Thqe guradian say that 7 in 10 landlords do not understand the immigration rules – the new “right to rent” rules that oblige them to check new tenants’ immigration statuses

Here is some information on what you should know and what is expected of you from the guardian on line:

The laws that come into force on Monday could cause problems for young tenants and the less well-off, experts say. They could also put landlords at risk of being accused of discrimination.

From 1 February, landlords who let property in England will have to carry out checks to make sure potential tenants have the right to rent property in the UK. The scheme, which was piloted in the West Midlands, is being introduced as part of the government’s drive to “create a hostile environment for illegal migrants”.

Anyone who breaks the rules and is found to be letting a home to a tenant who is not allowed to stay can be fined up to £1,000 the first time, and £3,000 subsequently.

The Residential Landlords Association (RLA) said its members faced a difficult choice: they could “take a restrictive view with prospective tenants, potentially causing difficulties for the 12 million UK citizens without a passport” or “target certain individuals to conduct the checks, opening themselves up to accusations of racism”.
Although the national rollout of the scheme was announced in October, the RLA said more than 90% of 1,500 landlords it surveyed had not received any information from the government about this new legal duty, and 72% did not understand their obligations.

Landlords are allowed to accept a number of documents as proof, including passports, but the RLA said 44% had indicated they would only accept documents that were familiar to them. This could cause problems to people without passports.

Dr David Smith, policy director at the RLA, said: “The government argues that its ‘right to rent’ plans form part of a package to make the UK a more hostile environment for illegal immigrants. The evidence shows that it is creating a more hostile environment for good landlords and legitimate tenants.”

He added: “Landlords are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.”

Under the rules, landlords are expected to check documents with their tenants and ensure that the documents are originals and belong to the tenant and that the dates for the tenant’s right to stay in the UK have not passed.

If a tenant’s permission to stay is time-limited, landlords can be fined if they do not make further checks before the expiry date or 12 months after the first check.
Nicola Thivessen, head of compliance at Chestertons estate agency in London, said for landlords and lettings agents who kept good records the checks “shouldn’t add a huge burden to the process of securing a tenancy”.

However, she said there could be problems for landlords who did not fully understand the rules.

“As some landlords are likely to feel that the new legislation is a bureaucratic minefield, they may think they can play safe by only renting to British people. This is absolutely not the case, as this is tantamount to discrimination,” she said.

“As a professional agency we are legally obliged to ‘dis-instruct’ landlords for discriminatory or racist behaviour, but in reality those who are rejected or overlooked for tenancies by landlords using less scrupulous agents or advertising directly through classified ads for instance may have a hard time proving they have been discriminated against.”

Tenants could also suffer if they were not able to provide the right paperwork. “Some of the most vulnerable people in the private rented sector may be forced to turn to the black economy to find a place to live. Someone who is homeless, for instance, may not hold a passport or visa; and obtaining one may be difficult, not to say costly, for someone living on the streets or in temporary accommodation, so this policy could well bar many such people from ever getting back into secure, rented accommodation.”

It emerged in August that just seven landlords involved in the pilot scheme had been issued notices, and they faced average fines of £800. “

Housing associations are consulting lawyers about setting up ‘sister companies’ to free stock from the effect of government policies.

Deregulatory measures contained in the Housing and Planning Bill give landlords the freedom to sell stock without the regulator’s oversight.

This would allow associations to create sister companies and sell stock to them, effectively removing them from measures such as the rent cut and Right to Buy.

Lawyers have fielded initial queries from a range of landlords and are understood to be formally advising some on the move.

The move would likely prove controversial with the government if it was seen as a way to evade reforms.

Before the general election last year, Brandon Lewis, the housing minister, warned stock-holding local authorities against setting up companies to escape the Right to Buy.

If housing associations were to pursue the option, the sister companies would be free to set the rents on the properties or sell them. However, existing loan covenants and contractual restrictions may prevent some properties from being moved to a new entity.

HAs will have  continuing need to comply with the Homes and Communities Agency’s regulatory standards; with loan covenants; and with contractual restrictions that may apply to particular properties.

The Housing and Planning Bill provides for substantial deregulation of housing associations, aimed at reversing the Office for National Statistics’ (ONS) reclassification of the sector as public.

As well as being given freedom to dispose of stock, housing associations will no longer have to seek regulatory consent over mergers or restructures.

The bill passed its final reading in the House of Commons last week and is due to receive Royal Assent in April.

Proposals to allow a third party to resolve affordable housing disputes could make it more difficult for councils to ensure suitable development.

Inside Hosuing reported:

Ninety five per cent of supported housing providers would be forced to wind up housing schemes for the most vulnerable if a planned benefits cut went ahead.

An Inside Housing snap survey of 82 providers, which own a collective 120,000 units of supported housing, lays bare the impact of capping housing benefit at Local Housing Allowance (LHA) levels for the first time.

According to Inside Housing:

” It shows 27% of providers believe all their schemes would be left financially unviable, while 40% said most of their schemes would go under in the survey conducted this week.

A further 28% of providers said at least some of their schemes would be unviable, with only 5% saying all of their schemes could survive.

Housing leaders are currently frantically lobbying the government to confirm an exemption for supported and sheltered housing from the benefit changes which kick in from April 2018.

Rents in supported housing are typically well above LHA levels – which reflect the lowest 30% of private sector rents in an area – and tenants of these schemes would be left facing huge arrears if benefit was capped.

The 82 providers said they had a combined 5,691 new units of supported housing currently under development. However 18% said they had frozen this development and more than a third – 34% – said they are considering doing so while they wait on news of an exemption.

The cut, which was first announced in the Autumn Statement, will apply to all new tenancies granted from April this year when it comes into effect in 2018.

Because of this, 12% of respondents said they would no longer accept benefit claimants to supported housing schemes from April if an exemption is not confirmed by then, and 16% said they would be reluctant to.

The government has offered £70m additional Discretionary Housing Payments for two years from 2018 to cover the shortfall, which providers warn is insufficient.

UPDATE: at 10.19am 21.01.16

Housing associations met with local government minister Marcus Jones and civil servants yesterday at a meeting set up by the National Housing Federation (NHF) to press the case for an exemption for supported housing from the welfare cut.

David Orr, chief executive of the NHF, said: “Ministers and civil servants heard about the profound impact these changes will have on housing associations’ ability to provide supported housing for society’s most vulnerable people.””

Have your say – here is their consultation document:

HCA informal consultation on innovation plans

Local authorities will still in some cases be able to offer lifetime tenancies to existing secure tenants who have opted to move to another council home.

According to Inside Housing:

The government’s Housing and Planning Bill, which was debated in parliament at report stage today, will end lifetime tenancies for all new council tenants.

However, housing minister Brandon Lewis confirmed  that tenants who are asked to move by their council will be able to take their security of tenure with them.

Tenants who apply to their council landlord for a transfer will also be able to have a new secure tenancy when they move in some cases. Inside Housing understands that the circumstances in which councils can allow this will be outlined in future regulations by the Department for Communities and Local Government.

Mr Lewis said: “Where somebody is asked to move who has a secure tenancy that will transfer with them and we will give councils the flexibility to do that for voluntary moves as well.”

The legislation allows the secretary of state to specify circumstances in which secure tenancies can still be granted.

Labour tabled an amendment to remove the ending of lifetime tenancies for new tenants from the bill. However, this was defeated by 296 votes to 207 in a Commons vote this afternoon.

Another Labour amendment, aimed to prevent the forced sale of council homes to fund the extension of Right to Buy to housing association tenants, was withdrawn with shadow housing minister Roberta Blackman-Woods citing a lack of parliamentary time available.

MPs also approved a government amendment aimed at enabling councils in London to achieve two-for-one replacement of high-value homes sold. This would see the ‘levy’ charged on councils for their high-value vacant homes reduced if they build two replacement homes themselves.

In addition to the Right to Buy extension, the bill also includes provisions to support Starter Homes, a new Pay to Stay for social tenants deemed to be high earners and measures to deregulate housing associations.

Mr Lewis, defending the bill in the face of criticism from the Labour benches, said the legislation would “result in fairness and efficiency to the housing market and further the dreams and aspirations of homeowners”.

Jonathan Walters, deputy director of performance and strategy at the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), said the fees would “generate income” to shore up cuts of 35% at the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

In 2014 and 2015, the HCA shelved plans to introduce fees after ministers failed to sign off a consultation in time.

However, at the National Housing Federation’s risk conference in Birmingham yesterday, Mr Walters said “I wouldn’t be surprised if [fees come] back on the agenda in the course of this year or the next.” He said that the DCLG faces revenue cuts of 35%, following the Spending Review in December.

Mr Walters added that the regulator had decreased in size from 240 to 120 staff over recent years following previous spending reductions.

He said: “I think one of the obvious answers to this question… will be a question the discussion about fees and is there a role for fees to generate income for the regulator.”

A HCA discussion paper in February 2014 suggested an annual fixed fee per social housing unit owned.

Sector figures have called for fees to be used to boost the regulator’s income, rather than replace government funding. If DCLG gives the go ahead, the HCA would look to bring in fees at the start of a financial year. This means a paper would have to be published a few months in advance of this time to allow time for consultation and publication of final proposals. This means the earliest fees could feasibly be brought in would be April 2017.

It is not clear whether the DCLG is currently in favour of allowing fees. The department has been contacted for comment.

United for All Ages, a social enterprise which aims to bring younger and older people together, has today outlined 20 ideas to “promote intergenerational equity”.

According to CIH:

“A number of the ideas relate to housing and care, including a suggestion of a new task force on retirement housing.

Jane Ashcroft, chief executive of housing association Anchor, is quoted in the report backing the idea. She said: “I firmly believe the government should create a national task force of developers, ministers and local government to produce a national strategy for increasing retirement housing supply.” Ms Ashcroft said this would reduce resentment felt by some younger people who feel they are prevented from accessing homes by ‘bed-blocking’ older people.

The report also suggested older and younger people should be encouraged to live together through home share schemes. Alex Fox, chief executive of Shared Lives Plus, a network which offers home share services, said that the scheme can address issues of loneliness among the elderly community as well as young people who are unable to afford housing. Mr Fox said: “Home share could not only create intergenerational fairness, but mutual support and respect across the generational divide.”

Other ideas suggested in the report include buidling 300,000 homes a year, with a mix of affordable rent, Starter Homes and retirement housing.”