Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 04 June 2013
04 Jun 2013 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Private Rentals (Deposits)
I, too, congratulate Patrick Harvie on securing the debate, as the failure of many landlords to comply with the regulations by the required date last month is a matter of considerable concern.
The Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 gave ministers the power to introduce regulations that would establish tenancy deposit schemes. A Scottish Government review in 2009 found that a significant majority of tenants in the private sector had deposits partially or totally withheld at the end of their tenancy, and that in around three quarters of those cases that was done unfairly. There was evidence that quite a lot of that was going on. Such evidence has been presented to us in the briefings that we have received from CAS and the NUS and, as Patrick Harvie suggested, many of us know from personal or constituents’ experience that such practice goes on.
For example, my eldest son has rented a number of properties in the Leith area over the past four years. He has had to fight to get his deposit back when moving from one flat to another. He has heard excuses about having to send in cleaners when, in fact, the property was considerably cleaner when he left than it was when he moved in. On two occasions, he has faced problems in finding out from the letting agent who the landlord was: once when his boiler blew up and, on another occasion, when the pipes froze due to being inadequately insulated. Tenants can face a lot of problems with trying to find out who their landlord is.
The 2010 consultation on the introduction of the regulations found widespread support from most people—other than from private landlords and letting agents—for the introduction of the tenancy deposit scheme. Landlords are now required to do a number of things. They are required to register the deposit with a tenancy deposit scheme within 30 days of the beginning of a new tenancy or by 15 May for existing tenancies. They are also required to provide the tenant with certain information about the deposit—the kind of information that we would reasonably expect tenants to get from a landlord: the amount of the deposit; when it was received; the address of the property; a statement confirming that the landlord is registered with the local authority; and the name of the tenancy deposit scheme with which the money has been registered and the conditions under which it can be retained. Those are fairly simple bits of information.
The problem lies not so much with the regulations but with awareness and enforcement. Tenants can indeed receive up to three times their deposit in compensation if their landlord does not comply with the regulations. However, that requires a tenant to know their entitlement and to be prepared to take their landlord to the sheriff court for non-compliance, and it requires landlords to know their obligations and what the consequences could be of not conforming to them.
In its briefing, the ESPC said that the Government should take action to raise awareness of the regulations among tenants and landlords. It could also be argued that the Government needs to facilitate the enforcement of the regulations, because, as Marco Biagi said, many of the private sector tenants are young and might not feel comfortable about threatening their landlord with court action if he or she does not provide the necessary information within 30 days of the start of the tenancy, or asking their landlord whether their existing deposit was lodged in a tenancy deposit scheme by 15 May this year.
Of course, we do not know the reasons why so many landlords have not complied. It may be due to ignorance on their part, but it might be that some landlords and letting agencies are simply chancing their arms and ignoring the legislation, as they do not believe that they will be caught. In answer to a question from me on 22 May, the minister indicated that local authorities have the power to take action when there is evidence of non-compliance with tenancy deposit legislation, and that that could be taken into account during landlord registration. I would therefore welcome further detail regarding how local authorities can access information. Would it be through tenants providing evidence of a lack of compliance?
As Alex Johnstone stated, there is some concern about the success of landlord registration. I have certainly heard that the legislation is not always adequately complied with or enforced. Indeed, as with any other offence, the knowledge that offenders are likely to be caught and punished acts as a considerable deterrent.
17:28
The Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 gave ministers the power to introduce regulations that would establish tenancy deposit schemes. A Scottish Government review in 2009 found that a significant majority of tenants in the private sector had deposits partially or totally withheld at the end of their tenancy, and that in around three quarters of those cases that was done unfairly. There was evidence that quite a lot of that was going on. Such evidence has been presented to us in the briefings that we have received from CAS and the NUS and, as Patrick Harvie suggested, many of us know from personal or constituents’ experience that such practice goes on.
For example, my eldest son has rented a number of properties in the Leith area over the past four years. He has had to fight to get his deposit back when moving from one flat to another. He has heard excuses about having to send in cleaners when, in fact, the property was considerably cleaner when he left than it was when he moved in. On two occasions, he has faced problems in finding out from the letting agent who the landlord was: once when his boiler blew up and, on another occasion, when the pipes froze due to being inadequately insulated. Tenants can face a lot of problems with trying to find out who their landlord is.
The 2010 consultation on the introduction of the regulations found widespread support from most people—other than from private landlords and letting agents—for the introduction of the tenancy deposit scheme. Landlords are now required to do a number of things. They are required to register the deposit with a tenancy deposit scheme within 30 days of the beginning of a new tenancy or by 15 May for existing tenancies. They are also required to provide the tenant with certain information about the deposit—the kind of information that we would reasonably expect tenants to get from a landlord: the amount of the deposit; when it was received; the address of the property; a statement confirming that the landlord is registered with the local authority; and the name of the tenancy deposit scheme with which the money has been registered and the conditions under which it can be retained. Those are fairly simple bits of information.
The problem lies not so much with the regulations but with awareness and enforcement. Tenants can indeed receive up to three times their deposit in compensation if their landlord does not comply with the regulations. However, that requires a tenant to know their entitlement and to be prepared to take their landlord to the sheriff court for non-compliance, and it requires landlords to know their obligations and what the consequences could be of not conforming to them.
In its briefing, the ESPC said that the Government should take action to raise awareness of the regulations among tenants and landlords. It could also be argued that the Government needs to facilitate the enforcement of the regulations, because, as Marco Biagi said, many of the private sector tenants are young and might not feel comfortable about threatening their landlord with court action if he or she does not provide the necessary information within 30 days of the start of the tenancy, or asking their landlord whether their existing deposit was lodged in a tenancy deposit scheme by 15 May this year.
Of course, we do not know the reasons why so many landlords have not complied. It may be due to ignorance on their part, but it might be that some landlords and letting agencies are simply chancing their arms and ignoring the legislation, as they do not believe that they will be caught. In answer to a question from me on 22 May, the minister indicated that local authorities have the power to take action when there is evidence of non-compliance with tenancy deposit legislation, and that that could be taken into account during landlord registration. I would therefore welcome further detail regarding how local authorities can access information. Would it be through tenants providing evidence of a lack of compliance?
As Alex Johnstone stated, there is some concern about the success of landlord registration. I have certainly heard that the legislation is not always adequately complied with or enforced. Indeed, as with any other offence, the knowledge that offenders are likely to be caught and punished acts as a considerable deterrent.
17:28
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-06681, in the name of Patrick Harvie, on protecting tenants’ deposits. The debate will...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
I put on record my thanks to the 27 MSPs who have added their names in support of the motion, representing four political parties and independents who repres...
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con)
Con
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to such an important debate, and I congratulate Patrick Harvie on securing it and bringing the issue to the chamber.T...
Patrick Harvie
Green
Will Alex Johnstone give way?
Alex Johnstone
Con
I am actually over my time and should be stopping. However, I am sure that the opportunity will come along.Effective enforcement can do a great deal more tha...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
Mr Johnstone has advised me that he has to leave the debate early because he has parliamentary business to attend to.17:15
Anne McTaggart (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
I am delighted to contribute to this debate on the subject of protecting tenants’ deposits. I thank Patrick Harvie for recognising the growing importance of ...
Marco Biagi (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
SNP
I welcome the chance to debate the matter because, in my constituency, 41 per cent of households now live in the private rented sector. I do not know what th...
Elaine Murray (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Lab
I, too, congratulate Patrick Harvie on securing the debate, as the failure of many landlords to comply with the regulations by the required date last month i...
Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Lab
I congratulate Patrick Harvie on lodging an important motion on protection of tenants’ deposits. It has become an increasingly important issue over the past ...
Kezia Dugdale (Lothian) (Lab)
Lab
I congratulate Patrick Harvie on bringing the issue to the chamber. My first job out of university was as a welfare adviser at Edinburgh University Students ...
The Minister for Housing and Welfare (Margaret Burgess)
SNP
I, too, thank Patrick Harvie for bringing the issue to the chamber for debate. It is clearly important to all of us. I have listened carefully to what has be...
Patrick Harvie
Green
Would the minister consider ensuring that no landlord has any legal justification for withholding a deposit that has not been lodged with an approved scheme?
Margaret Burgess
SNP
Landlords must lodge deposits with an approved scheme—that is why the schemes were set up and those are the rules of the schemes. If a landlord does not do t...
Marco Biagi
SNP
We are all interested in the enforcement working. What conversations has the Government had with local authorities on the difficulties and challenges that th...
Margaret Burgess
SNP
We have set up a working group. The strategy makes it clear that we will work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, given that local authorities...