x

CORONAVIRUS UPDATE

See the latest Coronavirus statistics from across the world on our world map SEE MAP UK Confirmed cases: 285,787 | UK Deaths: 44,216 SEE MAP Italy Confirmed cases: 241,184 | Italy Deaths: 34,833 | Italy Recovered: 191,467 SEE MAP Spain Confirmed cases: 250,545 | Spain Deaths: 28,385 | Spain Recovered: 150,376 SEE MAP See the latest Coronavirus statistics from across the world on our world map SEE MAP UK Confirmed cases: 285,787 | UK Deaths: 44,216 SEE MAP Italy Confirmed cases: 241,184 | Italy Deaths: 34,833 | Italy Recovered: 191,467 SEE MAP Spain Confirmed cases: 250,545 | Spain Deaths: 28,385 | Spain Recovered: 150,376 SEE MAP

Matthew Payne

Business & Property Consultant

1266 Profile Views

About Me

Business and property consultant offering strategic consultancy services and executive coaching to property businesses and property people looking for guidance and support to fulfil their potential, become more compliant, commercial, effective and profitable.

Get in touch at aficionadoproperty.com or on 07970 773 847.

my expertise in the industry

I worked in the independent and corporate property world for 25 years, working my way up from trainee estate agent to Managing Director of a multi-million-pound estate agency in London delivering record profits in the years that followed. Working closely with my teams, clients and customers in sales, lettings, property management, land and new homes afforded me an intimate 360 degree understanding of a transactional residential property business and the people it served.

Matthew's Recent Activity

And beyond Angus. Next wave will happen, it is a foregone conclusion. If you read all the science bit, cases have been steadily increasing, and in fact there are more carriers out there than in March. As soon as the floodgates are opened on July 4th, only a matter of when not if. Most experts predict the autumn when the weather changes. Just in time for September when normality could have retured as you say. Government knows all this of course, but they have to get economy open otherwise there will be no society left anyway. Another 50,000 deaths will be the price for the majority surviving with some economic future.

From: Matthew Payne 26 June 2020 13:37 PM

I agree Mark! Making someone homeless is always a last resort, Covid 19 on top of a housing/affordabilty/unemployment crisis will mean they will be even less inclined to do so, and if your tenants are a family, forget it. Will never happen. Dont be surprised to see some tenants taking advantage of this as well as we saw with the supposed rent holidays. Expect to see Dr's notes being waived in Court citing stress, anxiety and mental health issues where before there were none.

From: Matthew Payne 26 June 2020 13:32 PM

Classic needs based sales to be fair. Hightlight a problem that could exist, make it sound complicated and scary as hell, and then leave the door wide open to offer to fix it for them. Agents have been doing this to Landlords for years! Yes good agents will be doing it, but there are plenty who won't, who dont know how, or who don't want the risk, who Neil is hoping to get a call from. Numbers game.

From: Matthew Payne 22 June 2020 13:29 PM

Lets hope No 20 since 1997 knows something about property....

From: Matthew Payne 22 June 2020 13:15 PM

Whilst there are large swathes of tenants paying their rent as normal, many others whom have fallen into genuine hardship who need support, there is a very public third group who are taking advantage of this loophole. There are 1000s of anecdotal pieces of evidence out there where tenants have blatantly used this window to deliberatley profit from the pandemic, I have had dozens of calls from LLs asking for advice on how to handle these situations. I am sure Sim and his teams own data will reflect this as well, so there shouldn't be any need for doubt or speculation about what might happen now the evictions ban has been extended. More of the same for all 3 groups.

From: Matthew Payne 10 June 2020 10:38 AM

I thought that was common knowledge. Many smaller agents use the Open Rent back door to advertise on RM, its far far cheaper of course.

From: Matthew Payne 01 June 2020 16:20 PM

Chestertons also love getting their free bit of PR. Richard Davies is suggesting Landlords need to discount their current asking prices to avoid a void period. He has not however said they will need to accept a figure lower than the previous tenancy, which is the actual measure of rents decreasing. Sounds to me like he is on a purge for some price reductions to get some deals done, which is fair enough. Only 25% of the properties on their website are let. The more that landlords hear in the trade press that rents are coming down, the more likely they are to accept a lower offer. Nice bit of postioning and conditioning I would say.

From: Matthew Payne 01 June 2020 16:09 PM

Im not sure why they are postioning this with agents at all, it is the landlords decision alone as to what type of tenants they prefer, and they are perfectly entitled to make those choices whatever they are provided they are not in breach of statute, a comfortable affordability rating for one, which will vary from landlord to landlord. Would like to hear their independent legal firm go on record with the advice they have provided.

From: Matthew Payne 15 May 2020 12:15 PM

There were a few blood vessels about to burst in the trail above, so I thought I would just clarify that he wasnt talking about Resi for change, that's all, no other reason for the distinction.

From: Matthew Payne 07 May 2020 13:10 PM

And I'm not fond of his politics dont get me wrong, he is one of JCs buddies, but everyone deserves a fair trial!

From: Matthew Payne 07 May 2020 12:41 PM

Yes I read it, its 4000 words long and thats the only mention to Resi in his intro paragraph explaining why there will be an economic crash. His blog is really about an economic collapse, how businesses will cope, banks and pensions - he isnt talking about the property market. When he comes to talk about lower rents it is in the paragraphs where is solely focussed on how businesses will need funding, need to find ways to survive and one of them is with his proposed solution on rents. When he talks about landlords, it is always in context of their business tenants.

From: Matthew Payne 07 May 2020 12:39 PM

His blog is about business survival and commercial rents, if LAT are suggesting he is talking about Resi tenants they are misquoting him and setting hares running.

From: Matthew Payne 07 May 2020 12:00 PM

Yes, having worked as a smaller independent and part of the big corporate I agree with Lyndon. Smaller agents make their own policies and processes, larger agents have them made in a petri dish at head office and there are so many firewalls that any discretionary flexibility is virutally impossible. The smaller lettings agents have a pretty good chance of surviving this provided they have made the right decisions early enough, and continue to do so and plan for the inevitable later lockdowns. This first one was a warm up for the real thing. The bigger agencies are too big, have too many fixed costs and are run by dinosaurs, many of whom have never been agents. Look at LSL. Sacked their CEO last week. Look at Countrywide. They will be lucky to survive this. Paul Creffield has taken to writing begging letters to the Housing Minister and their share price still looks pretty ugly.

From: Matthew Payne 06 May 2020 12:03 PM

I agree. Relationship and evidence. You can only have a good relationship face to face or on the phone, and good relationships will prevent many not all issues spiralling out of control or resolve any issues to start with. Evidence however of everything should always be kept for compliance and litigation. Have a call, summarise in an email. If they disagree with the summary they will query it, if they dont, the summary is deemed accurate. I also believe a prompt call adds some weight that someone is prepared to get stuck in and deal with something personally and head on. Letters and emails get ignored, and can suggest the sender is seeking to avoid any personal contact, which can be counter productive. I used to have a credit controller in my last business who managed all my rent arrears and debtors. Collected it all by phone (with follow up in writing). People paid just to make sure they didnt get another call. Not a nice feeling when your phone rings thinking it might be that person chasing you for money you owe.

From: Matthew Payne 06 May 2020 11:16 AM

Not sure how an agent or landlord can refuse or prevent a valid notice being served and actioned? What would they do, physically prevent them from moving out on the last day and magically suck the rent out of their account the following month after the standing order had been cancelled? Must be some soft tenants out there if they are claiming they allowed themselves to be talked out of moving, or persuaded they are not allowed, they seem to be experts on most other things.

From: Matthew Payne 05 May 2020 10:13 AM

I understand why Chestertons would come out with this PR, makes sense to talk a market into activity, but these arent big numbers however you measure. A 28% increase in almost none, is a fraction more than almost none. I saw a national survey result last week showing that 60% of people will change very little about their behaviour when the lockdown ends. I dont think we will see a surge in much in the coming weeks whether lettings, of any other industry. With a rising mortality rate in the UK, now up to 15% from 13% last week, most of the people I speak to or read about are going to keep their heads down over the summer just to avoid getting contaminated, and I would have thought Londoners even more so, albeit I speculate there. If people do rush out in droves to get back to normality as they suggest, there will be a second much bigger wave, and many scientists say thats actually likely to happen in any case, as hoping we could snuff this out to 0 carriers whilst theoretically possible, would be like betting on horse in the Grand National with 3 legs, the odds are that long.

From: Matthew Payne 05 May 2020 10:05 AM

Hi Andrew, its all down to the interpretation of the police if you were stopped. It doesnt sound unreasonable to visit a property you own once in 7 weeks to check it's still standing when there is far more blatant abuse of the lockdown taking place every day. I always find it amusing how so many people go to do there essential shopping on a sunny weekend dressed head to toe in leathers on a 900cc sports bike with no panniers, no rucksacks, along with their 5 mates who have also decided to do their shopping at exactly the same time, equally as unprepared.

From: Matthew Payne 04 May 2020 11:29 AM

I didnt say it would prevent the lender repossessing if it wasnt there. I didnt say it was a legal requirement. It could compromise a lenders rights to sell the property immediatley if absent and therefore there are implications for the borrower. Most mortgage offers detail that any additional costs in the lender exercising their rights caused by the borrower are the responsibilty of the borrower, and possibly delaying the lenders ability to sell the property with vacant possession might create additonal cost which is not in a landlords interests. It is certainly good practice to include and if the government makes any moves towards assured tenancies then every lender in the land will insist once more that this clause is included and flashing red and making a noise in every TA so everyone knows it is there. (I was just pointing out to Philip that this is one way a tenant can learn the property is mortgaged but they have no right to know.) It is not a standard clause it is usually added on page 16/17 in addtional clauses, and I am not sure why any landlord or agent would not add it for the sake of completeness to reduce risk, however small that may be.

From: Matthew Payne 30 April 2020 10:01 AM

Yes and no. The tenant doesn't have the right to know, but if the TA is drawn up correctly, there should be a Mortgage Ground II clause which basically gives the lender ultimate authority to repossess and is giving the tenant notice of that from the start. If the clause is there, that is informing the tenant of their right to repossess and the risk that poses. If the clause is absent either there is no mortgage or whoever created the TA has failed to add it, which could then compromise a lenders rights and have implications for the landlord who may just want to hand the keys back.

From: Matthew Payne 29 April 2020 19:53 PM

The key here is the language used and whether it is deemed a landlord has provided consent to anything that might be described and then later misconstrued as a holiday, a deferred payment, a reduction etc and what the implied terms might be. Any shortfall needs to be treated and documented in the same way any normal arrears would be.

From: Matthew Payne 29 April 2020 09:09 AM

Perhaps not mediation, but I have been contacted by a number of landlords since this started asking for advice as to how to handle certain situations, some of which have been to do with tenants and rent payments. Getting a formal mediation service involved could be a death nail for any remaining goodwill between a landlord and tenant and as such signal the end of the tenancy as soon as this is all over.

From: Matthew Payne 28 April 2020 16:59 PM

No of course not and is actually designed to prevent the illegal immigration from happening in the first place, as it creates one more obstacle for anyone overseas from thinking it would be easy to get into the UK and live there. If properly policed by landlords and agents, illegal immigration will start to drop and that would reduce the strain on the taxpayer on a lot of fronts. If you know you will have nowehere to live, no benefits, no right to NHS treatment, no job, no blockbuster video card, you are less likely to want to come here in the first place.

From: Matthew Payne 22 April 2020 14:31 PM

I accept that some people from all races are racist to their core, but the Right to Rent scheme wont have made them more racist, or someone who previously very liberal now one. You would know their nationality and the colour of their skin anyway, so if those are drivers for a landlord as opposed to the usual considerations like employment or references then this legislation would have changed very little..

From: Matthew Payne 22 April 2020 12:45 PM

The enforced savings by the pandemic are actually quite considerable, tracker mortgages are down, no commute, no expensive lunches and coffees, no gym memberships, no kids clubs or school lunches, even Sky Sports is free. Chuck it all in a spreadsheet and it adds up to quite a meaningful amount.

From: Matthew Payne 16 April 2020 11:02 AM

I am not sure why a landlord would take a mortgage holiday when they dont need one? Affects your credit worthyness, makes the mortgages more expensive, and they then still need to be paid anyway. Where is the logic?

From: Matthew Payne 16 April 2020 10:50 AM

It is hysteria like this that led to all the panic buying in the shops. Shout loud enough for long enough and people think a problem exists where there isn't one. Campaigning like this is only about self promotion.

From: Matthew Payne 14 April 2020 10:35 AM

I am sure the tear off slip wont be returned by anyone, a bit of symbolism perhaps. It is worth doing from an education perspective. There is a lot of fake news going around about tenant rent holidays and lobbyists calling for this and that. Constructively engaging with your tenants in explaining what the guidelines actually are, what is expected and what the possible outcomes could be if they stopped paying rent is a useful exercise and will lead to less arrears.

From: Matthew Payne 14 April 2020 09:55 AM

The implication of rennovation was that nothing was essential, so any of us doing DIY away from our homes would not be allowed. However, if you are a trade and you are doing work on an empty property following social distancing regs, as your livlihood depends on it, then that would be allowed, so the WHO is relevant depending on the cirmcumstances. I know plenty of trades who are still working and being allowed to work, gardeners are still out in force as well. Bet you get a ticket though if you get pulled over and you tell him you are off to mow auntie bettys lawn for her.

From: Matthew Payne 09 April 2020 11:52 AM

I am sure there are some jobs that could be justified as essential maintenance that cannot wait, but there will be plenty of others that will not. Rennovation is a broad brush, pardon the pun. Ultimately it will be down to the interpretation of the law and judgment of the police officer if you get pulled over.

From: Matthew Payne 09 April 2020 11:48 AM

The irony is the Tories have done this to win over young voters over who are more likely to vote Labour, and it is a traditional Labour policy area. However, as their ill conceived policies start to bear fruit, ie smaller PRS, less choice and higher rents they could well face a backlash from these tenants who then turn to Labour at the next election. They may well need to reverse these policies to save their own skin.

From: Matthew Payne 09 April 2020 11:09 AM

The flaw is forcing all landlords to pay to join a scheme when they may be fully compliant. If they are genuinely interested in tenant welfare they should carry out their checks at their own cost, and fine those in breach. I dont understand why the PRS gets this perverted attention where you have to pay to have someone check you are not breaking the law, that's what certification is for. The council doesnt force car drivers to pay to join a scheme for them to enforce car maintenance standards even though they may have a valid MOT and road worthy car. The law exists and it is for central and local government to police it from existing tax receipts.

From: Matthew Payne 08 April 2020 14:50 PM

Hi Jonathan, in your case as an owner it would be regarded as a hobby and not essential maintenance even if the garden does get a bit overgrown. Yes if you employ someone they can do it, as they cant carry out their job remotely. The key is all about movement not what you may be doing. An employed person is permitted as HMG doesnt want to deny them the opportunity to work if they can do so safely. You travelling there would be regarded as non essential as your livlihood is not dependent on it, and CGT payments in the future wont count. They are trying to limit the number of unecessary car journeys as statistically there will more accidents, more ambulances called away from the front line.

From: Matthew Payne 08 April 2020 14:40 PM

I have seen only 5 BTL lenders openly declare a holilday so far, and no doubt there will be conditions attached and fees to use, so I would say virtually no LL is taking a mortgage holiday currently and with section 24 and all the other layers of red tape and licensing, this urban myth that landlords even make modest profits now they are taxed on turnover and profit needs to be addressed by commentators. So I would say it is largely untrue, the exception being landlords that may have low or nil mortages on properties inherited or bought a long time ago.

From: Matthew Payne 02 April 2020 11:17 AM

I would check their terms, unless they have a very unusual set having read 100s of sets over the years, lettings agents terms normally say its a % of the gross rent or something similar, in fact I have never seen a set that say its a % of the intial rent or normal rent even if it changes, so this would be a first. I am sure if you had a rent review that triggered an increase they would change their tune.

From: Matthew Payne 02 April 2020 11:04 AM

It is good advice though. The current crisis is where we find ourselves whether we like it or not, and nothing will ever be achieved in extremes burying your head in the sand or either party being too belligerent. Open communciations and good relationships between landlords and tenants are more likely to lead to an agreeable solution for most, and that's how most deals are brokered in a business. This is just another one of those. (he doesn't say he backs a longer possession notice, so I am not sure why that is the headline, he just says with courts closng, that will simply be the reality)

From: Matthew Payne 31 March 2020 10:41 AM

Ive only seen press on 4 lenders offering them so far. About 690 still to go...

From: Matthew Payne 26 March 2020 10:28 AM

There was no U turn just like there was no rent holiday I keep seeing landlords being asked to provide. If you look at the text from the government in the days since it was raised in the Commons, as I have said in other posts they were very careful and deliberate with the words they chose to use as politicans always are. There was only ever talk of the eviction process being amended, there was never an indication whatsoever that the use of Section 21 would be suspended. That was simply poorly interpreted by those who wanted to see that happen. The appropriate solution to this would be for tenants in genuine need to make an application to for the rent payments to be covered and paid direct to the LL, just like applications for benefits or the ones businesses are now making for having wages paid. Very simple. That way those that need it will be supported as they should be and those that would have been tempted to get a free lunch will have to keep paying their way.

From: Matthew Payne 26 March 2020 09:51 AM

No good to you now I know, but many payment systems are now accessed remotely, Im not sure whether you have this facility. I used Bottomline technologies which then had a segway to Lloyds where the client acct was held. My client acct posted all rents remotely through our CRM/Lloyds Acct, reset floats, allocated funds to contractors etc and then sent me the payment run by email and set it up in the system, I logged on from my laptop wherever I was and used my card and card reader to check and make the payment. We simply needed to download the software on to each laptop that might need to get involved in the process.

From: Matthew Payne 24 March 2020 13:03 PM

As predicted. Boris was far too vague in the commons the other day on this point, and the loose wording surrounding "landlords starting proceedings" suggested that they may not be removing a landlords ability to serve notice and here we are. There has been some energetic debate about supposed government sanctioned "rent holidays" and the implications for lenders and landlords, so it is useful to get some clarity for the time being at least and whether generation rent like it or not, it does afford tenants more protection getting us into the warmer months when the experts tell us the virus will be far less effective.

From: Matthew Payne 24 March 2020 09:38 AM

Hi Sarah, make sure your attempts to gain access and their rebuffs are in writing esp on maintenance, you may need to rely on them at later date. I would put all comms in writing at least by whatsapp even on basic stuff as it shows a pattern of comms. We are in unprecedented times and you want to make sure you can demonstrate you have done everything by the book.

From: Matthew Payne 23 March 2020 14:18 PM

I know and know of loads of trades who have simply downed tools and wont be working in anyone's home for the forseeable future, so agents and landlords need back up plans in case they get let down. Its tough enough gettting an appt with some of these guys when times are normal. I have also noticed the number of facebook posts increase from people asking for help finding one as X, Y or Z is not working, boilers, immersions etc. I have also heard of van hire companies cancelling bookings, so the supply chain may be affected in ways we had not anticpated.

From: Matthew Payne 23 March 2020 12:02 PM

Any sensible tenants will choose to let the status quo remain and continue paying their rent. The chancers must realise that they will simply be evicted as soon as the 3 months is up, and they will struggle to get through referencing when they have to move? With rents rising fast as well, even if they find somewhere else they will have a higher rent to pay. I have still only heard of one business, Virgin Atlantic who have forced people to take an unpaid period. Of course some businesses may fail, which is a different matter, and landlords will need to understand from their tenants what their plans are medium term and come to some agreement that works fairly for both parties. I dont see the economic argument for all these tenants to suddenly fall on hard times, and a lot of headline grabbing scaremongering is going on. Why do all tenants suddenly work in the supply chain of an airline, a pub or a failing fashion business? Yes Laura Ashley may go out of business but that has been on the cards for years. Yes pubs, theatres and airlines and others social sectors may suffer short term, but there are parts of the economy benefitting from this virus, some booming in fact. If you work in IT or phamaceuticals for example, they are less concerned about what is going on and see opportunity not threat. What about all the tenants that work for Andrex, Boots or Sainsburys? Life is good! A friend of ours works in Waitrose head office and she said last night, they are absolutely smashing their sales numbers. Noone there is worried about paying their rent.

From: Matthew Payne 19 March 2020 12:21 PM

The rent roll for 3 months is £4 billion. The only way this could work is if the government has the appetite to underwrite arrears when any payment holiday concluded. Many tenants would remain in arrears, some would be opportunistic and choose to. Moreover, they would be passing legislation to interfere in existing legally binding contractual arrangements between 2 parties, that would have a knock on effect in the supply chain. The lawyers would need to pour over the implications of such a move for weeks and no doubt be challenged in the courts, so it is not somehting I can see coming to pass anytime soon unless of course the Sunak cheque book is happy to cover everyones losses.

From: Matthew Payne 17 March 2020 10:13 AM

It wont surprise anyone to learn he is a public Corbynister....close pal of him and John McDonnell. Was an advisor to the shadow cabinet on economic policy in recent years and a key contributor to Labours' fortunes at the ballot box. Long may his creativity continue!

From: Matthew Payne 06 March 2020 08:39 AM

I like Heather's ambition to support these people, but this proposal opens up the PRS to greater opportunity for the most high risk tenants? How is that? Landlord confidence aside riding at an all time low off the back of recent legislation, I am sure that very few lenders would allow their charges exposed in this way. Lenders are more risk averse than landlords and they certainly wont want even the slightest possibilty of attracting the inevitable public witch hunt having to repossess and evict a former homeless person, as through no fault of their own, the Housing Minister commited them to a tenancy they were never going to be able to afford from the second rent due date. Every time HMG comes up with a proposal in the blue sky thinking room, before they go public, they really should just pause for thought and do a bit more brainstorming on the Q, "How is this going to work?"

From: Matthew Payne 05 March 2020 12:29 PM

One of the main reasons these tenants are rejected is the clawback system that penalises landlords and agents. Until such time as that is addressed, there will be no improvement. Clearly though depsite the fact that this point is raised again and again, it is ignored, by pretty much everyone other than those it affects. If there wasnt the label of a "DSS" tenant which I agree is not helpful anyway, would the government or TPOS expect a landlord or agent to accept a tenant who offers to pay the rent only on the understanding they may be forced to give it back at some point at their cost? Of course they wouldn't, so why are these tenants an exception? So they will ban the use of no DSS adverts, and what they incorrectly label and stigmatise as open discrimination. In the meantime, landlords and agents will simply have to comply and choose one of several dozen other possible legitimate reasons if they need to as to why those particular tenants applications are not acceptable and the current status quo will remain. It is not actually about rejecting tenants anymore though as the PRS is changing its dynamic under pressure from external influences. It is about choosing the best tenants in the current climate and with the tenant fees act and the aboliton of section 21 this will get worse. What are regarded by some as poorer quality tenants or even reasonably good tenants wont need to be rejected for any particular reason, they will simply be told the landlord chose to let the property to someone else - The "Alpha" tenant who represents as close to zero risk as possible.

From: Matthew Payne 05 March 2020 11:54 AM

Yes it will do, from 1st June it applies to all ASTs, licences, and student housing including that offered by education providers. There are still 100s of agents charging some fees for one reason or another.

From: Matthew Payne 03 March 2020 09:19 AM

If you look at their website and facebook page, there is a lot of ranting going on in particular about one of their other campaigns to bring rents down. This after they campaigned for the Tenants Fees Act which has forced rents up, and now campaigning to abolish section 21 which will force rents up. To be fair they arent the only ones who haven't yet got their heads around market dynamics.

From: Matthew Payne 03 March 2020 08:31 AM

Interesting that in the same report that he cites that lack of security of tenure for tenants in the PRS, discrimination by Landlords in not accepting tenants on Housing Benefit and increasing rents are all causing health issues, and that all 3 need to be tackled. Another reader quoted Le Chatelier's principle the other day that can be applied to commercial markets, and so many commentators simply dont understand or ignore the fact that the PRS is a marketplace, not a state owned commodity. Put pressure on a system in equilibrium and it will change just like squeezing a water balloon. Restrict a landlords rights to who can rent their property, how long they can stay, what remedies they have, they will naturally become more selective and rents will rise. If his recommendations are adopted it will give tenants even less choice and fuel rents to rise even faster if section 21 is removed for example. We have seen this cause and effect already with government policy in these areas which he fails to acknoweldge, instead implying it is unilateral landlord behaviour that is the driving force. The under publicised clawback system is a main reason many agents and landlords avoid tenants on housing benefit, not for any sinister social stigma that is implied. Likewise, the Tenant Fees Act has recently had repercussions for yet higher rents, younger tenants, families and pet owners. Similarly, landlords very rarely exercise section 21 (about 10% of tenancies), and where they do it is either to regain possession to sell, move into, or remove problematic tenants. Landlords do not evict well behaved tenants only to risk a void looking to replace them with other tenants who are an unknown quantity. If anything, most landlords are very accomodating with good tenants and often leave rents unchanged to reduce the risk of them leaving.

From: Matthew Payne 26 February 2020 10:49 AM

I would love to see this research published and meet all these traditional agents, what an opportunity to transform their businesses. They could improve their lettings revenue by 7% overnight by simply commencing marketing when they receive notice from the tenant. If you do voids are like unicorns in London. Asaf has scored an own goal here by tipping them all off....

From: Matthew Payne 20 February 2020 12:27 PM

It shouldn't be for people in the industry who understand the different types of tenancy, so I don't see why any agents would get it wrong. All they need to remember is it's 5 weeks on every tenancy from 1st June 2020 fixed term renewals included. The only exceptions will then be periodic tenancies that commenced as a fixed term before 1st June 2019. Most tenants however will only see the word tenancy and won't understand the difference, so it would be prudent for agents at least to send out a note in plain english with their scheme guidelines so they can't say they havent at least been provided with the information. Likewise, with any historic longer fixed term tenancies that now lapse into a periodic, it's an ideal time to have that conversation. Equally though I know some agents that are going to the other extreme and are planning to refund 1 week on every existing tenancy, even periodics which they have to be careful about. Unless they have consent the deposit needs to remain at the amount agreed in the original TA, as their is no obligation to make any changes.

From: Matthew Payne 12 February 2020 14:54 PM

That wording doesn't reflect in most TAs now and I can't see them passing legislation to say that all LLs and agents have to use the model agreement or their chosen wording. Even if they did, it is perfectly reasonable for a landlord to deny consent to preserve the condition of their property, or want to avoid the costs to remedy. If the premise of Mr Jenricks' strategy is that "well behaved" cats and dogs like unicorns actually exist and should always be given consent, then he will need to come up with some way of a tenant being able to prove that. Animal referencing perhaps. As we know they can't as animals by defintion behave like animals and create damage and high wear and tear, then the only way forward is a pet deposit as you suggest and as most have concurred.

From: Matthew Payne 10 February 2020 13:30 PM

It will be interesting to see whether the service becomes mandatory to use instead of carrying out your own checks. No doubt it won't be free, whereas checking a passport currently is, and one very convenient spin off for the government would be a national database of PRS properties, tenants and landlords. Now there's an idea..

From: Matthew Payne 10 February 2020 11:30 AM

I'm not sure why Mr Jenrick thinks that everyone uses this model agreement anyway, and even the minority that do, will simply continue to use the old version or amend the new one to remove any bits they don't agree with. I don't quite understand why he thinks amending a template on gov.uks website that almost no landlord agrees with will lead to any practical change in whether pets are permitted.

From: Matthew Payne 10 February 2020 08:59 AM

I wonder if the £340 is refunded to the compliant LL if at the end of the year nothing needed enforcing on their tenancies, or is it a contribution to the cost of the council having to enforce standards on all the uncompliant landlords?

From: Matthew Payne 07 February 2020 11:09 AM

I have owned many of both, and there is always collaterol damage to door frames, window cills, furniture, carpets, kitchen cupboards, gardens, as these are animals after all, who do animal type stuff and whose hygiene standards are pretty poor. Noone is to blame, tenants are not being irresponsible, that's just what happens, but someone has to pay for it. There is no such thing as a well behaved or genetically altered dog or cat; even a responsible pet owner cannot prevent the inevitable extra dilaps and wear and tear. I put up with it in my own house, but I wouldn't in a buy to let, unless the tenant was prepared to contractually remedy. I am not sure what Robert Jenrick is expecting to change. He wont convince anyone that a property will be returned in the same condition ever, so Landlords just have to foot the bill? I think more likely, landlords will continue their pet ban, the RSPSA are going to be busy over the next couple of years until the government amends the legislation to allow some kind of separate bond for pets.

From: Matthew Payne 06 February 2020 16:08 PM

Because a cynically contructed database of LLs allows councils to be seen to be championing the plight of "the vulnerable" thus protecting themselves at the ballot box, whilst at the same time creating a cash cow to top up the coffers.

From: Matthew Payne 03 February 2020 09:52 AM

That would be assuming all are ASTs which they won't be. A good number will be Non Housing Act tenancies where deposits don't need protecting - where the rent is too high, there is a resident landlord or a company let as 3 examples.

From: Matthew Payne 03 February 2020 09:46 AM

If you look at the Hometrack/Zoopla numbers rents rose by 3-6% in most cities in the 12 months to Dec 19. The Tory governement doesn't much care though one way or the other. This was not a policy introduced to save tenants money, or where they thought rents could remain unaffected. They like us, knew rents would rise, but this was about young peoples votes, an opportunity to bribe a group of voters seduced by Labours free tuition fees, train travel & broadband, who don't understand the micro economics of the PRS. It was simply politics and them stealing a Labour policy to be able to demonstrate they are a party of the people, a one nation Tory party who fights for the rights of the common man at the cost of landords and big business. To be fair it worked though. 80 seat majority.

From: Matthew Payne 29 January 2020 09:29 AM

There are not many articles that feature in the TODAY pages where the opinion of the interviewee is not heavily biased towards a postion that protects or benefits their own financial interests or of an organisation they represent, which amounts to the same thing.

From: Matthew Payne 29 January 2020 08:01 AM

I have to say I am not convinced it is that easy to fudge inventorys/checkins/checkouts other than in some pretty unorthodox situations, as tenants photograph and all parties get to see the docs. Yes there are honest mistakes/ommissions but they get rectified. My tenants were always lightning fast to challenge even the smallest detail in check outs and we used approved contractors. Why wouldnt they challenge a rogue's version? In 25 years, I've never seen a complaint, or even any press on the subject before now. The deposit registration process is designed to prevent this, however unscrupulous a landlord may choose to be. (The inventory clerk has nothing to gain by being so) If a tenant has been served TDS E, the certificate, the prescribed information, a tenancy agreement, the How to Rent guide, and the inventory check in, there is little chance of the tenant not being aware of the correct process, and wouldn't choose to ignore it. There will always be a tiny fraction of the population that legislation cannot protect as it always requires some engagement and common sense applied to work. I suppose it is possible if there was no agent involved, intro only from Gumtree, the landlord chose to ignore all legislation, the tenant lived in a vacuum, had never rented before, never asked friends or family for advice, or Googled help when the landlord then tried to keep their deposit with a bogus check out, that it could happen very occasionally.

From: Matthew Payne 28 January 2020 14:10 PM

It is ridiculous that anyone would need to pay their District Council £600 for the right to let their property. The council are not a stakeholder in the relationship like lenders, freeholders and insurers whose consent is required. This is just highway robbery to the tune of £12m. Who is next to jump on the bandwagon and demand landlords need their consent as well, Parish Councils, County Councils, the Highways Agency?

From: Matthew Payne 24 January 2020 09:57 AM

There are 2 potential issues if tenant does not provide a cash security deposit to one of the approved schemes at the start of the tenancy. 1) If these choose not to, because they would rather keep hold of their cash. How committed are they to the tenancy? Will they look after the property and respect their obligations in the same way when they know it is not their own cash that is in jeopardy at the end of the tenancy? 2) If they are unable to, why would any landlord rent to a tenant who was down to their last few pennies? Whilst that is regrettable for the tenant, if they have no resource to lay their hands on £1000 then there is a high probability at some point the rent will not get paid and everyday cleaning, maintenance and upkeep in the property will get neglected. It's all very well labelling this as a cash flow problem, but cash flow problems mean things dont get paid for. I would argue that is also very much an affordabilty issue as well. If their bank or credit card company wont lend them a relatively small sum of money that should be largely untouched whilst borrowed (ie: lodged in a custodial scheme until they leave the property and can pay it back) then they are either at the end of their creditworthyness as they are up to their eyeballs in debt already or have a poor credit rating and can't borrow. It all amounts to the same thing.

From: Matthew Payne 22 January 2020 12:34 PM

Including any rent arrears and dilaps, seeing as it currently takes nearly 6 months on average, and the use of sections 8s is more likely to trigger that behaviour.

From: Matthew Payne 17 October 2019 09:57 AM

Breaking News