead of 12 months)
- “in respect of” instead of “during” takes in payments outside the tenancy or period applied for, e.g. arrears that were paid later. This overcomes, e.g. the difficulty we had in Kowalek where, perversely, rent arrears that had been paid after the tenancy had been determined were not available for a RRO award
- “Repay” is changed to “pay”: this is significant as some landlords had argued that e.g. rent paid by a parent for their student child was not rent that could be subject to a RRO. This is clarified further “paid by or on behalf of the tenant”
- Amendments at s43 & the addition of s46A allow for RRO awards to be made against multiple landlords for the same property- but not the same period
§101
Company officers are liable where the landlord is a company. This is huge and will destroy the pervasive use of shell companies as landlords which are then wound up when there is a RRO made in order to avoid any consequences for the crime. Ditto Rent-to-Rent (R2R) companies.
Exactly what Flat Justice has been asking for.
§102
Aligns the availability of a ”reasonable excuse” under the new scheme in which superior landlords are liable under s72 of The Housing Act 2004 (HA) for both tenants and LAs
Comment
It is clear the government is determined to improve the effectiveness of RROs having seen the widespread uptake of the legislation by tenants bringing their own applications – rather than waiting for a LA to act.
The most important feature will be the liability of officers of companies that are operating as landlords. This has been a central theme of our lobbying and its enactment will have a profound impact on the criminal landlord fraternity.
The doubling of the rental period available for a RRO and the delay for making an application will draw many more RRO applications from tenants. Other loopholes for landlords have been closed down.
RROs have been bashed about a bit in various appeals since the HaPA but have now been promised a new set of teeth. Tenants and RRO Applicants particularly will have a lot to smile about in this new bill.