Landlord registration - review of applications and fees: consultation analysis

Part 1 – Prescribed information

23. The consultation document advised that when applying to be registered as a private landlord, applicants must provide certain personal information and limited information about property they rent out to tenants; this is referred to as 'prescribed information'. A person who applies to be registered must declare that the information included in the application is accurate and that they comply with other legal requirements relating to the letting of houses. The consultation proposed that applicants are required to confirm whether they comply with a number of specific requirements relating to letting houses. These are:

• Property meets standards that apply to it (i.e. the Tolerable Standard and the Repairing Standard).
• Property meets the specific requirements relating to gas, electrical and carbon monoxide safety.
• A current Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) exists for the property and is available to tenants.
• Property advertisements include details of the landlord registration status and EPC rating.
• Owners of flats within a tenement are aware of their responsibilities in relation to common repairs and have appropriate buildings insurance.
• Owners of houses in multiple occupation have a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) licence.
• Risk assessments for Legionnaire's disease have been undertaken and the findings acted upon as necessary.
• The implications of renting houses for mortgage, insurance and tax purposes are understood.
• Tenancy deposit protection is applied when a deposit is taken.

24. To help applicants understand the legal responsibilities relating to letting houses they will be signposted to information on the relevant standards, before being allowed to complete their application. Provision can be made to allow for applicants to say why a duty does not apply.

Expanding prescribed information

Q1: Do you think that landlords should have to confirm whether they comply with each of the requirements specified above?

Table 3: Question 1a

	Yes	No	Unsure	No reply	Total
Housing Association	7	1	-	-	8
Local Authority	29	-	1	-	30
Lettings / residential lettings / property management	15	8	-	-	23
Professional organisation	2	-	-	2	4
Representative organisation	5	-	-	-	5
Safety / risk	3	-	-	1	4
Tenants' interests / tenants / Residents group	3	-	-	-	3
Other (e.g. charities / health / professional organisations / manufacturer)	3	-	-	-	3
Individuals (96)	62	26	5	2	95
Self-identified landlords	30	29	5	-	64
Total (239)	159	64	11	5	239

25. As shown in Table 3, a majority of respondents (159) agreed and 64 disagreed that landlords should have to confirm whether they comply with each of the requirements specified in the consultation paper. While there was agreement across all organisation sub-groups, those in lettings / residential lettings / property management, housing associations, self-identified landlords and individuals were the only sub-groups where any respondents disagreed with this proposal.

26. Of those who identified themselves as landlords, views were split and almost equal numbers responded 'yes' and 'no' to this question.

27. Respondents were invited to explain their answer and 183, across all sub-groups, took the opportunity to comment.

28. The key theme from a large minority of respondents was that this will encourage landlords to comply with the requirements, ensure that the market has compliant landlords and helps landlords to understand their legal obligations. Smaller proportions also noted that this is reasonable, that it is good practice and will ensure a level playing field for all landlords or that landlords should be compliant in all aspects of the law. A small proportion also simply noted their agreement with the proposal.

29. As noted by an organisation in the tenants / residents group,

"[We are] supportive of expanding the range of requirements that landlords must confirm they comply with in connection with an application to register as a landlord. Setting out the individual components of the 'fit and proper person' test in this way will go some way to ensuring that landlords are fully aware of their responsibilities when it comes to letting out property."

30. A small proportion also commented that requirements for landlords need to be specific and clear, with clear guidance being provided, for example, offering links to relevant legislation or relevant websites.

31. Of the respondents who answered 'no' or 'unsure' to this question, a key focus was on the increased workloads for landlords that this would introduce, thus making the registration process more onerous and time consuming.

32. The consultation analysis also shows there were concerns around the enforcement of legislation, and comments made by a small proportion of respondents included that local authorities do not currently enforce penalties on landlords and of a need to have enforcement; or of the need to target rogue landlords who do not register.

33. A small number of respondents made suggestions for changes to the registration process. These included the need to have an effective online registration system; that it may be difficult to confirm specific requirements relating to gas, electrical and carbon monoxide safety within the registration process; or that matters relating to mortgage and tax should be of no concern to the registration process.

34. Other comments made by a very small proportion of respondents included:

• Landlords should already have this information to hand and it should be easy to confirm.
• Many dwellings are not compliant at present.
• This is important for accountability and transparency.
• Landlords should also be required to provide legal confirmation that they have complied with the necessary legislation and / or to provide evidence of this; or that certificates should be provided as proof of compliance.
• This will help to maintain standards of rented properties.
• Disagreement with the requirement for a Legionella risk assessment.
• Landlords of HMOs are governed by other legislation.
• This is unfair on landlords and should be extended to other types of rented property such as caravan sites and holiday homes.
• This will just be a tick box exercise.
• Agents should be allowed to complete this on behalf of landlords.
• Concern over bad tenants and suggestions for a tenant registration process.
• Local authorities do not have the required resources.
• This obligation is already placed upon landlords.
• EPCs should be scrapped as they are of little use.
• Exclude requirements for mortgage / tax information as this does not come under the law relating to housing or landlord and tenant law.
• There was a suggestion from some of the stakeholder events that the list should be separated to distinguish between information that is a "requirement" and information that is "advice".

35. All respondents who answered 'no' to Question 1a (whether landlords should have to confirm whether they comply with each of the requirements specified) were then asked which requirements they thought landlords should not have to confirm that they comply with. However, some of those who gave answers other than 'no' to Question 1 also answered Question 1b, and their comments have been included in the analysis.

Q1b: If not, which requirement(s) do you think landlords should not have to confirm that they comply with?

36. A total of 81 respondents opted to provide commentary in response to this question, a number of whom simply reiterated points made to the previous question. While a small proportion felt that the existing required level of detail is sufficient, a similar proportion felt that landlords should have to confirm they comply with all this information.

37. Specific requirements which respondents felt landlords should not have to confirm that they comply with included:

• EPC.
• Mortgage / loans / tax.
• Legionella assessment.
• Gas safety.
• Electrical safety.

38. Once again, comments made, each by a small proportion of respondents included reference to the need for enforcement of any requirements, comments on the need to deal with rogue landlords or that this approach would be overly burdensome to landlords.

39. A very small proportion of respondents noted that this is already done; a similar proportion said that it should be presumed that landlords comply with any requirements.

Q1c: Do you think that landlords should be required to provide evidence of compliance with any of the requirements specified above?

Table 4: Question 1c

	Yes	No	Unsure	No reply	Total
Housing Association	7	1	-	-	8
Local Authority	18	8	3	1	30
Lettings / residential lettings / property management	12	8	3	-	23
Professional organisation	-	1	1	2	4
Representative organisation	2	2	-	1	5
Safety / risk	2	1	-	1	4
Tenants' interests / tenants / Residents group	2	-	-	1	3
Other (e.g. charities / health / professional organisations / manufacturer)	2	-	1	-	3
Individuals	49	30	14	2	95
Self-identified landlords	23	31	9	1	64
Total (239)	117	82	31	9	239

40. As demonstrated in Table 4, a majority of respondents (117) felt that landlords should be required to provide evidence of compliance with any of the specified requirements, although a minority (82) disagreed with this proposal. Smaller proportions were unsure or did not provide an answer to this question. Among landlords specifically, more did not support this proposal than did (31 did not support this, compared to 23 who did). Some of those who gave answers other than 'no' to Question 1 also answered Question 1c, and their comments have been included in the analysis. Table 4 shows responses from all respondents.

41. A total of 179 respondents opted to provide further commentary in response to this question.

42. Two key themes emerged in response to this question, each cited by around a quarter of respondents. These were that this would create unnecessary paperwork and burden on landlords, or that this would create too much administration and / or cost for local authorities and impact on timescales. These two themes came primarily from respondents who had answered 'no' or 'unsure' to this question.

43. Smaller proportions of respondents, primarily organisations, suggested that local authorities should carry out random sample checks each year or that landlords should have to provide evidence if a complaint against them is made. As noted by an organisation in the lettings / residential lettings / property management sector which was supportive of the proposal,

"There is currently no requirement of a landlord to provide this information which is policed, the only current requirement being that it be provided to tenants for them to police it. Legislative requirements are not always understood by tenants and they are not qualified to make judgements on their own safety w.r.t. let property.
Particularly safety and tenancy sustainability requirements should be policed by civic authorities who generally have greater authority and competence when dealing with 'rogue, non-compliant' landlords failing to meet their Repairing Standard obligations."

44. A small proportion of respondents, primarily organisations, noted that evidence should be provided by landlords alongside their application form or that local authorities need to conduct checks of any required certification. A small proportion of respondents also noted that it can be difficult to provide evidence on compliance with the Tolerable and Repairing Standards and that some requirements do not qualify for certification. As one landlord commented, some of this information is already required through other legislation and some can be difficult to easily provide:

"Requirement for EPC is already covered as a requirement for advertising. LGSR is a legal requirement and an offence if not current. Presence of CO Alarm is covered under the LGSR. Submission and checking of other certificates (LGSR, EICR, PAT, LRA) would be an administration burden. Difficult to easily provide evidence re compliance with tolerable and repairing standards. The compliance against their requirements are better considered by FTT should a case be brought by a tenant."

45. Some respondents made suggestions for specific evidence that should be provided by landlords. This included electrical or PAT testing, gas safety certificates, EPCs, carbon monoxide safety and fire compliance.

46. Other comments, each made by a very small proportion of respondents, included:

• Queries over the process of reviewing evidence and what resources would be provided to local authorities.
• This should be carried out by letting agents where they are being employed by landlords.
• This will drive up registration costs.
• This will drive up rents for tenants (and disproportionately impact upon poorer tenants).
• It may lead to some landlords not registering or driving landlords with only a single or small number of properties out of the market.
• The need for checks to be proportionate.

47. Once again, small numbers of respondents referred to the need to deal with rogue landlords or commented that enforcement is needed.

48. At stakeholder events, there were a small number of additional suggestions. These included the introduction of a digital wallet for storage of relevant certificates; for checks to be carried out on a small sample of landlords to ascertain whether they have provided all the required information (i.e. checks to be proportionate); these checks might be initiated by a tenant complaint, or for applications to carry the caveat that the local authority may ask for evidence of compliance.

Q2: What other questions, if any, do you think should be included in an application for landlord registration?

49. Respondents were invited to offer suggestions for additional questions, and 140 did so. The key theme to emerge, from a very large minority of respondents across most sub-groups, was that no other questions should be included in an application for landlord registration and that plenty of information is already provided.

50. Some specific other questions to be included were suggested by a minority of respondents. These included:

• Details of any criminal convictions / CCJs.
• If a landlord has had any action taken against them by previous tenants.
• Whether a landlord has been refused registration.
• Relevant landlord insurance and proof that mortgage right-to-let has been granted / details of any standard security attached to the property.
• Ownership of the property e.g. owned outright / with mortgage etc.
• Gas safety.
• Electrical safety.
• Whether property complies with fire safety regulations.
• Other certification e.g. questions relevant to energy efficiency.
• Whether an agent is used and if the agent is registered with Government's Letting Agent Register.
• Private Residential Tenancy (PRT) was mentioned at stakeholder events.

51. Once again, a very small proportion of respondents referred to this as creating unnecessary paperwork and being too onerous on landlords.

52. A very small number of respondents referred to the usefulness of the landlord registration process as a means of gathering data to feed into government policy. As a representative organisation commented,

" …. Regulatory decisions about the private rented sector are currently based on very little data and the policies introduced are not being appropriately monitored. We would welcome voluntary questions for landlords to record the rent that the property is achieving, the length of tenure, size of property etc. This could be associated with a discount of say £5 or £10 to incentivise landlords providing the information."

Energy Performance Certificate Rating

53. The consultation paper noted that Scottish Ministers have powers under section 64 of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 to require the assessment of a property's energy performance, and for the owner to take action to improve the energy efficiency and environmental impact of a property. Scottish Ministers have confirmed that minimum energy efficiency standards will be introduced. To support the enforcement of the minimum standards, once introduced, applicants could be asked to provide information on the EPC rating of a property when confirming there is an EPC.

Q3: If a minimum energy efficiency standard linked to an EPC rating is introduced, do you think that landlords should be asked to provide the domestic EPC rating for property?

Table 5: Question 3

	Yes	No	Don't know	No reply	Total
Housing Association	8	-	-	-	8
Local Authority	24	4	2	-	30
Lettings / residential lettings / property management	12	9	2	-	23
Professional organisation	1	1	-	2	4
Representative organisation	4	-	1	-	5
Safety / risk	1	-	1	2	4
Tenants' interests / tenants / Residents group	3	-	-	-	3
Other (e.g. charities / health / professional organisations / manufacturer)	3	-	-	-	3
Individuals	50	30	14	1	95
Self-identified landlords	27	29	8	-	64
Total	133	73	28	5	239

54. As Table 5 demonstrates, a majority of respondents (133) agreed that landlords should be asked to provide the domestic Asbno rating for property, compared to 73 who disagreed. Small numbers of respondents provided an 'unsure' response (28) or did not reply (5). Across organisations, the highest level of disagreement came from those in the lettings / residential lettings / property management sub-group. Of those self-identifying as landlords, views were evenly split between those who were supportive and those who were not.

55. Respondents were invited to explain their answer and 172 took the opportunity to comment.

56. A minority of respondents commented that the EPC rating is already provided when a property is advertised. A similar proportion noted their general agreement with the proposal in that it will ensure compliance with legislation and would be a useful document to provide. A smaller proportion noted this would be useful to help potential tenants make an informed decision on the cost of utilities or that tenants should be able to decide whether a property might be cheap or expensive to heat.

57. However, a small proportion also felt that this is of no benefit to tenants as they will not base their decision to rent a property on the EPC or that they would choose a property because they like it.

58. A small proportion of respondents commented that legislation is about to change and that the impact on the private rental sector (PRS) needs to be measured accurately and that an EPC will be needed to show that a landlord is meeting the requirements of this new legislation.

59. A small proportion of respondents commented that there is an existing EPC database and that this should be used to assist with the registration process.

60. Other comments, each made by a very small proportion of respondents, included:

• This is not relevant.
• This will add to the cost of the registration process.
• This would be of no benefit to the landlord.
• This is not a safety issue for tenants.
• An EPC is not required when letting property through local authorities or housing associations.
• Tenants need to know the energy efficiency rating of a property.
• This will provide local authorities with an indication of the condition of the housing stock.
• This would be useful for data gathering purposes.
• Providing evidence of compliance will speed up the registration process and reduce the time and cost of the application process.
• This will encourage landlords to invest in their properties.
• A tax break should be offered to landlords to help offset costs or the Scottish Government should incentivise energy performance.
• Some older properties do not meet EPC ratings.
• The efficacy of EPCs is limited as many are based on assumptions of limited value or that they do not provide realistic information and can be misleading.
• This would be administratively cumbersome for local authorities.
• Landlords should have to provide information on why a property does not meet the minimum required standard.
• This could be difficult to manage in rural and remote areas; there should be a distinction between rural and urban private rental sectors.
• Queries on who will check the rating.
• The system needs to be able to recognise exemptions.

Miscellaneous amendments to prescribed information

Contact information

61. The consultation paper stated that in order to clarify and streamline the registration process, one option would be to amend the legislation so that only the applicant's home address and a correspondence address are required. The latter would be the address that anyone searching the register can use to contact the landlord and that local authorities could use to send out information to the landlord. An applicant can specify what address they want correspondence sent to and the online application allows an applicant to nominate a different address for individual properties.

Q4: Do you think that the applicants should only be required to provide a home address and a correspondence address?

Table 6: Question 4

	Yes	No	Don't know	No reply	Total
Housing Association	6	2	-	-	8
Local Authority	19	9	2	-	30
Lettings / residential lettings / property management	14	7	2	-	23
Professional organisation	2	-	-	2	4
Representative organisation	3	1	1	-	5
Safety / risk	1	-	1	2	4
Tenants' interests / tenants / Residents group	1	1	-	1	3
Other (e.g. charities / health / professional organisations / manufacturer)	2	1	-	-	3
Individuals	71	17	6	1	95
Self-identified landlords	39	12	11	2	64
Total	158	50	23	8	239

62. As shown in Table 6, a majority of respondents (158), across all sub-groups, were supportive of this proposal, whilst 50 were not supportive. Higher proportions of those who self-identified as landlords were supportive of this proposal than those who were not.

63. A total of 123 respondents opted to provide additional commentary to this question. A large minority of respondents generally agreed with the proposal; reasons given included that this will help to clarify and streamline the registration process. One local authority commented that …

"Landlords have ultimate responsibility for their property, even when employing an agent. Landlords should be aware of the need for local authorities to reach them regarding their property if required. If an Agent is used they must be registered and their details provided too. Both a correspondence and a home address should be required. The ability to highlight which address to contact for in relation to each property is a good function to have to allow flexibility as stated in the example …."

64. Another theme that emerged from a minority of respondents was that if a landlord is paying to use an agency, then all communication should be via the agency.

65. Data protection was clearly an issue for some respondents, with comments that personal information should not be made public and of a need to protect landlords' private details or that only a correspondence address should be provided to allow for privacy to be maintained. This issue received greater prominence from individuals than organisations. A very small number of respondents also queried whether this proposal breaches GDPR or data protection legislation. Alongside the issue of data protection, a very small proportion of respondents commented that it can be dangerous to give a landlord's home address to some tenants.

66. Some respondents referred to other types of information that should be provided, and these included:

• A telephone number.
• A home address, a correspondence address and a contact address.
• An email / online address.
• Home address for registration details and a correspondence address which could be an agent.
• There should be an option to use a business address.
• A UK-based address for overseas landlords or mandatory use of an agent for non-UK based landlords.

67. Very small numbers of respondents commented that the provision of a home address allows for tenants and contractors to be able to contact a landlord directly and that there will be instances where this direct contact will be necessary. One organisation queried how the registration system will deal with institutional investors who are likely to lease their properties to another company which in turn then leases to the tenants.

Other contact details

68. The consultation paper noted that applicants are not currently required to provide an email address (unless they are using the online system), a home telephone number or mobile telephone number. Local authorities can post correspondence using the address provided by the landlord but it is often more convenient to contact landlords by email or phone.

Q5: Do you think that applicants should be required to provide an email address, home and mobile phone number (if they have one)?

Table 7: Question 5

	Yes	No	Don't know	No reply	Total
Housing Association	7	1	-	-	8
Local Authority	26	2	-	2	30
Lettings / residential lettings / property management	12	9	2	-	23
Professional organisation	2	-	-	2	4
Representative organisation	3	-	2	-	5
Safety / risk	1	-	1	2	4
Tenants' interests / tenants / Residents group	2	-	1	-	3
Other (e.g. charities / health / professional organisations / manufacturer)	3	-	-	-	3
Individuals	64	23	7	1	95
Self-identified landlords	30	23	8	3	64
Total	150	58	21	10	239

69. As demonstrated in Table 7, there was majority support across all sub-groups for this proposal, with agreement from 150 respondents and disagreement from 58. A slightly larger proportion of self-identified landlords supported this proposal than did not.

70. Respondents were invited to provide commentary in support of this response and 129 opted to do so. The key comment was general support for the proposal; for example, comments that as many contact details as possible should be provided or that this will increase communication channels. Suggestions for flexibility within the system were mentioned by a small number of respondents.

71. Only a very small proportion noted their disagreement with this proposal, for example, that this is not required or that it will increase bureaucracy.

72. Again, the issue of data privacy was raised by respondents - a minority of respondents commented that the register managed by the local authority should contain this information but that it should not be available to the general public. A smaller proportion also referred specifically to data protection or GDPR and concerns that this may counteract data protection legislation. An organisation in the lettings / residential lettings / property management sub-group referred to GDPR legislation introduced in May 2018 and noted;

"No specific reference is made to GDPR compliance in the consultation document. In the absence of a legally compliant privacy notice, and more specific details of how the Scottish Government and local authorities plan to store and manage the private data of landlords, there should be no mandatory requirement to provide email addresses, mobile numbers etc."

73. Some respondents commented specifically on different types of information that could be provided, with various comments on the provision of an email address; some of these noted that email offers various advantages over other types of information, such as speed or transparency, that an email address is most appropriate or simply that it is a better means of contacting a landlord. A small number suggested that a mobile number should be provided alongside an email address or that a phone number should be provided alongside an email address but that this phone number should be the choice of the landlord.

74. A small number of respondents commented that phone numbers are less appropriate than email addresses or that a landlord should not have to provide any form of phone number. That said, a very small proportion also noted that a local authority should use the postal service to contact landlords or that some landlords preferred the local authority to use the postal service. This latter comment was made by individuals.

75. A small proportion of respondents commented that it should be the choice of the landlord as to what channel of information is used; and a very small number noted that not all landlords will have an email address or mobile phone number.

76. Other comments, each made by a very small proportion of respondents, included:

• Landlords should have to provide at least one option.
• An email address should be compulsory.
• Landlords should have to provide at least one phone number.
• An agent's details should be provided if a landlord is using an agent.
• It will be difficult to keep the website up-to-date because of changing phone numbers.
• There should be a messaging system offered for reminders and other information.
• This will help to reduce the administrative burden and cost for local authorities.

77. Very small numbers of respondents made comments regarding the website and these included:

• The new system introduced only asks for mobile phone numbers and that it would be useful to be able to provide more than one phone number.
• The website needs to be working effectively.