Renters’ Rights Bill: What’s coming, and what’s not (and why?)

As the Renters’ Rights Bill makes its (slower than expected) progress through the Westminster Parliament, it is important that we give consideration to what parts will apply to Wales, and also what parts won’t.  I have become interested in particular in the latter question for reasons I will explain.  The Explanatory Notes (which had to be updated after an error occurred – embarrassing) contain a really good Annex (which hopefully is now accurate) which tells you about the territorial extent of the Bill.

First, what parts will apply to Wales.  The part to which I have drawn attention previously relates to the discrimination provisions (I won’t repeat the analysis here).  The LCM (which I will call LCM1) is here.  The best answer I have had to my question about pets (why is so much time being given to the question about pets in private rented housing?) is that tenants regularly raise the issue in surveys.  It doesn’t quite get to the real issues in renting (cost and quality) but, as my kinds used to say, “whevs”.  At least, keeping a pet is something which policy-makers feel that they can control.

However, there are other important changes away from those headline issues to the Housing Act 2004 which will apply to Wales and for which the LCM process applies (see here).  These are technical changes in a way, but changes which will make it easier to serve improvement notices; and, in clauses 105-6 (in the version which left the House of Commons – the one I am using at the moment),  to widen the offences in relation to unlicensed HMOs and selective licensing (clarifying the limits of a defence).  There are also changes to the housing ombudsman rules in the Housing Act 1996, which apparently apply “in relation to a number of homes in Wales”: LCM1, 40).

Next what won’t apply.  There is so much in this Bill and not all of it would have been relevant to Wales anyway for which Renting Homes and the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 are the governing legislation.  England will create a PRS “database” – they can’t call it registration or licensing because that will suggest that they are copying Wales and Scotland and, to an extent, Northern Ireland.  But, what has interested me is that the provisions about enforcement, including loosening the reins of local authority investigations, are not going to apply.  This is really important stuff because it facilitates the local authority enforcement role in the PRS and gets rid of a lot of the restrictions about which local authorities have been complaining for some time.  Further, and I admit to becoming just a little obsessed by this provision, clause 107 won’t apply.  Clause 107(1) says:

It is the duty of every local housing authority to enforce the landlord legislation in its area.

I actually think (maybe wrongly) that this is one of the most important provisions in the Bill.  Consider the problems that Cardiff Council had in 2023.  They were judicially reviewed through the fantastic Speakeasy Law Centre (with supporting evidence from Shelter Cymru) because they did not investigate and consider prosecuting one of Speakeasy’s client’s landlord: “During judicial review proceedings, Cardiff Council disclosed that it had not used its powers of prosecution under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 in the last 10 years.” If this clause were in force, they would have had a duty to enforce those rules.  Councils would have a duty to enforce the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, and other housing law.  Now, this raises another quirk of devolution of housing.  The reason why clause 107 can apply in England is because of the civil penalty regime, which essentially means that the local authority can charge the offending person a sum of money which must be recycled back in to their service.  There are all sorts of problems with this regime, I admit, but, in principle, what is objectionable about it.  It penalises “bad” landlords and ensures that local authorities can resource themselves to provide a check on standards, rather than “do a Cardiff” in this context.  We have rent repayment orders (more limited than in England, and the Renters’ Rights Bill expands them for England, but not for Wales) but not civil penalties.

This might be worth exploring further.  If we want standards and housing quality in Wales, what’s the problem?  What am I missing?  Isn’t it just a bit weird for England to become more proactive about PRS enforcement than Wales?  Why?