Hansard

I congratulate Murdo Fraser on securing this debate and I thank the Scottish Confederation of Park Home Residents Associations for its briefing. I also thank many of my constituents who are among the 70-plus residents of Bruce Court, Willow Park and Millglen Lodges for sharing their views with me in advance of this debate.

Park homes are a growing and welcome component of our housing stock, and residents are typically retired and looking to downsize and enjoy their retirement among like-minded people in a peaceful and attractive setting. In the midst of a housing emergency, park homes can offer a low-cost way of expanding the housing stock while freeing up traditional bricks-and-mortar homes for young families. However, it is clear from today’s debate that there is strong cross-party support for the Scottish Government to take action to protect park home owners.

Residents own their home but not the land that it is built on. They do not enjoy the rights that owners or renters of bricks-and-mortar homes have. Instead, any recourse in the event of a dispute is covered by consumer rights legislation or the park home licensing regime. The Mobile Homes Act 1983 requires that site owners must give the proposed park home occupier a written statement that sets out the rights and responsibilities of both parties and other relevant information. However, there is no standardisation of that important document. Some residents may not even have been given one, and there is no independent register of ownership.

The licence fee does not cover the cost of any enforcement action; instead, the local authority has to recover that from the business that is operating the park home. I have constituents who believe that that has held their local authority back from taking enforcement action where it is necessary, because site owners can refuse to communicate with residents associations and individuals, making it difficult to resolve issues and causing significant frustration.

There are also concerns about the lack of designated park managers to handle issues when site owners are away, which leaves residents without support during emergencies. SCOPHRA and individual constituents question whether the fit-and-proper-person test is weeding out unscrupulous site owners—we have heard from colleagues today of a number of alleged such owners.

Site maintenance and safety is a common complaint. A prominent example is site owners allegedly failing to spread grit during cold weather despite being asked to do so by vulnerable elderly residents. Such safety measures should be included in the licensing conditions to ensure compliance. As colleagues across the chamber have touched on, park homes are excluded from legislation on adaptations to help people with disabilities, because they are not a permanent structure. That is despite more park home residents being older and therefore more likely to have mobility issues.

Residents are concerned about the high cost of utilities such as gas and electricity, which are often metered by park owners. There are allegations of overcharging, and residents feel vulnerable to exploitation. The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets limits the maximum price at which gas and electricity can be resold to residents by site owners. However, that limit does not apply when an inclusive charge is made for accommodation—for example, when a park home pitch fee includes all amenities—or for the resale of liquefied petroleum gas. When the previous UK Government awarded households £400 off their energy bills, park homes were excluded, and Patricia Gibson MP had to take the matter to the floor of the House of Commons. Residents have also had difficulties with adding an electric car charging point to their park homes.

With regard to the 10 per cent commission on sales, in days gone by, the site owner often assisted in selling a park home, acting much like an estate agent and partly justifying the fee. Park home managers consider that commission to be important and argue for its role in supporting site facilities. However, the near-unanimous feedback from residents is negative; they see the commission as being more like a feudal levy. Often, residents are opposed to the commission in principle, as they consider it unfair or because they do not see a commensurate investment in site infrastructure.

The Scottish Government has pledged to review site licensing before the current session of Parliament ends. I trust that the minister is taking on board the concerns that colleagues from all sides of the chamber are raising today and will progress changes to better protect residents, thereby ensuring that park homes remain a viable and attractive housing option for our elderly population.