National Landlord Registration Scheme was announced by the Government in response to the “Rugg Review” since 13^th May 2009. The public hold different views and criticisms on it.

In the response to the “Rugg Review”, the Government announced a proposal on Private Landlord Registration Scheme in the buy-to-let Sector last month. Following the announcement, the proposal has been put under assessment and consultation to study and finalise the possible options and assumptions generated by the initial plan. The first “Impact Assessment on National Register on Landlords” was emerged 2 weeks ago (3^rd June 2009), which has considered the different options on the Landlord Registration Scheme; and claimed that a final Impact Assessment will outline and develop the post-implementation review framework on the actual costs and achievement on the regulation.

According to the Impact Assessment, three possible options were assessed:

1. “Do nothing”

2. Full licensing of properties for landlords:-

A full licensing system by the local authorise on all the private rented properties with a set-up cost of £50,000 per local authority as well as £500 license fee per property that involves total annual cost of £300 millions.

3. National Landlords’ Register:-

Generate a web-based national register for all landlords with set up costs to be covered by the annual license fee of £30 - £50 for around 1 million landlords that cost an estimate of £40 millions a year.

In the document, it is stated that if Option 1 is being applied, issues and problems recognised in the “Rugg Review” will persist. Moreover, when comparing Option 2 and 3, it is revealed that Option 3 is a better and the most preferred option with a cheaper cost and smaller licensing fee for landlords. It is also seen to have significant benefits than other options.

Prior to the Publication of the Impact Assessment, criticisms had been made towards the proposal of the Private Landlord Registration Scheme:

1. It has been criticised that housing benefits are paid directly to the tenants rather than the landlords since April makes it hard for the landlords to receive the rental income.  At the same time, the government’s proposal on landlord registration is not as convincing since it would further increase the bitterness of landlords of feeling “penalised” by paying licensing fees under this economic climate.
2. Some have doubted on the competence of the scheme in clearing out all the unscrupulous landlords. Some suggested the key point of getting rid of all rogue landlords is to increase the awareness and knowledge in tenants. Let them know their rights to “fight” against those landlords.
3. The landlord registration scheme running in Scotland is being criticised as a “failure”. It is revealed that one in four rental properties are still not registered after 3 years. Moreover, no direct benefit has been reported for landlords and tenants in Scotland. Even worse, local authorities in Scotland are aware of the unregistered landlords; yet, nothing can be done due to the lack of resources.
4. The proposal is condemned to be one-sided, which only provides protection to the tenants from unscrupulous landlords but not protection for landlord over bad tenants.

Full consultation processes and discussions are needed to further develop detailed enforcement arrangements. It is still in an early stage of the policy proposals; thus, we have been informed that “the national register for landlord would require primary legislation which would not be in place until 2011 at the earliest”, according to the Impact Assessment*.

Get landlords insurance from Discount Landlord Insurance.