Consultation on a New Tenancy for the Private Sector: Analysis of Consultation Responses

Annex 2: Tenant Focus Group Script

Length of Tenancy (30 minutes)

At the moment most of you will probably have started out with a 6 month tenancy and, depending on how long you have been in your current home, it may now have been extended. The Scottish Government's proposal is that in the future, landlords would still have to offer a tenancy of at least 6 months, although it could be for longer. However, tenants would be able to request a shorter tenancy period and a landlord would be able to decide whether or not to agree.

1. What are your views on landlords having to offer tenancies of at least 6 months?

• What are the pros and cons of this approach?
• If you have concerns, is it about the 'principle' or about 6 months?
• If about 6 months, do they have an alternative timeframe in mind and why?

2. Bearing in mind that tenants would be able to end a tenancy by giving 4 or 8 weeks' notice (depending on how long they had lived in the property, what are your views on tenancies having no maximum period?

• What are the pros and cons of this approach?

• Do you think you would consider taking a longer tenancy? If not, what would be holding you back?
• Do you think tenancies should not have a specific length, in other words they should run until either the tenant wanted to move on or the landlord wanted to repossess the property?

3. What are your views on a tenant being able to request a shorter period, but that the landlord would be able to decide whether or not to agree?

• Does is seem reasonable that a tenant can ask for a shorter period?
• Does is seem reasonable that the landlord would be able to decide whether or not to agree to a shorter period?
• Is it something you might have taken advantage of in the past (if so why) or could you envisage circumstances when it might be useful to you in the future?

Tenancy roll over arrangements (15 minutes)

Under the current legislation, tenancies can roll over on a monthly basis after the initial lease period expires. The proposal is to change this so they cannot roll over for a duration of less than the length of the first tenancy offered. So, if you moved in with a 6 month tenancy, you would be offered a tenancy of at least 6 months when the first one comes to an end.

4. What are your views on this proposal?

• Does it seem reasonable? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Are there any alternative approaches you would prefer and why?
• In particular, (as we discussed above) would an 'indefinite' tenancy approach be better and if so, why?

Time to bring a tenancy to an end (20 minutes)

At the moment a landlord must give you at least 28 days' notice if the tenancy has lasted for 4 months or less, and at least 40 days if it has lasted for longer than 4 months. The proposal is to continue to link the notice period with the length of tenancy, but to change the detail

(Circulate cards outlining arrangements)

5. What are your views on the notice period being linked to how long the tenant has lived in the property?

• What might be the pros and cons of this approach?
• If you would prefer an alternative approach, what would you like to see and why?

6. What are your views on the four proposed notice periods that landlords would have to give?

• What might be the pros and cons of this approach?
• If you would prefer an alternative approach, which ones would you like to see changed and how?

7. What are your views on the two proposed notice periods that tenants would have to give?

• What might be the pros and cons of this approach?
• If you would prefer an alternative approach, which one would you like to see changed and how?

Reasons for bringing a tenancy to an end (25 minutes)

Under the current arrangements there are 17 grounds under which a landlord can repossess their property. About half of these are mandatory - in other words, the court must give a possession order if the ground is proved. The rest are discretionary, which allow the Sherriff discretion to consider how reasonable the request is. All grounds need a sheriff's court order for the landlord to repossess the home. The proposal is to reduce the number of grounds for possession to eight, all of which will be mandatory.

One of the main proposals is to remove the 'No-fault' ground for repossession. Currently, a landlord may use this ground in order to reclaim their property simply because the tenancy term has ended. (Circulate cards outlining arrangements)

In any case (this will already be happening) if a landlord did wish to repossess their property and there was any disagreement cases would be considered by a PRS Tribunal rather than a sheriff.

8. What are your views on removing the 'No Fault' ground?

• Can you see any pros or cons to this approach?
• Does it seem to strike a fair balance between the rights of tenants and landlords?

9. What are your views on the suggestion that the (remaining) repossession grounds should be mandatory, in other words that a landlord should always be able to repossess their property if any of the final grounds applied?

• What do you like or dislike about this suggestion and why?
• If you do not agree with the suggested change, do you have any alternative ideas or suggestions?

10. What are your views on the 8 proposed grounds?

• Do they seem to strike a fair balance between the rights of tenants and landlords?
• Are there any you do not agree with? Why?
• Are there any others that should be there?

11. What are your views on reducing the landlord's notice period to 28 days if any of grounds 6, 7, or 8 applied?

• Again, do they seem to strike a fair balance?
• Should it apply to all 3 grounds, if you do not think so which ones should not be included and why?
• Are there any of the other 5 remaining grounds you think should be included?

* * *