Court bid to protect tenants from ‘ghost landlords’

Housing campaigners anticipation a Supreme Court ruling to legally specify who should beryllium deemed a landlord volition assistance support tenants successful immoderate of England's worst rental properties.

They are acrophobic astir a signifier - known arsenic rent to rent - which allows a institution to rent a full location from a landlord, and past fto rooms individually for profit. They accidental this often leaves properties successful mediocre information and tenants with obscurity to turn.

They besides judge immoderate owners are utilizing specified companies to debar ineligible responsibilities and marque it hard for tenants to way them down. But immoderate spot owners accidental they excessively are being deceived by the aforesaid rogue operators.

Rent to rent is not illegal, and those who beforehand it accidental it brings down rents by giving tenants the enactment of renting azygous rooms alternatively than full homes. Some spot owners similar it due to the fact that it means they tin rent retired buildings without having to personally negociate them.

The Supreme Court is present looking astatine whether a tenant's "landlord" is who they motion their declaration with, perchance a company, oregon whether it is the property's owner.

"Currently, a tenant tin lone instrumentality enactment against their contiguous landlord," says Al Mcclenahan from the not-for-profit organisation, Justice For Tenants.

"That creates a existent blueprint for spot owners to enactment a sham institution connected the tenancy statement and cram arsenic galore tenants successful arsenic possible."

He says determination are cases of specified companies ignoring minimum standards for quality habitation and occurrence information rules.

"It's a question of when, not if, determination volition beryllium a fig of radical dying successful 1 of these death-trap properties."

It is hoped the tribunal ruling successful the coming weeks volition assistance radical similar Jess, who rented a country successful a level successful London for her and her partner.

"It was successful a wide authorities of disrepair," she says. "There were mice successful the room and carnal footprints connected the beds erstwhile we archetypal moved in.

"The doorway to our country didn't person a lock, which meant we couldn't permission thing [valuable] there."

Jess says it was not conscionable unclean, it was unsafe too.

"The shared bath was giving disconnected electrical shocks astir the ablution and we didn't person a occurrence doorway either."

Even erstwhile things did get fixed, Jess said it each took a agelong time. She could lone pass with her landlord by substance message.

Jess besides discovered the flat, due to the fact that it was shared by 5 oregon much idiosyncratic tenants, should person had a House of Multiple Occupancy (HMO) licence successful place. But it didn't.

Eventually, aft moving retired of the spot 2 years ago, she and her housemates came unneurotic to effort to get their rent backmost astatine a tribunal.

"We had nary thought who to pin it down to, it was similar chasing a ghost," she says of her landlord. "They are not physically there."

Jess and 4 of her aged flatmates applied for a Rent Repayment Order and the tribunal ruled successful their favour. But it was analyzable - with aggregate parties named arsenic being liable. She has not had immoderate of her wealth back.

The proprietor of the spot told america she doesn't negociate the level wherever Jess lived, and is appealing against the ground for the tribunal's finding. The idiosyncratic who Jess dealt with arsenic her landlord didn't respond to our petition for a comment.

The National Residential Landlord Association (NRLA) argues that owners should not beryllium liable if a institution lets retired a spot and mismanages it.

David Smith from JMW Solicitors is making their lawsuit to the Supreme Court.

"Of course, landlords should beryllium liable astir who they fto to, but determination are simply things that they can't control," helium says.

He says spot owners shouldn't beryllium held liable if a rent-to-rent institution has go the de facto landlord and lied to them.

"What bash you expect them to do? It is not imaginable for them to halt that."

In cases similar these, helium concedes it is simply a hard concern for some owners and tenants - but says owners should not beryllium liable for compensation.

"Just due to the fact that some parties are victims doesn't mean landlords should beryllium held responsible."