New requirements for a 'new' tenancy

[Carryon Regardless]

I'll be setting up my 1st new tenancy for a while, and I'm aware that there new requirements for us, as LLs, to comply with but I'm not sure I have them all covered.

Legislated

EPC (if requested by T),

gas cert,

carbon monoxide detector (for rooms where solid fuel is used),

6 month AST c/w contact details for service (we don't have to provide to but silly not to),

protect deposit (I no longer take deposits),

prescribed information (if you take and protect deposit),

report of faults sheet, c/w contact details,

manuals to all LL supplied equipment (hoovers, boilers, washing machines, wall fans.....)

Choice

Guarantor, with deed,

check in inventory (stopped doing these some time ago),

electrical inspection (renew at each change of occupancy),

smoke detector,

 

clean toilet paper with instruction on correct application.

What have I missed?

 

 

[Melboy]

Legionaires Water Check Certificate.

https://rla.org.uk/landlord/guides/legionnaires_disease.shtml

 

 

[Richlist]

In addition....all mandatory

* 'How to Rent' the checklist for renting in England....latest version.

* Confirmation that CO alarms are fitted in EVERY room with a solid fuel burning source and have been checked and are working at the start of the tenancy.

* Confirmation that Smoke alarms are fitted on EVERY floor. They have been checked and are in working order at the start of the tenancy.

Also

* You can no longer claim w & t allowance on furnished property.

* You must apply the relevant parts of the immigration act 2014 by checking applicants passports/ visas and right to rent.

Don't forget.....fire labels, latest changes to mortgage interest relief, changes to capital gains tax liabilities, amendments to SDLT thresholds.

Recommended

* A tenant help sheet

* A booklet on how to control condensation.

* A list of any restrictions or requirements (mainly leasehold but maybe freeholds as well)

I'm bound to have forgotten something......

[Melboy]

Credit / personal checks on prospective tenant?     This may not apply to COR of course knowing his past history of his tenant selection.   

[Carryon Regardless]

I think you would be surprised Mel.

When the area only gives a choice of low value potentials it follows that eventually I must lower my expectations. Having experienced long voids from being choosy, that is not wanting the perceived "where's my rent this month" "naff off or I'll belt yer" scenario there is a point where the lost rents would pay for the anticipated renovations. And let's not forget the 150% council tax , elec and gas bills we all prefer to avoid. Then if the void is prolonged the insurance will lapse.

The g'tor is my favoured protection from financial abuse, for £3 I can see if they have equity to threaten in the event. And by taking a credit check fee it causes then to be honest about their previous failings for fear of wasting the fee. Unfortunately my experience of the County Court educates me that the socialist Judge would prefer the greedy capitalist to bear the burden of responsibility where things have gone yuk. In reality the hoped psychological effect has value on a hopefully naive g'tor.

I have been deciding on the 2 next to be rented flats in that dreaded block of flats in Wales. Do I attempt to rent with a tidy up, or do I replace dated kitchens and bathrooms. All applicants would appreciate the higher standard but not many demonstrate enough respect to return the property without the soul destroying "I only" amendments they believe to be betterment. The last to be rented to an older chap was similarly dated. He was and is happy with the flashover it had. Now the social services would like to replace the dated bath with a walk in shower arrangement due to his developing infirmity, erm. He's a nice chap but it's not difficult to see where he wont be living soon enough and then the next applicant would likely prefer the shower into bath set up it has now.

I lose a fair few possible T's as they come to realise that Mr Angry lives there in his own flat, each week there's a new story about him. Last month he was sprawling on the walkway at the front rolling in his own puke to an audience. Earlier this week he ran from the flats across a main road. Dressed in his house coat and y fronts only. No shoes or socks. 2 cars 'just' avoided hitting him (bloody ABS), across to the other side, stubbed his toe and over on to his face. The older chap watching said the crack as Angry went down made him nauseas. Audience again, Police attended, Ambulance (or Mr Angry Taxi if you prefer) cart Angry off. 15 minutes later he walks back, dressed the same. Obviously he had changed his mind about a trip to A&E. 

Angry wishes to talk to me about Comptons as they're pursuing him, no surprise there. I've told him that I'm fighting them as their aim is to show a debt of over £350 for 2 years as then they can take the flat. It may not be totally accurate but what do I know? But Comptons are playing up and that will make selling them more difficult. They drilled a test hole to check on the integrity of the near perfect tarmac on the parking areas last week so I anticipate a future battle there. What's next with them I wonder?

I envy you lot but at least I can pass some entertainment your way.

[Mortitia]

Cor - why don't you get rid of Mr Angry?  Why are Comptons pursuing you Cor?  I'm a bit confused.

[Carryon Regardless]

Mortitia I think you must have missed a few episodes of this lack of soap opera.

Cromptons have taken me to County Court 4 times, well 3 times me and 1 times my Ltd Co for the 5 flats I have in the "dreaded block". This being for ground rents and insurance not yet due. A bit more complicated but that's the essence. Last week they sent me information to say the claims were dropped, but this week the Court sent me information to say the cases were to be programmed at my local CC, either way I don't really mind.

Flat 6 is owner occupied by Mr Angry, even though the mortgage is with Mortgage Express and in arrear. Getting rid of Mr Angry would be very reasonable, but I believe would come with a few years penalty if caught, even if I brought in a contractor for the task.

[kerbut]

CoR 

 What was your reason for stopping doing the check in inventory ? , I find that the check in inventory being photographic and the photographic Check out inventory a very powerful tool , the inventory clerk I use does over 300 photos.

[Carryon Regardless]

The main reason for the check in / check out is for demonstration to the DPS, I realise it could have 'some' purpose in the CC also.

Now fighting a case with the DPS for a few hundred quids deposit just 'aint worth the effort. A T simply says I don't agree with the LL and now the LL goes through hoops to demonstrate the losses. Even when demonstrated the DPS have sympathy with the T, as does the CC generally. An example is that a carpet is written off after 4 years, how many home 'owners' would replace their carpets each 4 years, if mine don't last 15 years I'm disappointed.

So we pay out from our profits for the checks, just to set ourselves up for future efforts. With good T's we have no need of any of these systems anyway, for the bad the systems are biased toward the T. I save the monies I would spend and effectively self insure, these monies saved (from the good and the bad) now go toward the works as needed. When we have bad tenancies the loss of rents are by far the easiest to demonstrate. By the time we have hoofed a bad T often the lost rents are more than we can expect to recover so I don't see the advantage of proving that they have not cleaned or damaged a carpet.

As I understand doing our own checks is not desired by those that rule us. I'm open to new learnings though.

[Richlist]

CoR raises a very interesting point.......one that is often lost on forums such as these. There are lots of different markets. Letting to the poor or those on benefits is considerably different to letting to the well healed or even the middle classes.

It's easy for each of us to wrongly assume everyone else operates in a similar way and has similar experiences. CoR demonstrates that is totally wrong and we often all have very different situations.

[Grampa]

Having used both the the DPS (Government custodial deposit scheme) and the TDS (insurance based deposit scheme & you keep funds in your own bank acc) I can honestly say the insurance based schemes are easier to deal with if there are dilapidation's at the end of the tenancy and the issues get resolved a lot quicker.

I would advise any landlord to pay the extra to use the insurance schemes.

First you do need a good inventory in place. 

 

[Richlist]

I have a kinda middle of the road deposit protection scheme which echos that suggestion.

My letting agents are registered with TDS and hold the tenants deposits in a dedicated holding account. Because the money is held by the agents it seems my tenants rarely argue against deductions.

[Carryon Regardless]

As we are continually tasked to increase our administration involvement, my view is to minimise my activities here generally to what I 'MUST' do.

We aren't required by legislation to carry out a Legionaires survey. We are legislated by H&S to provide a safe environment for our t's. Actually that sort of legislation applies to anyone, as in we shouldn't be neglectful of others safety. So I've done my survey's but don't intend to record them in any fashion. The chance of any t coming down with legionaries is so minimal the efforts to control this are massively disproportionate.

I don't have or intend to have solid fuel heating so no further consideration of carbon monoxide detectors required. A smoke detector is required on each level, for tenancies commencing after 1 Oct 2015, demonstrated ok at tenancy start. Here I shall tick boxes on a sheet and require t's to sign.

We are allowed to provide a link to the 'How To Rent' booklet, that sounds good enough to me. Those conscientious enough about life don't need 8 pages shoved at them they will source relevant info as required. Those that aren't conscientious will only use it when the loo paper runs out. I am aware that the link address on the tick sheet will be forgotten about but I don't have respect for this booklet anyway.

We now 'must' provide the EPC. It doesn't say a copy or a link (which would serve good enough purpose), how many will provide a photo copy like me?

Instruction for the heating systems, I can see this one being sort of reasonable. The original manuals are best kept by me for where faults need investigating. Maybe a link to the manuals will do here. Would any of us feel comfortable providing a parts diagram to a wannbe DIY'er?

I don't supply electrical equipment and don't intend to, aside from a cooker, if electrical that's fixed equipment as it doesn't plug in. Any kit left from a previous t and desired by the new is gifted. Soon enough we will be legislated to have the fixed electrical installation inspected so I'll wait for that.

As my AST already details faults should be reported to me, and of course has the contact details I reckon that one is covered, I haven't read this has any additional legislation anyway.

So I'm intending to build tenancy packs. Generally to be kept by the meter/s.

AST

Guarantor Deed

Gas Certificate

EPC Copy

Info / Tick Sheet dated and signed to show receipt of the above + smoke alarm testing, link to 'How to Rent' for idiots, link to heating system manuals. 2x this as I need 1 for my records.

 

I don't believe giving loads of paperwork to t's helps them understand or behave better. My aim for a while has been to make the responsibilities clear to understand within the AST. Areas are headed and underlined so the t can find the relevant part when needed. i.e. Animals No animals of any description shall be kept at the property without written approval from the landlord.

My AST is up to four pages, the last page being the signature page. Any more and there becomes a reluctance to even try to take it all in. Some have actually questioned parts as they decide to check what is permitted, so there is some success.

[Carryon Regardless]

It's gas inspection time for my properties. Wales was done last week and all requirements were as previous.

Yesterday I met the engineer at my 1 Manchester property. He says that this year it will be a requirement for us to provide co2 detectors even for properties with gas fires and gas boilers, not just solid fuel burners. I can't see anything to support this statement, any thoughts?

While not included in the welsh certificates the Manchester certificate now carries tick boxes for; Approved co2 alarms Fitted, Are co2 Alarms in Date, Testing of co2 Alarms Satisfactory, Smoke Alarms Fitted.

There is certainly a desire for the co2 alarms demonstrated there but the surprise is that the smoke alarm attention is minimal, where fitted it doesn't even require testing.

That was fortunate as in the 3 level house (+ cellar) 2 of the 3 batteries were removed.

How many would install a smoke detector in a damp(ish) cellar? it is another level but c'mon.

[Richlist]

The original bill that went through parliament was a requirement for co alarms where there was either solid fuel or gas appliances. The requirement for those properties with gas appliances was dropped and legislation was/ is only for solid fuel.

I have not heard of any updated requirements.......but I'm human, so I could be wrong.

[Carryon Regardless]

This is an ongoing problem the changes to the industry are so frequent it's so easy to miss something. For anyone to misunderstand or misinterpret is very understandable as it may well be the case for this gas engineer.

So when Cameron reiterated the complaint of the EU being too bureaucratic you might think it reasonable to try to reduce the red tape closer to home some. 

[Richlist]

A search of the web doesn't show any new legislation or any suggestion of something that might be on its way.

Nothing either on the RLA web site although I have learnt something today.......properties, including flats, which are all electric but which are located over shops DO require co alarms. Makes sense really but could easily be missed.

[Grampa]

3 hours ago, Richlist said:

A search of the web doesn't show any new legislation or any suggestion of something that might be on its way.

Nothing either on the RLA web site although I have learnt something today.......properties, including flats, which are all electric but which are located over shops DO require co alarms. Makes sense really but could easily be missed.

I am not aware of this regulation Richlist do you have a link for it. 

[Richlist]

See:

http://rla.org.uk/landlord/guides/carbon-monoxide-requirements.shtml

Under the heading ' The Premises Affected'.

 

 

[Grampa]

I'm slightly confused and may be reading it differently (and incorrectly) but it reads to me that flats above shops are to be treated the same as any other property and you would apply the normal rules.

 Some of these flats you get above shops especially older ones can be integrated to the shop below and not separate. You use to get a lot of the shopkeepers years ago living above so were linked with a doorway/stairway. Maybe this is to stop the argument of the living area being part of a commercial unit and not applicable to the smoke and CO rules.   

The fact that us (on this forum) as professional landlords can interpret this in two different way show how badly worded it is. 

[Richlist]

Yes I see what you mean.

I think it's fair to say that shops and general commercial properties are unlikely to have solid fuel appliances anyway.....much more likely to have gas or electric.

We also know that fumes from lower properties can easily enter the properties / rooms above through gaps/voids in the building fabric.

Because CO alarms are quite cheap to buy, if I had a flat above a shop I'd be inclined to fit one for peace of mind. 

In fact, it makes sense to have one if you have gas appliances. 

 

[Melboy]

My Son is a registered gas installer.  He does receive the updates on new gas laws etc. via  a professional magazine.... monthly..... plus all registered gas installers have to be re-certified by examination every few years so updates are fed into the examination and re-coursing.

The CO law that came out last October was ambiguous to say the least but for me I fitted CO alarms to my properties regardless of how this new legistlation was being interpreted.  As stated, cheap enough to buy and a tax deductable expense and peace of mind for tenant and landlord.

[Grampa]

I manage a number of flats above shops, some are completely independent to the shop below, have their own entrances and owned independently from the shop below. I cant see how this type of property can be treated any different. What if there was 5 floors of flats above? Would it apply to all of  them as well? 

As RL says for the relatively small cost for a 7-10 year co/smoke alarm you cant go wrong especially if you lived above a crematorium.  

[Richlist]

I think the important words are 'completely independent to the shops below' i.e........the shops below have a different owner, different appliances, different maintenance arrangements Tec.

Irrespective of how many floors above the shops, personally, I think they all need CO alarms.

I have property which has no solid fuel appliances, just gas but, I still fit a CO alarm. They can be bought for less than £30 each.

 

[kerbut]

They can be bought for less than £30 each. (quote Richlist ) 

I have on the ground floor mains operated (not hard wired , plug in ) and on first floor battery with a (lets see ) 10 year battery life ,it worked out @ £26 per property for the 2 alarms