Repair in the private rented sector: where now?
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPPEL-07-2020-0031 |
| Published date | 27 January 2021 |
| Date | 27 January 2021 |
| Pages | 46-59 |
| Subject Matter | Property management & built environment,Building & construction,Building & construction law,Real estate & property,Property law |
| Author | Emily Walsh |
Repair in the private rented
sector: where now?
Emily Walsh
Portsmouth Law School, Portsmouth University, Portsmouth, UK
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to analyse the extent to which recent changes in the law, most notably the
Homes (Fitnessfor Human Habitation) Act 2018 and proposals for changesin tenant redress, will help tenants
living inthe private rented sector (PRS) with issues ofdisrepair and poor living conditions.
Design/methodology/approach –It applies theoretical scholarship on procedural justice, to two
proposals for reform,namely, compulsory membership of redress schemes and a new housing court or use of
the first-TierTribunal for claims relating to disrepair.
Findings –The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 will not provide decent private rented
homes without increased securityof tenure and a requirement for inspection prior to letting. Tenants should
have the right to a fit home at the timeof moving in and a cheap and relatively fast method of redress when
things go wrong. A combination of compulsorylicencing, membership of an ombudsman scheme and either
the transfer of disrepair cases to the first-tiertribunal or a new housing court would provide the best overall
solutionfor tenants with regard to repair and condition.
Originality/value –This study contributesto the important scholarship on procedural justice and applies
it to ongoing currentdebates regarding disrepair in the PRS.
Keywords Procedural justice, Repair, Decent homes, Disrepair, Fitness for habitation,
Housing court
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction
The private rented sector (PRS) is in a worse state of condition than any other tenure type. In
2018, a quarter of private rented homes were found to be non-decent (Ministry of Housing,
Communities and Local Government, 2019a, 2019b,2019c). This meant that they failed to meet
the Decent Homes Standard that was set by the Government for council and housing
association accommodation (Department for Communities and Local Governm ent, 2006). Poor
housing causes both physical and mental health problems (Burdette et al., 2011;Gibson et al.,
2011;Marsh et al., 2000). Where homes are in poor repair, tenants are often reluctant to
complain and when they do complain, repairs may not be carried out quickly or may not be
dealt with at all. These problems have been acknowledged by recent changes in the law, most
notably the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 (H(FHH)A), and also by proposals
for changes in the way that tenants access to redress. This article seeks to examine the problem
of repair in the PRS both in respect of the law itself and in terms of the ability of tenants to
enforce their legal rights. It then examines the extent to which recent proposals that are aimed
at improving redress will assist tenants. The article uses the lens of procedural ju stice as a tool
to critically assess these proposals. Part I of this article assesses the reasons why private rented
tenants are not living in decent homes. Part II outlines the theory of procedural justice and
discusses how the theory has been applied to studies relating to differing forms of dispute
resolution. Part III applies the theoretical lens of proced ural justice to two proposals for
improving tenant redress; firstly, compulsory membership of an ombudsman scheme and
JPPEL
13,1
46
Received8 July 2020
Revised27 November 2020
Accepted3 December 2020
Journalof Property, Planning and
EnvironmentalLaw
Vol.13 No. 1, 2021
pp. 46-59
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2514-9407
DOI 10.1108/JPPEL-07-2020-0031
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2514-9407.htm
To continue reading
Request your trial