Landlords - How does the Immigration Act 2016 affect you?
It is a criminal offence and you could be liable to an UNLIMITED FINE should you be unable to demonstrate that you have taken reasonable measures to ensure persons residing in your property have a continuing right to reside. [England now Wales likely to follow suit]. Such penalties are in addition to the £3,000 fine connected to failures to carry out Right to Rent checks.
The main new offence is one committed by landlords who knowingly let to illegal immigrants. The offence is committed where a landlord:
- Has let to one or more persons who do not have a right to rent;
- Knows or should have known that those persons did not have a Right to Rent; and
- Where there was a time-limited Right to Rent the time limit has now expired.
A person who is guilty of an offence is liable—
- on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, to a fine or to both;
- on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, to a fine or to both.
The acid test would arise for the landlord/agent should the Secretary of State serve the landlord with one or more notices telling him or her that some or all of the occupiers in their property do not in fact have a Right to Rent. Upon receipt of such the landlord must take affirmative action to end the tenancy ASAP [ring your members help line]
There is a second offence that landlords should be aware of. LIMITED STAY PERIOD
Court Fees Increase Again - Bailiff Fee Now £121
On the 21st July in the House of Lords, The Civil Proceedings, First-tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal and Employment Tribunals Fees (Amendment) Order 2016 was approved. The new fees, which see an increase in the fee to issue a writ, will be implemented on this coming Monday, the 25th July 2016.
4 days’ Notice that the cost of applying for Issue of a warrant of possession/warrant of delivery increases from £110 to £121
A spokesperson has said that the courts are showing utter contempt and acting contrary to a key principle of British judicial process "being fair and reasonable" Applications which Landlords made last week are being returned - How on earth can it be reasonable to implement a price increase in 4 days and reject applications that have already been posted - would it not have been more reasonable to implement the increase after 30 days. If Landlords gave three days notice of a rent increase besides being illegal it would be deemed unprofessional - so why are the courts being so unjust?
Unlike many other fees which were increased in 2014 and again in 2015, this is the first time since 2011 the court fee of issuing a High Court writ of execution has risen. The fee rises from £60 to £66, a 10% increase; this relates to writs of control, delivery and possession.
With immediate effect, all new instructions will require the new fee of £66 to be included. We would also suggest that you check with your chosen HCEO to see if your writs have already been issued or whether you will be required to send a further payment.
Other fee increases to note are:
- Application for oral examination rises from £50 to £55
- Application for third party debt order rises from £100 to £110
- Application for charging order rises from £100 to £110
- Application for a judgment summons rises from £100 to £110
For an official certificate of the result of a search for each name, in any register or index held by the court rises from £45 to £50
On the filing of a request for detailed assessment providing the fees charged do not exceed £15,000 then the application fee rises from £335 to £369. Similar rises occur for higher fees.
Possession Fees
- Possession claim (County Court) Section 8 Notice and Section 21 Notice manual process £355
- Section 8 rent arrears is £325 when application made online
Issue of a warrant of possession/warrant of delivery increases from £110 to £121
31 Migrants Crammed Into Rental Property Licensed For Just 7
Brent Council raided a private rented property to uncover thirty one migrants living in squalor that had permission to be rented out to only seven tenants.
The officers were staggered to find up to six people crammed into each room and disgustingly, the only female tenant was living in a shack that was constructed out of wooden pallets and tarpaulin without light or heating.
The two crooked landlords responsible for the abhorrent accommodation had converted the property into nine bedrooms. They charged each of their tenants a weekly rent of £65 which made the landlords £100,000 per year.
Each of the bedrooms had makeshift bunk beds to optimise the number of tenants ‘shoe horned’ into the rooms.
The council found out that the tenants were from India and worked shifts.
Councillor Harbi Farah said: “We’ve seen pest-ridden slums and even beds in sheds before, but this is a new low.
“The shack looks like something you would expect to see in a Hollywood depiction of a shanty town, not Zone 4 of London. Criminal landlords cannot and will not get away with this.
“Our ground-breaking licensing scheme is helping us to tackle poor standards in the private rented sector and focus on the minority of unscrupulous landlords who refuse to comply with the law.”
Brent Council is well known for its landlord enforcement
Method of pursuing a civil action after judgment has been made in favour of a party. Process carried out by Magistrates Court to collect fines and other monetary orders made in the Crown Court as they are bringing between 2 and 5 landlord prosecutions every week
Welsh Landlords Could Be Forced To Sell Up Because Council Worker Pocketed Rents
Many North East Welsh landlords in Denbighshire could be forced to sell their PRS properties after being conned out of their rents by a council worker.
The Denbighshire county council worker, whose role was to work with the county’s homeless, admitted his guilt of keeping rents which were given to him that were due to landlords at Mold Crown Court, earlier this month..
The ex-council worker, Michael James Lloyd, was a ‘homeless prevention worker’ for Denbighshire and responsible for being the intermediary between private landlords and tenants. He managed to arrange rent payments to be paid directly to himself in contravention of the council’s policy for certain employees not to handle cash.
He was only caught out when a female tenant attempted to pay rent direct to Lloyd in his council office when he was out.
The council’s prosecution claimed that Lloyd has stolen more than £9,850 in outstanding rents.
The presiding judge Rhys Rowlands stated that Lloyd had acted fraudulently whilst being in the employ of the Council and some landlords would have sell their properties because of having to make the mortgage payments without receiving their rental income, saying: “There is a real breach of trust here.”
The judge told Lloyd, that: “You were the homeless prevention officer liaising between private landlords and tenants to prevent people from being rendered homeless.
“You were trusted by both your employers, the landlords and the tenants, who assumed you were safeguarding their interests.”
The judge decided to be lenient to Lloyd as it came to light that at the time he was found out, he had suffered a stroke and together with his age as well as previously being deemed to be of good character, he was let off of a prison term. He received a 12 month prison sentence which was suspended for two years, along with a tagged curfew to remain inside a property between 9pm and 6am for three months.
The judge arranged for a Proceeds of Crime time table that will hopefully lead to the full amount of money to be paid back.