Our response to Newport Council approve use of PSPO

The Wallich and Shelter Cymru are deeply concerned at Newport Council’s Streetscene, Regeneration and Safety Scrutiny Committee decision to approve the future use of a Public Safety Protection Order (PSPO) in Newport City Centre.

The decision to allow the use of a PSPO came after a public consultation1 which received only 403 responses and found 90% in favour of a rough sleeping ban.  We believe the question asked misled the public into a ‘yes’ answer through its language.  We called for the results of that particular question to be deleted before being put to scrutiny committee members2.  We received no reply to this letter and the results were submitted to councillors.  Newport City Council has not addressed the issue of the wording of their consultation.3

We believe that the inclusion of the phrase “rough sleepers need help and support” misled the public, as many would agree with this statement, thereby being recorded as agreeing with a rough sleeping ban.  Additionally, linking rough sleepers to arson and criminal damage further misled the public as no evidence was provided in support of this statement.  The consultation also linked rough sleeping with aggressive begging.  We dispute this link, aggressive begging is regularly perpetrated by those who are not homeless and can already be dealt with under existing laws such as the Vagrancy Act 1824.

Among other measures, the PSPO would allow the enforcement of fixed penalty notices and potential prosecution leading to a criminal record for “those individuals who were rough sleeping and who already had accommodation.”4 We have a number of concerns around this as a method of addressing rough sleeping. Criminalising rough sleeping will drive vulnerable people underground where our RSIT and other organisations cannot reach them.  This will lead to people with mental and physical health problems not seeking treatment due to fear of arrest.  Other rough sleepers will not be deterred by being given a criminal record and will continue to sleep outside.5

We call for clarity on what constitutes accommodation in terms of the ban.  We are concerned that those who are sleeping rough due to fleeing abuse may be deemed to have accommodation and be criminalised under a PSPO.

The ban on rough sleeping would be impractical to enforce.  The consultation called for rough sleepers to be given “help and support” rather than sleeping in the city centre.  Newport City Council provides 125 beds for rough sleepers to access through their referral service.  Many of these spaces are reserved for those in priority need such as vulnerable women and those with mental health issues6 and are unavailable to many single rough sleepers.  We have seen an increase in rough sleepers in South Wales who are not in priority need and are homeless due to financial reasons only.  Bed spaces available for these individuals in Newport are few. We believe that this ban would simply criminalise those who are sleeping rough and have no other option.

We welcome any opportunity to work with Newport City Council to improve services for homeless people in their area and help develop services and strategy to prevent people having to sleep rough.

Last night we questioned the First Minister Carwyn Jones in person on a potential ban on rough sleeping in Newport. His response was “We have to have a system and society that provides support to rough sleepers and helps prevent it.”7 We believe that the potential ban on rough sleeping in Newport would make it much harder for this to be a reality.

  1. Link to Newport Council consultation paper: http://www.newport.gov.uk/documents/Council-and-Democracy/Consultations/City-Centre-PSPO-consultation.pdf
  2. Earlier response & joint letter to Newport Council: http://www.thewallich.com/newport-council-to-ban-rough-sleeping-our-response/
  3. Link to Newport Council consultation response paper: https://democracy.newport.gov.uk/documents/s2929/2.%20Scrutiny%20City%20Centre%20PSPO%2015%20Oct%2015%20-%20FINAL.pdf
  4. As above. Page 6
  5. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0359lc0
  6. Newport Council Homelessness Provision (total 125 beds):
    • Clifton Place Hostel (Solas) – 29 Places – All
    • In2change – a 10 bed space Gwalia project for single people aged 18+ with drug and/or alcohol issues
    • Ty Trosiad – a 10 bed space Gwalia project for single people aged 18+ with an offending history
    • Clarence Place – a 26 bed space Solas project for single people aged 18+ with complex needs
    • Albert Street – a 21 bed space Solas short-term housing project for single people aged 18+
    • Clytha Square – a 6 bed space Llamau project for single young people aged 16 to 21
    • Mind – 16 bed spaces in 4 shared houses for people aged 18+ with mental health issues
    • Women’s Service – 5 bed space Llamau hostel for women only aged 16+ with a range of complex support needs
  7. https://twitter.com/fmwales/status/654714671618875393

Election Manifesto 2016

Campaign successess

Sioned’s story

Shelter Cymru Live – advice when you need it


Launched at the Charity’s People and Homes conference by Lesley Griffiths, Minister for Communities and Tackling Poverty, Shelter Cymru Live aims to help more people facing housing problems. Shelter Cymru Live provides an independent, informative and immediate response to people across Wales who may be concerned about their housing situation.

Christine Skelton, Service Manager said:

The service has been developed as a response to feedback from Shelter Cymru clients, partner agencies and our own advisors.   Responses indicated that although face to face housing advice is a very effective and often a preferred method of delivery it was clear that we needed to develop other ways for people to access advice.

Initially financed from the Professor Harris Trust, a lifelong supporter of the charity, the full service is now supported through the Welsh Government Homelessness Grant Programme and their Frontline Advice Grant.

Minister for Communities and Tackling Poverty, Lesley Griffiths said:

I am pleased the Welsh Government has been able to invest in this new service, which will enable Shelter Cymru to support even more vulnerable people.

In a digital age it is important people are able to communicate in their preferred way and to receive advice immediately. The new service is a significant milestone which will play a vital role in providing trusted advice and preventing homelessness.

Shelter Cymru Live gives more people, more options to get advice when they need it. People facing housing problems should in addition or as an alternative to contacting the service directly use the Advice on Line service. This  web based information service provides a step by step guide to housing and debt problems with downloadable self-help resources.

For advice and further information please go to sheltercymru.org.uk/get-advice

Welfare Reform and Work Bill

Parliamentary Briefing

July 2015

1. Freezing Local Housing Allowance will mean more and more private renters will be unable to pay their housing costs as rents outstrip wage growth. Discretionary Housing Payments are unevenly distributed in Wales and not reflective of housing need.

2. The Benefit Cap has fundamentally changed. The cap is no longer made with reference to average earnings, making it punitive. It will now affect much smaller families in less expensive areas. This will increase the risk of homelessness and price out of work families out of whole swathes of the country.

3. Removal of the Family Premium will lead to reduced housing benefit for working families, making it harder for them to manage the above shortfalls. The impact of this change on growing families has not been modelled by the government and is of great concern.

4. Support for Mortgage Interest benefit payments for homeowners will be replaced by a loan. Little accompany detail has been announced. Loans should not put people’s homes at risk and mortgage holders should be able to choose between a reasonable and affordable payment plan and deferring payment until the sale of the property.

5. The removal of housing benefit for 18-21 year olds will remove support from an extremely vulnerable group. The government must come forward with robust and practical exemptions. However, even with exemptions, many will likely fall through the net and become street homeless.

6. Reducing Social Rents in England is welcomed by our sister organisation Shelter; tackling the high cost of housing is the only sustainable way to reducing welfare spending. But house building – the only way to bring housing costs down in the long term – must not be undermined, reinforcing the need for the Affordable Homes Programme.

7. The redefinition of Child Poverty in England is a concern for Shelter. The new definition risks under-estimating the rise in in-work poverty. It will be a missed opportunity if the new definition does not capture the impacts of high housing costs on family finances and bad housing on children’s lives.


1) Freezing Local Housing Allowance
Section 9, Pg.11.

Key points:

• Freezing LHA for 4 years means more struggling private renters unable to pay their rent

• 39% of LHA claimants already work but are still unable to find affordable rents

Local Housing Allowance is housing benefit for private renters, set at different rates across the country to reflect variations in rent. Before 2011 LHA rates covered the bottom 50% of the rental market and were linked to actual market rents, rising or falling accordingly. In April 2011, LHA rates were rebased at the bottom 30% of the market and the link to market rents was broken – meaning support could no longer keep track with rising rents. In recent years increases have been capped at 1%.

Policy changes have failed to bring down rents and rising rents have outstripped wage growth, leading to increasing shortfalls between housing costs and incomes. Many are struggling to stay in their homes or to find new ones, meanwhile the ending of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy has become the leading cause of homelessness in Wales.

The Welfare Reform & Work Bill will make this worse by freezing LHA rates for a further 4 years. This will mean increasing shortfalls between rents and incomes for the people receiving this support.

In some areas the gap between LHA rates and rents will be so great that housing benefit claimants are unable to find anywhere affordable. This will mean severely cutting back on other areas of spending for those trying to stay in their home. Meanwhile, more and more people will be chasing fewer and fewer affordable properties. Families will be put at increased risk of homelessness as their tenancy ends or because they are evicted due to rent arrears.

The Chancellor did announce in the Summer Budget that there will be additional Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) provided to help those struggling and Targeted Affordability Funding to raise LHA rates where rent increases were unusually high, which are both welcome. However, neither measure will be enough to mitigate the enormous impact this policy will have on affordability.

LHA rates should reflect the real cost of renting in each area to ensure availability of affordable properties, preventing shortfalls and homelessness. The link to actual market rents should be restored and rates allowed to fall or rise in line with local rent pressures.

Should the government go ahead with the freeze, the rates should, at the very least, be reviewed after 2 years to assess whether they need to be rebased to ensure private renters can find homes. This would mean re-setting LHA rates in line with the bottom 30% of market rents at that time.

DHP and TAF funding must also be adequately maintained until LHA is brought back in line with market rents to help those struggling to stay in their homes.

Discretionary Housing Payments are unevenly distributed in Wales and are not linked to housing need. We would support devolution of DHPs in order to allow the Welsh Government to recalibrate distribution.
2) Reducing the Benefit Cap
Section 7, pg. 8.

Key Points:

• The link to average earnings has been broken, making the policy unnecessarily punitive

• The policy goes beyond large families in expensive areas and will now affect smaller families in towns across Wales

• The cap risks increasing homelessness and will make it very hard for local authorities to find anywhere affordable to rehouse families

The Welfare Reform and Work Bill seeks to reduce the benefit cap from £26,000 to £23,000 in London and £20,000 outside of London. Shelter Cymru remains particularly concerned that the cap includes housing benefit and ignores the high and variable housing costs paid by families across the country. With more people affected, more will struggle to pay their housing costs.

The government’s rationale for the original cap was to ensure people claiming benefits could not receive more than the average family earned. The original cap, therefore, was made with reference to average family earnings and affected around 1,500 households within Wales. Households could escape the cap if they moved in to work, however, only a minority of these were actually able to do so.

The new lower cap, however, fundamentally alters the nature of the policy. The new cap no longer makes reference to average incomes. This new, arbitrary threshold will drastically change the impact of the cap; rather than affecting large families in expensive areas it withdraws support from small families right across the country. It creates a postcode lottery at the heart of the safety net, with whole swathes of the country being deemed excessive for support.

The DWP estimate as many as 90,000 additional households across the UK are subject to the new cap. This group, despite already deemed in need of state support, could have their housing benefit substantially reduced, even though they do not live in areas considered atypically expensive and receive less than average families, needlessly risking homelessness.

Those affected by the new cap will increasingly be ordinary sized families in averagely priced areas, simply struggling to make ends meet. The new cap will put these families closer to losing their homes.

The Government should consider the adverse effects of this policy on vulnerable groups, some of whom will inevitably be unable to withstand the loss of income. The impact upon these groups should be published and exemptions considered.

Local authorities must be adequately supported to house families made homeless as a result of the benefit cap and other welfare reforms. This means financially supporting them to find emergency housing for people who have lost homes and then to help find settled accommodation that is suitable for their needs.


3) Removal of the Family Premium
Section 12, pg. 13.

Key Points:

• Removing of the premium will lead to shortfalls for low income families

• The changes will affect working households only and will reduce housing benefit significantly

• LHA rates should reflect the actual cost of renting

The Summer Budget announced changes to the means test for housing benefit which will make it less generous for working households. Already overstretched family budgets will have to be squeezed further if families are to pay the rent.

The Family Premium will be removed from the housing benefit calculation for new claimants from April 2016. This is an income allowance worth £17.45 per week for families with children and was designed to reflect the increased cost pressures families face. We are disappointed that the DWP has not produced any modelling on the impact. Shelter calculates that a single parent working part time (20 hours a week) at the new national living wage would lose around £11 per week.

The housing benefit means test will no longer reflect the additional costs of a growing family from April 2017. New claimants will not be eligible for a ‘child allowance’ for third or subsequent children. This reflects new restrictions on tax credits for more than three children. It will reduce the amount of housing benefit larger families are eligible for. Again, we are disappointed that DWP has not modelled the financial impact of this.

We are concerned that these changes, which affect working households only, will reduce affordability at a time when housing benefit is already increasingly inadequate. This will make it even more important that LHA rates reflect actual rents so families are not left with shortfalls. LHA rates should reflect the actual cost of renting.
4) Support for Mortgage Interest (SMI) Grant to Loan
Section 16, pg. 15.

Key Points:

• Loans must not become an additional burden for struggling households

• Clarity is needed on whether people can defer payment until the sale of a home without penalty

• SMI should not be delayed from 13 weeks to 39 weeks given financial risks are reduced

People who are out of work and struggling with mortgage payments are currently eligible for Support for Mortgage Interest. This benefit covers the cost of a person’s mortgage interest (but not capital repayments) up to a £200,000 capital limit.

The Bill seeks to turn new SMI payments into loans from April 2018 onwards. Interest will be charged on the loans, which will be secured on the claimant’s property as a ‘second charge’, effectively a secured loan on top of the existing mortgage.

Paying support through a loan rather than benefit payment may be a sensible reform in principle, given that SMI enables homeowners to retain an asset and potentially gain substantially from rising house prices. But it must be introduced in a way that does not exacerbate affordability problems.

The Budget indicated that a repayment plan will be agreed when a person’s circumstances improve (for example they move into work) or when the property is sold. However, it is currently unclear which repayment mechanism the government intends to pursue. SMI should never make a household’s situation worse – any repayment plan must not compromise their ability to stay in their home.

The Budget also announced an increase in the waiting period for SMI eligibility to pre-recession levels – up from 13 weeks to 39 weeks. This will be done in accordance with regulatory powers within the Bill and will come into force in advance of the move from grants to loans. This will mean a significant and worrying delay in support for mortgage interest rates. Given the move to loans, such a delay seems unnecessary given that the financial risks to the government are significantly reduced.

Once the loan scheme is introduced there is no need to make people wait for assistance and quicker access to credit could be beneficial, but waiting could increase the risk of people turning to toxic forms of debt, such as pay-day lenders or loan sharks, and risking arrears.

The Bill gives huge scope for the government to set the terms of repayments but more details are needed about the government’s intentions around repayments. Whilst a loan may help prevent the loss of a home, imposing unsustainable repayments could eventually tip people in to homelessness. Those who access SMI should be able to defer repayment until they sell their property, without pressure from the government to sell.

Increasing the 13 week waiting period to 39 weeks is unnecessary in the long-term. With SMI effectively becoming a form of low-risk, consumer credit, it should be readily available to those struggling to make repayments. The government no longer bears the risk of paying mortgage interest indefinitely with no hope of repayment. With this reduced risk, help should be made available sooner rather than later.
5) Removing Housing Benefit for 18-21s
(Outside the Bill but of serious concern)

Key Points:

• Young people are already penalised under housing benefit rules and receive little support

• Most young people do live at home until they can afford to move out, but living at home for many vulnerable young people is simply not an option

• The government must bring forward proposals on robust and enforceable exemptions

The decision to remove housing benefit from 18-21 year olds is highly regrettable. Shelter Cymru would never advocate the removal of housing benefit on the basis of age and rejects the proposition that a significant number of young people are able to leave the family home in order to claim benefits.

The majority of the 1,200 18-21 year olds in Wales who will be affected by this change are in social housing and will have already met extremely strict criteria, having been deemed in priority need by their local authority, demonstrating just how vulnerable this group is. The remainder of those eligible for help live in the private rented sector and receive the Shared Accommodation Rate, the lowest rung of housing benefit, barely enough to cover a room at the bottom end of the market.

For many young people, living at home is simply not an option, including those who have fled domestic violence or abuse, been asked to leave because of their sexuality, or have become estranged from their parents. Housing benefit helps these people to live independently when living at home is no longer an option. Removing it could leave people choosing between returning to a destructive family home or street homelessness.

The government has made clear there will be exemptions for certain groups but we would encourage them to come forward with details as soon as possible to ensure they are robust and practical. Shelter Cymru has welcomed the commitment to protect vulnerable people but maintains that this is the bare minimum required; even with exemptions, many young people will slip through the net and increase homelessness. We would urge the government to reconsider its position on removing housing benefit for 18-21s.

The changes are expected to come via regulations in the coming months and are not part of the Welfare Reform & Work Bill. This is regrettable as the decision to remove housing benefit from an age group on this scale is an unprecedented step and should be subject Parliamentary approval in Primary Legislation.
Measures relating to England only
The following measures do not affect Wales. Our sister organisation Shelter addresses them as follows:

6) Reducing Social Rents
Section 19, pg. 18.

Key points:

• Shelter welcomes the reduction in rents for tenants in social housing

• Lost revenues for housing associations or local authorities wanting to build reinforces the need for the Affordable Homes Programme

• It is welcome that housing benefit savings are being sought by reducing the cost of housing and this approach should be taken further by investing in genuinely affordable housing to shift public expenditure from benefits to bricks over time

The Welfare Reform & Work Bill seeks to reduce social rents by 1% for four years. This is good news for those on low incomes in social housing, whose rent will be reduced. The policy will also mean large savings on the welfare budget for the Department of Work and Pensions.

Tackling housing costs in this way, however, must not undermine the viability of house building itself. Many housing associations and local authorities use social rent revenues to fund the building of more homes. The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates the reduction in social rents could result in 14,000 fewer homes being built, whilst the National Housing Federation estimates the loss to be as much as 27,000.

The UK already builds less than half of the houses it needs, reducing the number of homes built – even if rents are reduced for some in the meantime – will not bring down the cost of welfare sustainably in long term. Housing associations and local authorities, therefore, need continued access to alternative forms of funding, such as the Affordable Homes Programme.

Reducing the benefits bill can only be sustainably achieved through reducing the cost of housing, which this policy recognises and seeks to do. Further long-term reductions in housing benefit can be achieved if the government invests in genuinely affordable social housing. This will reduce reliance on the expensive private rented sector, meaning working households are less likely to require a housing benefit top-up and reducing the cost of housing people who continue to require support.

For those local authorities and housing associations who use revenues from social rents to fund house building, the importance of the Affordable Homes Programme is reinforced. AHP funding should be protected, if not increased, to ensure house building continues, helping to alleviate the high cost of housing and subsequently welfare spending.
7) Changing the definition of Child Poverty
Section 6, pg.6.

Key point:

• The new definition fails to capture the true extent of child poverty, most notably the cost housing for low income families

The government proposes to redefine child poverty. The Bill will abolish the existing four indicators based on family income and reframe child poverty in relation to behaviour, (such as unemployment, addiction and family breakdown).

This new definition fails to capture the true extent of child poverty and in particular the impact of the cost of housing on low income families. We are particularly concerned that it will downplay the recent growth of working poverty at a time when changes to housing benefit and tax credits will penalise many working households and reduce their income.

In order to develop a true picture of the extent of poverty in the UK we need a clear focus on the structural and financial causes of poverty, with the impact of rising housing costs front and centre – as well as supporting families and addressing barriers to work and progression.

Moving to a multidimensional measure should also capture the importance of overcrowding, poor conditions, stability and security on the development of families. Reliable datasets exist for many measures of housing need, making this suitable for inclusion in what risks becoming a nebulous measure of life chances.
If you are interested in helping Shelter Cymru oppose these changes, or for more information, please contact Jennie Bibbings on 02920 556903 or email jennieb@sheltercymru.org.uk

Response to Summer Budget

The summer budget promises to deliver more human misery to thousands of Wales’ poorest families. Cutting Housing Benefit for 18 to 21 year olds will affect 1,200 young people in Wales, many of whom have nowhere else to live. Leaving these young people out in the cold, while exempting them from the minimum wage increase, is sheer cruelty. Benefit freezes for people who are already in severe poverty will make life impossible.

We advise anybody who is experiencing hardship to get independent advice – call us on 0345 075 5005.

Homelessness Snapshot – July 2015

Ten lessons based on emerging findings from Shelter Cymru casework

At the end of April this year, Wales introduced its own distinct way of dealing with homelessness. The Housing (Wales) Act 2014 created new duties for local authorities to help prevent homelessness for anyone who asks for help.

The philosophy of this new approach is based on partnership working with other agencies and with people facing homelessness. The aim is to involve people in designing their own solutions, looking not just at immediate housing problems but also at any underlying issues, intervening early wherever possible to prevent people’s situations escalating out of hand.

At the same time the Housing Act created other major changes in the rights of people facing homelessness, by removing automatic priority need for prison leavers, and allowing local authorities to discharge homelessness duties with an offer of private rented accommodation without the consent of the applicant.

Agencies are being encouraged to work together rather than in opposition. Independent advisers are being brought closer into some local authority teams, while social landlords have new legal duties to cooperate in the prevention of homelessness.

These are fundamental changes. Inevitably it will take time to embed new ways of working. However, it is crucial that people facing homelessness should not have to suffer poor service because their housing crisis happens to fall during a period of transition.

This report looks at how services have responded in the critical first two months. It draws on Shelter Cymru casework evidence to define ten learning points to show where things have worked well and where there is room for improvement. Our aim is to highlight good practice and nip poor practice in the bud, to ensure that services are delivered in the spirit of the 2014 Act.

Download and read the full report

If you’d like to discuss this work further, please contact Jennie Bibbings, Campaigns Manager, at jennieb@sheltercymru.org.uk

New homelessness statistics

The homelessness statistics released today show the continuation of previous trends.

Official homelessness went down during 2014/15 but we know that social housing possessions were high over the same period, with many people facing extreme financial difficulties because of benefit sanctions and other outcomes of welfare reform. The fact is that local authorities were doing a lot of work that wasn’t recorded in the official data – they were carrying out early prevention work and in some cases we know that they were trying to deter people from making homeless applications.

Since the end of April all this has changed with the implementation of Part 2 of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. Local authorities will be helping many more people than before and recording all that activity too. So we’re looking forward to seeing what the next statistical release looks like – hopefully it will be a more realistic picture of housing need.

Consultation on a Private Rented Sector Code of Practice for Landlords and Agents

Shelter Cymru warns that Welsh Gov’s new landlords code of practice needs a lot of work before it does the job

Shelter Cymru works for the prevention of homelessness and the improvement of housing conditions. Our vision is that everyone in Wales should have a decent home. We believe that a home is a fundamental right and essential to the health and well-being of people and communities.

Everyone in Wales should have a decent and affordable home: it is the foundation for the health and well-being of people and communities.

Shelter Cymru’s mission is to improve people’s lives through our advice and support services and through training, education and information work. Through our policy, research, campaigning and lobbying, we will help overcome the barriers that stand in the way of people in Wales having a decent affordable home.

  • Values
    Be independent and not compromised in any aspect of our work with people in housing need.
  • Work as equals with people in housing need, respect their needs, and help them to take control of their lives.
  • Constructively challenge to ensure people are properly assisted and to improve good practice.

Shelter Cymru welcomes the opportunity to respond to this consultation. We are strong supporters of landlord licensing, and during 2014 we worked hard to persuade Assembly Members to pass Part 1 of the Housing (Wales) Act 2014.
Unfortunately we cannot support the Code of Practice in its current format. The draft Code needs to be restructured and rewritten to be much clearer and more easily navigable. In its current form we do not believe it is capable of supporting compliance or best practice.

As currently presented, the separation between the ‘statutory requirements’ and ‘best practice’ sections is likely to ensure that most landlords and agents will read only what they need to read, and will probably not read ‘best practice’ at all.

We are also concerned that there has been no tenant involvement in defining ‘best practice’. We believe that if tenants had been involved, the content of the draft Code would be considerably different.

We have identified a number of additional points that we believe need to be included – and we are convinced that engagement with private tenants themselves would identify further important points.

In partnership with other housing organisations we would be in a position to arrange this engagement within a short timescale if the Welsh Government agrees with us that the Code, and therefore the implementation of Part 1, would be more effective as a result.

  • Drafting points
    The structure of the Code should be revised so that statutory requirements and best practice are presented together. There should be no need to repeat all the different sections twice. Presenting both side by side will make it much more likely that both elements are read and understood. Enabling readers to distinguish between ‘musts’ and ‘shoulds’ ought to be straightforward.
  • There is considerable repetition between the two sections, and ‘best practice’ includes numerous statutory requirements. This is likely to confuse readers, and gives the impression that anything listed under ‘best practice’ is essentially optional. This is a further reason why we advocate a restructure.
  • The language is overly legalistic and not very user-friendly. The point of the Code should be to communicate the law, not just to reflect it. One example of this is the description of landlords’ statutory duties relating to the HHSRS: ‘Conditions in or around a property that contribute to a hazard and are determined to pose a serious risk must be mitigated so that they do not pose such a significant problem.’ The meaning of this sentence is far from clear. The word ‘mitigate’ is not likely to be widely understood. The concept ‘not…such a significant problem’ is very weak. The sentence does not effectively communicate the essence of the law, which is that landlords must ensure that there are no serious hazards on the premises. It would also be beneficial to include examples of such hazards.
  • There are too many obscure terms used such as ‘prudence’, ‘mitigate’, ‘divulgence’, ‘diligent’ etc.
  • There is too much use of the passive voice, which at times leads to a lack of clarity about who precisely is being asked to do what. One example is the HHSRS sentence above: who determines whether hazards pose a serious risk? And who should be mitigating?
  • Additional points
    The Code makes no mention anywhere of what penalties landlords and agents may face if they fail to comply with existing law. This is quite misleading. We argue that landlords and agents should be reminded of the potential consequences of non-compliance in each area of the Code.
  • There needs to be clearer guidance regarding transparency in fees and charges. Although the Code states that ‘all non-optional fees must be disclosed and made clear’, it does not mention the requirement to include charges in property adverts and listings following the Advertising Standards Authority ruling of March 2013.
  • There is no mention of excessive penalty charges, although such charges may constitute a breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and should be included as a statutory requirement.
  • The guidance on ending a tenancy needs to be much clearer. The current Code refers briefly to not evicting ‘without a possession order and following due process’. There is no mention of harassment. The Code needs to make it clear that harassment and illegal eviction are criminal offences that carry a penalty.
  • There is no mention of security of tenure. Landlords and agents should be made aware that best practice is to offer tenancy lengths that meet the needs of the household, including offering longer fixed terms to tenants who have passed a probationary period and who want long-term security. Letting agents should not insist on six- or 12-month tenancy agreements as a blanket policy, just in order to maximise their renewal fees – a practice that we know is widespread.
  • There is no mention of allowing tenants to decorate to their own tastes. We suggest that this is something that is important to tenants and ought to be included as best practice.
  • ‘Best practice’ should include reference to adaptations for disabled tenants. Landlords should be asked to consider consenting to adaptations being made for tenants who require them, and should be reminded of the benefits of setting up long-term tenancies in these circumstances.
  • There is no mention of steps that landlords and agents may take to assist with the prevention of homelessness. We would urge the Private Sector Housing team to engage with Homelessness on the best practice elements of the Code relating to the ending of tenancies. With the advent of Part 2 of the Housing Act, many local authorities in Wales are trying to encourage private landlords to make contact with them at an early stage, prior to eviction, in order for prevention work to take place. The most proactive authorities are going out and speaking at local landlord forums to urge members to get in touch if they have problems with their tenants that may lead to eviction and a potential homeless presentation. Furthermore, we have been contacted by numerous landlords who want guidance on how to deal with vulnerable tenants and prevent problems escalating to the point where eviction is the only solution. We think it is very important that the Code reflects this, and signposts landlords and agents to potential sources of help and support offered by the local authority and other agencies. At present there is nothing in the Code about prevention, even though the loss of a PRS tenancy is the second highest contributor to homelessness.
  • Finally, best practice among landlords and agents ought to include signposting tenants to sources of independent housing advice. The best landlords in Wales are already doing this via their websites, written information and personal contacts with tenants.