I NOTE with interest Mike Dailly's Agenda contribution on the private rental sector (PRS) (“Tenants have little or no power in their relationships with landlords”, The Herald, October 12). I am amazed at the one-sided view of the private rented sector (PRS) he portrays. As a retired property manager my own experience differs considerably.
Mr Dailly states that his extensive survey indicates that tenants do not enter the PRS by choice. Most of us aspire to own our home eventually, but did he survey students, those on work contracts away from home, couples saving for a deposit, those escaping a partner or those evicted by a social landlord for their opinion? They are all usually happy to enter a contract giving them accommodation for a short period and don't consider they are "over a barrel".
Aa Short Assured Tenancy cannot be for less than six months and many tenants do not initially wish any longer, but it would be a shortsighte landlord who did not offer a responsible tenant an extension to the lease, rather than incur the considerable costs when a tenant leaves. Unfortunately not all tenants are responsible and legal action is often the only avenue available to the landlord, although this is often a considerable waste of time.
Mr Dailly says his survey indicates tenants are afraid to report property defects to the landlord for fear of eviction, despite acknowledging their considerable rights. Surely, he is well aware that landlords cannot evict a tenant without a court order and that the tenant can also make an application to the Private Rented Housing Panel to inspect the property and force action?
Rents are more expensive in the private sector than the subsidised social sector, but like Mr Dailly's legal practice, landlords try to make a profit. If the rent is too high the prospective tenant can look elsewhere.
It is also a foolish landlord who does not place the tenant’s deposit in one of the Governments safeguarding schemes, as the penalty is usually three times the unsecured deposit.
Applications from homeless applicants previously in the PRS will of course be higher, as the length of a lease the private sector are able to offer is so short. The £500,000 of housing benefit paid to PRS landlords does not seem quite so great when you consider housing benefit now runs at more than £20 billion per annum, with the majority covering the rents of pensioners.
He speaks of violence from landlords and I am sure there are some who use intimidation on tenants, but my own experience differs. I made an arrangement to visit a tenant who had not paid us his rent despite receiving housing benefit directly. Despite wearing glasses I was punched in the face and pushed downstairs. My assailant was not charged, as there were no witnesses.
There are bad landlords out there, but experience has shown me, there are far more bad tenants. Mr Dailly is quick to put all the blame on private landlords but if there was no PRS where would the 14.6 per cent of households using their facilities live?
Robert Aitken,
Kilpatrick Gardens, Glasgow.
WHILE we recognise some of the localised issues raised by Mike Dailly this in no way reflects Scotland’s private rented sector (PRS) as a whole. Scotland’s PRS is the most highly regulated in the UK and the sweeping generalisations he makes demonise a sector that has made great strides to set high standards.
The sector has embraced change, welcomes regulation that supports both tenants and landlords and contrary to the picture painted by Mr Dailly’s survey, is one of ongoing improvement. Scottish Government figures show 8 per cnent satisfaction with providers in PRS, the largest tenant survey by Lettingstats shows just 14 per cent of sitting tenants experienced rent rises and according to the Scottish House Condition Survey, only 6% or properties were “below tolerable standard” – and that figure was decreasing further.
If there is a failure in the system it is that the lack of housing has created a situation where demand far outstrips supply. If we could establish a policy environment that incentivises existing landlords and encourages institutional investment to “build for rent” we would see the kind of growth in good quality, affordable long-term rental properties that is taking place in England.
If this were to happen, we would not have to rely on the “accidental landlord” to fill the housing gap. Instead, with more choice, all landlords would have to compete for tenants by providing the kind of homes rental tenants want to live in.
Dan Cookson,
Head of Research at Lettingweb for PRS 4 Scotland,
26 Dublin Street, Edinburgh.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel