pet friendly landlords
Skip to content

MPs jump on “war against landlords” bandwagon

Now, we all know that in any industry, there are the good elements and there are bad. The good ones tends to outnumber the bad, but its the bad that give the rest of the group a bad name. And that has been proven time and time again.

Last week, I picked up from here on a debate of MPs in Westminster on the topic of Unscrupulous Landlords. I must say the debate gave me cause for concern, because of some of the content which was emphasising the bad over the good, using Shelter’s Gallery of Disrepair , and advocating more regulation of landlords.

Shelter, as I understand from certain quarters, is not anti-landlord, just anti-rogue-landlord. The organisation in its own way is trying to rout out rogue landlords, creating the Gallery of Disrepair, where tenants are being encouraged to post up pictures in a Gallery in a bid to Evict Rogue Landlords. Continued…

    Posted in Government, Lettings and Management, Tenant Behaviour.

    Tagged with , , , , .

    The dreaded voids – now at an all time low?

    Its every landlord’s worst nightmare – lost rent, however that happens. One of the reasons for losing income is voids. A void is that period during which the property is empty, in-between tenancies, and/or undergoing refurbishment. It means there is no income from it, even though it is costing the landlord money! The average void period is apparently a key indicator of how buoyant the rental market is.

    Some say that rental voids are now at an all time low.  The average void period has fallen to an eight year low, showing that demand for rental property continues to remain high. According to Mortgage Introducer,

    Compared with the previous quarter as part of the Association of Residential Lettings Agent’s (ARLA) survey of members, the average void period has again fallen from 3.6 weeks to 3.2 weeks.

    The average number of new tenancies signed up compared to the preceding survey has also increased in line with seasonal trends.

    Ian Potter, operations manager of ARLA, said: “The rental market is incredibly strong at the moment for those working within the industry but for those consumers who are relying on the Private Rental Sector for housing, the cost of renting must be of concern.

    So, what am I to make of this? Firstly, that there is a seasonal trend. Second that the decrease in the average void period is small. Third that the cost of housing in the PRS may be increasing?

    The Mortgage Introducer goes on to say that:

    Average void periods for rented residential properties are already short with nearly eight out of ten ARLA member offices reporting averages of four weeks or less per year.

    The South East has experienced the lowest void period at just 2.9 weeks compared with 3.3 weeks for Central London and 3.4 weeks for the rest of the UK.

    The average void period of the whole country is down quite sharply and is the third consecutive fall. Average voids have decreased in all three main geographical areas with the greatest decrease being for those outside London and the South East (from 3.9 to 3.4 weeks).

    There’s various reasons for this, some of which are interlinked. There was an influx of “accidental landlords” in 2009 when those who could not sell were forced to rent out their homes, creating and oversupply, and forcing down rents- quite significantly in some areas. The level of voids varies from one part of the country to another. The figures here quoted are average, and as with all statistics, we should be careful how we interpret them. When quoting statistics, what tends to get left out is the “spread” of the data set. That to me, would be useful along side the average.

    Some in the industry, say here that if a landlord uses a “good agent”, then there should never be void periods. Ha! I don’t agree, but then again, I’m not sure how to define “good agent”.  Someone queried my learned friend’s use of the word “never”, and it was revised to “majority of the time”.  A lot depends on how proactive the landlord/agent is, and whether or not the outgoing tenant allows viewings during the last month or so of the tenancy. Some are so fussy about “their right to privacy” and wanting to be at viewings, that its almost impossible to get viewings done!!

    And what happens when tenants go AWOL? or are evicted? That adds its complications. But then again, the cynic in me would probably say there will be those who come back with “I’ve never had to evict a tenant” and all that jazz. Hey hum. We live in a world where on one cap fits all and where we all go through different experiences even if we all apply the same principles and processes. That’s life!

      Posted in General, Lettings and Management.

      Tagged with , , .

      Enforcing A Possession Order

      The saga with getting your house back from a reluctant tenant is just one of those hazards of our business. I’ve had to deal with 4 of those cases very recently, and it is not pleasant. Time consuming, stressful, costly, etc. etc. You give them notice to quit, they ignore it, you go to court, and eventually, months down the line and rent arrears increasing, the Judge gives a Possession Order. And you think, good, now I can get on… But oh no! the battle continues, as the reluctant tenant very often refuses to go, even on the date the Judge says they should go. When that happens, the bailiffs have to be called, which takes even more time….

      However, on these recent cases, the tenants have left on or before the date of possession. However, one in particular got my goat… if that is the expression. You may recall the one with two kids that I previously told you about here. I had expected her to sit tight and not go on the day. I wrote to her the week before, to set a time on the date, got no reply. Tried her mobile number, but that was off. Eventually, the day before the due date, I tried her ex-partner’s mobile number, and she answers!! She’s got his phone because he is in jail, because he smashed her phone and did criminal damage in a fit of rage.  Anyway, to my further surprise, she says she is moving, and the house will be empty on the due date.

      Not believing any of it, I turn up on the Monday to check her out and collect my keys etc. The house is in a mess, even though she claimed to have moved out on the Friday before. There was a break-in during the weekend, and she’d called the police. When I arrived, she was painting over the graffiti that had been sprayed on the wall. There was garden rubbish everywhere, the carpets were dirty, front door lower doubleglazed glass was broken, black mould on window frames and bedrooms and living room walls (but not bathroom). I had a go at her for wasting my time, as I’d called before leaving to confirm she was ready for the checkout. We agree I’d come back the next day when she would have sorted it all out, had the place cleared completely and carpets cleaned.

      Turned up the next day to find 3 wheelie bins full of rubbish, some green waste still left in a pile. House was relatively clean but the mould was still on the wall and the carpets not cleaned. I tackled her immediately about the mould, and she claimed some Environmental health officer at the council had told her to leave it, and not clean it as it was dangerous. But she’d caused it and lived in it!! I asked for the name of this officer, but she didn’t know it. I tackled her about her attempt at claiming disrepair on her S21 defence form, and she claimed the officer at the CAB asked her if she’d had any problems with the property, and she said yes, with damp and the boiler. Now, the boiler had only just been installed in October 09, so I pressed her for what the problem was, and she had no specific answer.

      The damp & mould was due to condensation!! She used the radiators as driers, blocked up the ventilation points in all the rooms, keeps the windows tight shut and then wonders why there is condensation!!! Give me a break!!  So, I asked her if she was renting from the council – she says no. So, I ask again why it was the council to whom she reported that the new boiler wasn’t working. At this point, she proceeded to tell me to eff off with my s**thole property.  A property which she got in very good condition and proceeded to turn into the s**thole that she wouldn’t voluntarily vacate?? work that one out.  Its amazing isn’t it, how they beg and promise heaven and earth to rent the property, and when they’ve had enough or fall into arrears, decide its a s**thole. Why would anyone beg to live in a s**thole?

      As she walked out still spouting profanities, I yelled back promising her she and her Guarantor would pay every single penny owed to me, even if it took them the rest of their working lives!! They are both young, so there’s scope. She’s gone off to live in a hostel, at even more cost to the taxpayer.

      Meanwhile, the house has been given a makeover, returned to a very good condition, and now rented out again. This time to a mature lady.

      In the meantime, the Third Party deductions that were being taken from her income support has now stopped, because she has moved from my property. Interestingly, if she’d moved to another one of my properties, then the deductions would have continued. This was confirmed by the friendly lady at the third party deductions office.

      The next step now is to finalise her bill, and send to both her and the Guarantor, and if no settlement forthcoming – which I don’t expect, then I’m going to be starting a moneyclaim using the MCOL service.

        Posted in Court and Justice, Lettings and Management, Tenant Eviction.

        Tagged with , , , , .

        New Scrappage Scheme – Planning permission for HMOs out!!

        Hallelujah chorus should be ringing out from all the corners of the UK as the Housing Minister has come up with the latest scrappage scheme. This time, its to do with the previous Government’s desire to tie up landlords in red tape, and create more work for the already overwhelmed and creaking planning services up and down the country.

        The Labour government decided that anyone wanting to turn a Single Family House (SFH) into a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) of any size, had to obtain planning permission. This was their attempt to deal with a problem in a very small portion of the country. Talk about using a sledge hammer to swat a fly and not thinking through things.

        Anyway, Grant Shapps has brought some sense into the matter.  According to the News Release as published on the CLG Website:

        Landlords and councils will no longer be faced with bureaucracy aimed at micro-managing rented housing, Housing Minister Grant Shapps confirmed today.

        The Minister laid new regulations that could cut as many as 8,500 planning applications from the system, freeing up councils to focus on local priorities. Currently landlords have to submit a planning application to rent their properties to unrelated tenants – known as HMOs ( Houses in Multiple Occupation). Regulations published today will ensure councils only have to use this power where they know high concentrations of shared homes are a problem.

        Too many shared homes in one area can cause problems. A high number of short term tenants with little stake in the community can leave an area with an unloved look and feel, which can sometimes create seasonal ghost towns that harm local economies, anti-social behaviour and an increase in crime.

        But the Minister said that a blanket requirement to manage these through the planning system is a drain on council resources, and threatens to drive good landlords away from the rental sector because of increased costs and red tape, therefore restricting availability of affordable homes for rent.

        Currently up to 8,500 planning applications may be added to the system each year if every landlord looking to turn their property into a shared home is forced to submit an application, regardless of local circumstances.

        Housing Minister Grant Shapps said:

        “Councils understand their local area best, and they don’t need burdensome rules that assume housing issues in every town, village and hamlet are exactly the same. I am also committed to safeguard the supply of rented housing – shared homes are vital for people who want to live and work in towns and cities, and are important to the economy.

        “That’s why I’m giving councils greater flexibility to manage shared homes in their local area. Where there are local issues with shared homes, councils will have all the tools they need to deal with the problem – but they will avoid getting bogged down in pointless applications, and landlords won’t be put off renting shared homes where they are needed.”

        Well done Minister, and thank you.

          Posted in Government, Housing Regulations, Property.

          Tagged with , , .

          The merger of two Lincolnshire Councils?

          OK, so maybe its not a full merger of the two as we know it, but a lot of service functions in two councils are being given over to be undertaken by a “merged company”. Make sense? ..  No? ….

          I’ve just found out  that Councillors at East Lindsey and South Holland gave the green light to the creation of the merged service company which will, they claim, save ratepayers in both districts £30.7 million pounds over the next 10 years. So, we are talking of savings on average of £3.7 million each year. Not a bad sum, but how much is it going to cost to create this merged service company? Or does the company already exist?

          The agreement was given at both East Lindsey’s and South Holland’s Council meetings held on 28th July 2010.

          The  services to be merged are:

          • Customer Services
          • Revenues and Benefits
          • ICT
          • Human Resources
          • Finance

          These functions will be transferred to the Company on 1st August and then be transformed through new ICT investment and more streamline processes. Forgive me for being sceptical, but aren’t these functions most of what the Councils do anyway?? The whole bandwagon is just going to get bigger and more cumbersome, innit?

          The news bulletin goes on to say “the ground-breaking move will ensure quality services are delivered to the public at a reduced cost – a necessity in today’s cash-strapped public services – by a private limited company owned by the two councils.”

          When the term “quality” starts being bandied about, you know there’s something amiss. I’m yet to get quality service from South Holland as a normal service, and have only had it when I’ve made a formal complaint – about Customer Service and  Revenues & Benefits. East Lindsey do rate much better in my books, but could certainly improve.

          Furthermore, Cllr Gary Porter, Leader of South Holland District Council said: “This is great news for residents because it means we can provide services more efficiently, saving people money and keeping services performing well.” I can well believe it will be a big improvement.

          Cllr Doreen Stephenson, Leader of East Lindsey District Council said: “This is a move that will deliver the savings to residents and keep service standards high over the next 10 years.” As long as South Holland don’t run it, then I might agree with that statement.

          I’m curious as to how much it will cost to set this all up, and if there will be any net savings in the long run. Watch and see.

            Posted in Government, Local Authorities.

            Tagged with , , , , .

            Accelerated Possession – is indeed possible

            Too often, the Court system seems to operate in such a way as to suggest that it is weighted very heavily in favour of the tenant, with the Landlord often coming a poor second in the outcomes. However, today, I have to say, I was very well chuffed by an event that seems to indicate that there might perhaps be justice in the system after all.

            Today’s post bag brought me an envelope from the Court. It was an Order for Possession, given via the accelerated procedure for assured shorthold tenancy. I did a double take, and read it again in disbelief. But yes, it was an order, instructing the defendant to give possession on or before 9 August 2010. It came as a surprise because just over a week ago, the same court had sent me a copy of the Defence form filed by the Defendant, who had asked for the full 42 days to remain in the property, on grounds of exceptional hardship.  She was on the housing register, bidding for properties, had limited means and has 2 kids blah blah blah!! This, on top of the fact that I had sent in the N5b on 28-Jun-10, and later received a Notice of Issue from the Court stating that the claim was issued on 1-Jul-10, and will be deemed served on 7-Jul-10. A whole week down already. Why give 7 days to consider the notice served? Then to get the notice saying the tenant had filed a defence, I felt rather deflated, as it is well known fact that playing the “exceptional hardship” card was highly likely to involve a hearing bya Judge, and give the tenant more time to defraud the landlord.

            I really did think I was in for the long haul on this one. This is the tenant I had previously told you about here, someone whom I had tried to support and help through her break up with her partner, whom I’d effectively had to nanny! I eventually gave up trying to get her on the straight and narrow, and sent in the N5b to court asking for possession of my property.

            In her defence statement she decided to try to bring in that old chestnut of disrepair as shown below:

            tenant claims disrepair in defence form

            It is interesting to note that she reported the alleged problems to the Council, but not to the Landlord. How is a Landlord to carry out repairs that s/he is unaware of? Classic, isn’t it. I had a new boiler installed in October 2009! Each time I’ve spoken to her or been to the property, I’ve asked if everything is OK, and she’s always answered yes! As for the damp, she dries her washing on the radiators, keeps the windows tight shut, and guess what happens – condensation!! I have proof and a witness!

            In her defence form, she goes on to say she’s been advised to pay her top-ups to avoid causing me further hardship – oh well now, just what had I been telling her to do?? and a misely £9.24 per week at that!! But of course, on this occasion she is trying to get a stay of execution isn’t she? more to cover herself than any obligation she might have to pay her rent in full.

            tenant advised to pay her topups

            And then to finish off she plays the trump cared “exceptional hardship” – it is obvious she’s gone to the CAB or somewhere like that.

            tenant asks for more time

            However, it would seem that the Judge was not impressed by the defence, and quite rightly too. How could she not be able to afford to pay a mere £9.24 per week when she is getting handouts totalling £175 per week, by her own admission!!I kid you not – here it is:

            tenant's weekly handout income

            What hardship is that? As a taxpayer, I am funding her handouts, but she can’t be bothered to spend it wisely. She’s probably also not paying any council tax, or its heavily subsidised. So what is she using the money for? If she and her mother really wanted to sort things out, they’d sit down and budget properly, and put forward a proposal that would ensure the arrears got cleared in no time. Clearly they can’t be bothered. I really do feel for the children, but I am not a charity, I run a business, and I’ve had enough of being robbed blind by the likes of these. Of course, its the rules set up by the previous Labour government that has exercebated the problem. They’ve cleared off now, leaving a trail of debt owed to private landlords by LHA claimants.

            Come on Coalition government, put some sense back into the benefit system and get direct payment to landlords back in place. You can’t even begin to think of implementing the cuts in housing benefit rates without restoring the payments to landlords – if you do, you are asking for an unprecedented increase in homelessness that you can’t even begin to imagine as Landlords will not touch such folk with a barge pole. And those who can’t make up their top ups will find themselves on the streets. Mark my words.

            Anyway, 9-Aug-10 is the date by which she must hand over my property back to me. Lets wait and see. I have  a suspicion that the bailiffs will have to get involved yet again, but hey ho, par for the course. That will be another £95 down the drain, on top of the £150 for the possession claim.

            The next stage will be a money claim against her and her Guarantor-mother for every single penny that they owe me. She’s working, so attachment of earnings is a good route to take on that one. Watch out – Grumpy is on the war path…



              Posted in Court and Justice, Lettings and Management, LHA.

              Tagged with , , , .

              Deduction of rent arrears from income support

              Its been a quiet day today, and I’m thankful for that. Its given me a chance to catch up with all sorts of stuff that has taken a back seat in recent weeks … including this much loved rant outlet of mine. I’ve also done mundane stuff like tenant referencing, and the outcome of one of those calls made me laugh. But I’ll tell you about it later.

              Anyway, opening the post today, it felt a bit like christmas, even though it is still a few months to that time of year. In the pack of mail were 6 brown C5 envelopes, and no! not the sort that might have crossed your mind. These were flat, not stuffed, and on the back had “if undelivered, please return to DWP, PO Box XXX.. etc.etc.”. What is so cool about flat brown envelopes from DWP? They were notifications of third party deductions from income support, telling me that some of my tenants on benefits, who have either squandered their benefit payments, or refuse to top up their housing allowance to make up their rents, will now be paying it directly from their income support. The DWP only allow a nominal amount of deductions to be made, so its not a huge amount. But its the principle of the matter that has been established.

              Up until November 2009, I had not even considered applying for 3rd party deductions, but one of my then tenants got right up my nose, I felt that I needed to make the point. I called the local job centre in Cambridgeshire to find out the procedure, but was put through to a main Job Centre Plus (still in Cambridgeshire), and there the Officers insisted it couldn’t be done for private landlords, and wasn’t meant for private landlords and had never been done for private landlords etc.etc. Anyway, having done my research, I quoted to them from the DWP handbook, and eventually, the Officer said she’d look into it and get back to me. To cut a long story short, it took nearly 3 months to get this particular Job Centre Plus (JCP) to deal with the matter. 3 months in which they still tried to argue it couldn’t be done, or lost documents I’d sent to them, claimed to have sent me stuff I hadn’t received or that they were waiting for instructions from above etc.etc.. Had I not been so determined not be beaten by the idiocy of the bureacratic and incomprehensible benefits system, I’d have given up at the first or second hurdle, let alone the tenth. But we established that it was do-able for private landlords. And I did manage to get some deductions before that particular tenant moved on.

              Well, on 27th June this year, I sent out 3 batches of letters to 3 different JCPs offices in Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire, including the first one I’ve just mentioned in the previous paragraph. To short circuit the 3 months process period, I’d used one of their forms, and provided the information they needed in exactly their preferred format. I figured I might get away with 2 months process time, but never in my wildest dreams did I think it would be done in 3 weeks. From 3 months to 3 weeks – you gotta be impressed!!

              Earlier this year, I had telephoned one of the Lincolnshire JCPs to enquire about their process for third party deductions, and was pleasantly surprised when I was told of its utter simplicity. Just write to us, with details of the tenants and the arrears, and we’ll get it sorted. Of course, having had such a struggle with the Cambs JCP, I was rather sceptical about this. But, I am glad to report that the Lincs JCP have proved themselves true to the information given me, and come through with the deductions without aggro. I suspect that matters were helped along due to the fact that I gave them the right information in the right format!!

              Whatever it is, I’m chuffed to bits that the system has worked, and worked well in this instance. Whilst I might not be happy with the amount of deductions (that limit is set in stone by the protective government) and would have preferred a higher level, I am thrilled that something is coming in to chip away at the arrears that the tenants have systematically built up. More importantly, it shows the benefit claimant that they can run, but can’t hide, and that the system is not all in their favour.

              I’m just waiting for the first one of them to call and squeal at me for doing them out of their dole money. Watch this space.

                Posted in Income Support, LHA, Third party deductions.

                Tagged with , , , .

                Benefit Reforms – Is this the death knell of benefits culture?

                The much awaited Emergency budget came, and having digested its contents, the overall view is that “its not as bad as was feared”. I will qualify that with “in some quarters”.

                Whilst I welcome the attempts being made to reign in the ballooning and ridiculously high benefits bill, I am concerned at the way its being done. Let’s face it, whatever the Coalition came up with, it would not have met with approval all round. No one size fits all.

                The Local Housing Allowance, for instance, is to be seriously cut back.

                From April 2011, the 5 bedroom rate will be scrapped which means the top end payment will be the 4-bedroom rate. Landlords with larger properties will be affected, as the LHA claimants may not be able to afford the top up necessary to make up the difference between the benefit and their rent.

                Futhermore,  new upper limist will be introduced for the other property sizes, with upper limits set as follows:

                o       £250 a week for a 1 bedroom property
                o       £290 a week for a 2 bedroom property
                o       £340 a week for a 3 bedroom property
                o       £400 a week for a 4 bedroom property or larger

                Whilst this might not affect landlords in northern regions of the country, it is bound to affect those further south where the rents rates are a lot higher, and the LHA rates have followed suit.

                One positive change (to the claimant) is that the size criteria will be adjusted to provide for an additional bedroom for a non-resident carer where a disabled customer has an established need for overnight care.

                Now for the even bigger change, and one which will definitely affect everyone. From October 2011, the LHA rates will be set at the 30th percentile of rents in each Broad Rental Market Area (BRMA) rather than the median, as it is currently.

                This will have the very obvious effect of forcing LHA claimants to look for properties in the cheaper (and possibly more run down) parts of town. It may eventually force down rents, but market forces will dictate.

                It promises to be interesting times ahead, as Landlords up and down the country re-assess their strategies and decide whether or not to continue to accept tenants claiming LHA. If more landlords leave this sector, then the Government will no doubt have a housing crisis on its hands.

                Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

                  Posted in Government, Lettings and Management, LHA.

                  Tagged with , , .

                  My MP replies to CGT Reform Campaign email

                  I was rather quite surprised when an email dropped into my inbox from Andrew Lansley, my Member of Parliament, in response to the email I sent him as part of the NLA campaign. Well, he’s in my good books for bothering to send a reply, even though it might have been automated. At least he bothered to do so.

                  Here it is ….

                  alansley reply to NLA CGT reform campaign email

                  A lot of the time, these responses are Whitehall crafted, and say nothing with lots of words. Maybe this one is different? I say that because of one sentence  in the second paragraph which I have highlighted, the emphasis being on the “generous exemptions for entrepreneurial business activities“.

                  Whilst that is encouraging and gives one a bit of hope, the email completely fails to indicate whether or not landlords and lettings fall into the “business activities” category. That, afterall, is what the campaign is all about. That is the question that needs to be answered.

                  Good words, dear MP and well chosen, and I, together with fellow landlords up and down the country, wait with trepidation, to the answer to be given us on 22 June 2010.

                  If this Government is anywhere near keen to work with Landlords in the Private Rented Sector (PRS), then it needs to listen. Local councils have been left in positions where they cannot meet the housing needs of the thousands of people on waiting lists for council houses, and there aren’t the funds to build what is necessary. You need the PRS. Whilst we appreciate your decision not to burden us with yet more red tape, we ask you to help us to help you, to keep the economy growing whilst you try to plug the hole in it.

                  Can any other landlord who participated in this campaign indicate if they’ve received a response or acknowledgement from their MP to their email?

                  Yours truly


                    Posted in Government, Law.

                    Tagged with , , , , .

                    Housing Minister promises “no more red tape” for private landlords

                    Music to my ears indeed.

                    Acccording to the CLG News, “Grant Shapps, the Housing Minister on Thursday 10 June 2010, promised England’s one million landlords that the Government has no plans to introduce new regulations on the private rented sector“.

                    New regulations were proposed by the previous administration in response to the Rugg Review of the Private Rented Sector, but have been judged by the new coalition to introduce too much additional red tape. These included a National Register of Landlords, regulation of letting and managing agents, and compulsory written tenancy agreements.

                    Speaking at the first Communities and Local Government questions since the formation of the Coalition Government, the Minister confirmed that the legal framework already in place strikes the right balance between the rights and responsibilities between landlords and tenants – with the vast majority of private tenants reporting they are satisfied with the service they get from their landlords.

                    Instead, Mr Shapps called on councils to use the wide range of powers already at their disposal to tackle the minority of rogue landlords that fail to provide good quality accommodation and blight local neighbourhoods.

                    Councils already have powers to require landlords to take action to rectify hazards in their property and where landlords resist, to make and charge for improvements, and to prohibit use of the affected parts of the property.

                    Local authorities also have discretionary licensing powers to tackle areas blighted by poorly managed privately rented stock.

                    Mr Shapps said:

                    With the vast majority of England’s three million private tenants happy with the service they receive, I am satisfied that the current system strikes the right balance between the rights and responsibilities of tenants and landlords.

                    “So today I make a promise to good landlords across the country: the Government has no plans to create any burdensome red tape and bureaucracy, so you are able to continue providing a service to your tenants.

                    “But for the bad landlords, I am putting councils on alert to use the range of powers already at their disposal to make sure tenants are properly protected.

                    For those Landlords who have dealth with the Councils on these matters, you know that indeed, there are already statutory instruments in place for the Councils to deal with all these matters, if they were minded to do so. Labour’s idea of using the stick to deal with minor issues was outrageous and completely overbearing, to say the least. By tying us in red tape, they could create more jobs in the public sector, increasing the tax burden on ordinary folk, and driving the economy further into the red. Even I could see that…. how come they couldn’t??

                    Next step is to get rid of the planning requirements for small HMOs. Come on, Honourable Minister!

                      Posted in Government, Housing Regulations, Law.

                      Tagged with , , , .

                      SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline