Renters' Rights Bill

Written evidence submitted by University of Manchester Students’ Union’s (UMSU) to The Renters’ Rights Public Bill Committee (RRB29).

Executive Summary

1. UMSU is submitting written evidence and recommendations for amendments to the Renters’ Rights Bill on behalf of the student population of the University of Manchester. It is UMSU’s opinion that there are several changes to the bill necessary to support students wholly as tenants in the market. Students are often renting accommodation themselves for the first time and instances of exploitation by landlords are frequent and common. This can involve extortionate prices above market value, poor quality and hazardous housing, and a surging demand for housing, making it harder to find somewhere decent and safe to live and study. Nationally, Students Organising for Sustainability found that 54% of students surveyed in their ‘Homes fit for study’ project have experienced damp or mould on the walls or ceiling in their current accommodation. Additionally, The Cost of Living Report produc ed by the UMSU in 2022 found that 48% of students (2283 students) slightly or significantly lowered their housing expectations. This meant they were looking at cheaper housing, potentially of poorer quality in order to afford accommodation expenses. As such, the student rental sector is in poor shape with students paying high prices for low quality housing.

2. The University of Manchester Students’ Union suggests 12 recommendations to ensure that the Renters’ Rights Bill includes sufficient provision to protect student tenants renting housing and accommodation:

· Part 1, Chapter 1: recommendations pertaining to periodic tenancies, possession grounds, and rent increases.

· Part 1, Chapter 3: recommendations pertaining to discrimination in the rental market, particularly in relation to guarantors and additionally prospective tenants from liberation groups.

· Part 1, Chapter 6: a recommendation in relation to the enforcement of the rental bidding ban.

· Part 2, Chapter 2: a recommendation in relation to the efficiency of landlord redress schemes when resolving student complaints.

· Part 4, Chapter 2: a recommendation in relation to the formalisation of SU powers of enforcement.

· A recommendation pertaining to the duties of universities that is not yet covered in the current provision of the bill.

Part 1

Chapter 1, Section 1 : Assured and Periodic Tenancy Amendment s

3. UMSU states that banning fixed term tenancies may have an adverse effect on students due to the cyclical nature of student housing. Whilst the ban on Section 21 evictions is welcome, Ground 4A giving rights to possession in the Summer does not account for a range of varying circumstances including:

- Non September-September Academic Years

- Students seeking to remain in accommodation without homes to return to.

- New graduates struggling to find work may be subject to eviction at the same time.

4. Recommendation 1: The bill should always enforce that landlords should have to declare intention to enact Ground 4A and possess a property the following summer prior to tenancy agreement commencing and a written agreement should be signed by both tenant and landlord. Otherwise, possession cannot occur.

5. Tenancies becoming periodic means that anyone within a joint tenancy will be able to bring the entire agreement unilaterally. Subsequently, others will be left without accommodation. Due to the high demand for housing, anecdotal evidence shows that most students sign tenancy agreements for the following year in the first semester of the academic year (September to December). Students in their first year are often living with peers they do not know well and are therefore without housing security, if a peer decides to drop out.

6. Recommendation 2: Introduce a ‘right to swap’ giving tenants a notice period to find a new tenant prior to the unilateral ending of a tenancy agreement. This will afford greater security to students embarking on living situations with peers they do not know well.

7. Two-month notice periods for tenants do empower students to leave poor quality housing however, this may lead to some tenancies ending earlier to fit in with term dates. As such, landlords may respond by raising rents overall, negatively impacting students who will stay in properties over the summer.

8. Recommendation 3: Ensure landlords are not able to raise rents specifically in student let PRS to account for the chance of students ending tenancies early.

Chapter 1, Section 5 : Grounds for Possession

9. Whilst grounds for possession for anti-social behavior is reasonable, this may provide a loophole for landlords wanting to evict students. Students often sleep later and host social gatherings in their rental properties. Where currently this is monitored by local authorities in partnership with Universities (The University of Manchester can pass disciplinary action on students in receipt of noise complaints), this may be punishable by eviction under new measures. This is an extreme action and may even be abused by landlords who have had alternative powers to evict tenants removed under other measures in the bill.

10. Recommendation 4: Clearly stipulate what constitutes ‘anti-social behavior’ and a procedure through which landlords must have to undergo to evict on this basis. Evidence of this behavior should be provided from a crime report or through a local council authority. UMSU also strongly urges a warning system to be in place too, so students are not unfairly exploited.

11. As aforementioned, Ground 4A leaves student tenants open to unfair eviction and separates them from other non-student tenants in the PRS. Please see Recommendation 1.

Chapter 1, Section 7 : Statutory procedure for increases of rent

12. The provision restricting rent increases to once per year alongside the Ground 4A allowing for student evictions in the summer creates a loophole which may lead students to be paying more rent. Landlords can evict tenants each summer to charge new tenants higher rents, bypassing any restrictions on how much rent can increase. This means that provision in this section of the bill designed to keep PRS affordable for renters will not apply to the vast majority of the student population. As mentioned above, the Cost of Living Report conducted by the Students’ Union in 2022 found that 48% of students (2283 students) slightly or significantly lowered their housing expectations. This demonstrates that students in Manchester are struggling with the affordability of housing.

13. Recommendation 5: Strengthen protections for students renewing tenancies and apply restrictions on rent increases to properties that become vacant too.

Chapter 3 : Discrimination in the r ental m arket: England

check caps

14. The need for a UK based guarantor who meets certain income requirements is exclusionary for a large proportion of students including those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds and international students. Because of the need for a UK based guarantor, international students often have to pay rent up front or struggle to find a property that they can rent in the PRS and are forced to continue living in PBSA. 13% of students have experienced homelessness, with this being the case for 29% of international students. Removing the need for guarantors could go a long way in lowering this figure. A student surveyed by UMSU in relation to this issue stated that ‘Almost every housing company and landlord requires a guarantor. As international tenants, we have no one in the UK to be our guarantor, and our options for finding a flat are very limited... the only option they offer is to pay the entire year's rent upfront, which is incredibly inconvenient". Home students whose parents do not earn above the threshold also struggle to find guarantors. Those impacted are not able to access the accommodation they need/ prefer based on nationality or socioeconomic status- a discriminatory practice which is unfair.

15. Recommendation 6: Remove the need for guarantors in student accommodation entirely so that students from all backgrounds can study at university.

16. Students also report finding landlords abusive and discriminatory and feeling powerless to solve this given the current power dynamics in PRS. One student reported their landlord being sexist and addressing them in the third person rather than speaking directly to them. There have also been reports of aggression towards transgender students by this particular landlord. An additional student reported that, at a property viewing a landlord explicitly outlined not wanting to have a tenant in their property who had a mental health condition. The same landlord reportedly also asked about the prospective tenants’ religion. The student felt they had to opt for the accommodation due to needing somewhere to live.

17. Recommendation 7: Ensure provision for greater penalties to discriminatory or abusive landlords, particularly in the case of repeat offences.

Chapter 6, Section 55: Requirement to state rent and avoid rental bidding

18. UMSU welcomes the ban on rental bidding but worries that loopholes will easily exist in the measure if not properly enforced or accounted for. For example, landlords may register a property at a certain price; recognise a high demand for the space; remove the property from the market; then re-introduce it at a much higher rate. This could include taking informal offers and re-uploading a listing at a new rate.

19. Recommendation 8: Enforce additional measures that ban landlords or letting agents from re-advertising a property to rent within a certain time frame if tenants have not occupied it in-between. Include penalties for breaking this stipulation that can be implemented by the ombudsman and/or local authorities.

Part 2 Residential Landlords

Chapter 2 , Section 62 : Landlord Redress Schemes

20. The outlining of an Ombudsman as part of the redress scheme for tenants is useful but does not take into account the transitory nature of student living. If the Ombudsman is particularly inundated with cases, a students’ case may not be redressed before their tenancy has ended, leaving the process potentially ineffectual. There is also a lack of clear timeframes and procedures for dealing with a complaint. One student spoken to in relation to this submission for evidence reported being without an EICR certificate for half their tenancy, an issue which would have been solved by a quick and efficient Ombudsman process.

21. Recommendation 9: Introduce provision for student issues to be considered as priority before their tenancy runs out. Outline time periods for issues to be dealt with within, ensuring the deadline falls within the students’ tenancies.

22. Recommendation 10: Where complaints pertain to market rate setting disputes, ensure that this is done fairly and with the incomes of the general student population in mind.

Part 4: Enforcement

Chapter 2, Sections 104-110: Enforcement Authorities

23. The bill does not address partnerships with Students’ Unions or Universities but does provide a framework for how local authorities might delegate or cooperate on enforcement tasks.

24. Recommendation 11: Include a new section to establish formal partnerships between local housing authorities, students’ unions, and universities to help enforcement housing standards and resolve student accommodation issues. In Manchester, this could work especially well with the Good Landlord Charter, introducing a requirement for all student landlords to sign up to the Charter and introducing established processes of collaboration between Greater Manchester SUs and GMCA.

Additional Recommendations and Content

Duties on Universities

25. The bill does not currently contain any provision pertaining to the duties of universities to ensure access for students to affordable, decent accommodation. UMSU believes this should be the case given the duty of care Higher Education Institutions should have towards students living aware from home for the first time. The Halls of Residence Report published by UMSU in 2022 highlights that in almost all accommodation, qualitative data finds students feel their halls are unaffordable and poor value for money. There are also reports of pests and mould in certain accommodations (Oak House in particular). In a survey conducted to inform the University’s Access and Participation Plan when asked about overall satisfaction levels with university halls, 35% (n=181) of student agreed that they were satisfied; compared to 42.4% (n=229) who disagreed.

26. Recommendation 12: Ensure PBSA is not neglected from the bill and include provisions to ensure Universities are providing safe, affordable accommodation.

October 2024.