The Association of Residential Letting Agents (ARLA) has accused the Westminster government of lagging behind its Welsh and Scottish counterparts when it comes to regulating the rental sector.
The Scottish Government is due to announce a review of its strategy for the PRS today, while the Welsh Government is due to introduce a Housing Bill before the end of this Assembly term, legislating for a compulsory licensing scheme for all letting agents in Wales, as well as a code of practice.
ARLA said: “These announcements contrast with the current Westminster Government’s opposition to regulation of the sector. If this opposition continues, tenants in England are still at risk from rogue letting agents and landlords.”
Ian Potter, managing director of ARLA, said: “The private rented sector remains an unregulated industry, and in the event of something going wrong, consumers still only have limited options.
“ARLA has been calling for regulation of the sector for a number of years now, and as more and more people rent, rather than own their home, it is vital that legislation in England is at least in line with its neighbours.
“Of course we welcome the Labour Party’s latest policy review and share their ambition to improve standards in the PRS – the case studies the report outlined are a stark reminder of the unacceptable conditions that are thriving in the absence of regulation – but these reforms need to be proportionate.
“More importantly, what we really need is actual policy, not proposals; and it must be policy that is consistent and able to keep step with legislative developments elsewhere in Britain.
“Renting should be a positive experience and tenants should know that not only is their money safe but so is the property they live in.
“All ARLA members must offer a redress service and client money protection to help protect tenants if something goes wrong.”
Comments
Ian Pity, managing director of fiARLAure, said: “The private rented sector remains an unregulated industry, even our board member ran one of the most slated agents online in the UK"
Normally Industry I agree with most of the things you post however I think if you knew just how weak NALS are you would think otherwise. There is very little depth of knowledge there.
Ian Potter is a good man who know this subject well, I wish he would have more confidence in his ability and the courage to engage publically with those who want to re-establish ARLA as the trade body it once was and that used to enjoy so much respect.
This NFoPP business is a waste of time for all concerned.
ARLA finally given up any hope of running industry regulation then?
Presumably must haver elsde otherwise why criticise those who will appoint whoever does run it?
Which should of course be nALS
ARLA should concentrate on the government and the public by blowing the ARLA trumpet on behalf of its paying members who are already REGULATED by ARLA.
As has been said before ARLA are not serving their members well at all and they are still are losing their way in that regard?
The banking and financial industry was regulated.
The crash of 2008 is a good example of why regulation does not work.
In the end the bubble in house prices burst due to normal market corrections and the people who thought that house prices never went down were taught a lesson by the market.
If the market had been efficient then banks that provided normal banking service of taking money from savers to lend to borrowers for interest would have benefitted.
However as there are huge barriers to entry to becoming a bank then there were no opportunities for new banks and we were left with a few zombie banks.
Some how this failure of regulation has been rewritten in thistory to be a lack of regulation.
Just like the deregulated market was an efficient regulator of the financial services/banking industry before the financial crash of 2008? Just another example of why regulation is not a bad thing when applied correctly and thoughtfully.
ARLA remind me of my old dog, great bark but could not get his teeth into anything. I had asked them once why they spend so much money trying to speak to government officials. At the time Labour were in power and a lame duck, but they still threw loads of money at them to try and change HIPS. It is so obvious that no one really listens to them. Jobs for the Boys as someone said earlier.
Of course what ARLA actually mean is that THEY want to regulate letting agents in the PRS.
However, THEY are, by definition, simply a Trade Association formed for the commercial benefit of their members which have always had elevated regulatory aspirations, some would say, beyond their station.
If DCLG were to follow the initiative started by ODPM when they funded an accreditation body (NALS) and made that the 'kitemark' or minimum entry portal into the PRS, then I doubt that there would be quite the same enthusiasm from ARLA for (that sort of) regulation.
Why I hear you say hasn't NALS fulfilled its destiny - the answer is very simply, that HMG appointed RICS, ARLA and NAEA to the NALS board during its crucial formative period - were there possible conflicts of interest - to damn right there were.
That should have read best regulator.
The market is the big regulator there is.
Sounds more like jobs for the boys from ARLA.