Rented Sector Reform: Island Communities Impact Screening Assessment

Consultation

A New Deal for Tenants - draft strategy: consultation^[38] carried out in early 2022 invited views on a range of proposals for delivering A New Deal for Tenants. This aims to ensure all tenants, whether living in private or social rented homes, can access secure, stable, tenancies, with affordable choices – whilst also benefiting from good quality of homes and professional levels of service and rights. A number of these proposals are being progressed further as part of this Bill. Analysis of the consultation^[39] was published in August 2022. A number of responses highlighted the following challenges in relation to island/rural communities.

In respect of agricultural/crofting/tied worker tenancies - many comments focused on the importance of the early provision of advice and support. The other main theme raised related to priority for social housing. There was broad agreement that those facing the loss of tied accommodation should have priority for social housing, and it was noted that this is a particular issue in remote, rural and island communities.

On proposals to take forward a clarification in relation to the use of the ‘Landlord intends to use for non-residential purpose’ eviction ground - supporting comments included that the growth of short-term lets has come at the expense of housing supply and the housing needs of local residents and tenants. There was particular reference to the Highlands and Islands and Arran (as well as Edinburgh).

On wider supply issues, comments included that policy and funding should focus on the provision of more affordable housing in rural Scotland. The Rural and Islands Housing Action Plan was referenced as this aims to support rural repopulation and will provide an opportunity to bring together policy and funding to enable a significant increase in new rural affordable homes.

On the role of Build to Rent, in terms of financial returns from such projects it was suggested that challenges are likely to be particularly significant in rural areas. Respondents referred to higher building costs in remote rural and island areas.

In relation to social rented housing allocation, respondents suggested that in areas of socio-economic fragility more consideration could be given to how allocations could assist those who are seeking a home within the social sector, beyond those with key worker status. The connection was made to the repopulation of remote rural and island communities.

On skills and supply chain challenges, some respondents suggested a specific Rural Homes Just Transition Package could recognise the distinct challenges and opportunities in rural, remote and island communities.

Building on previous consultation work through Housing to 2040^[40] and ‘A New Deal for Tenants: Draft Strategy Consultation’^[41], the Scottish Government launched a questionnaire in September 2023 asking private and social rented sector landlords and tenants closed questions on rental sector reform to inform development of legislation to deliver A New Deal for Tenants^[42] through a Housing Bill. The questionnaire was accompanied by a paper on the current proposals^[43]. Stakeholders were also invited to take part in a series of discussion groups on the same topics to provide additional qualitative insights. Two discussion groups were held.

In total 6,650 questionnaire responses were received and the largest respondent groups were private landlords (accounting for 44% of respondents) and private tenants (accounting for 29% of respondents)^[44]. Other points to note are that:

• 48% of all respondents came from the four groups with a landlord perspective (private landlord, private landlord organisation, social landlord and social landlord organisation).
• 33% of all respondents came from the four groups with a tenant perspective (private tenant, private tenant organisation, social tenant and social tenant organisation).

Analysis^[45] of the questionnaire responses and discussion group findings were divided by key subject areas, as follows:

Rent Control

Respondents were divided on a number of the issues. 59% of those answering thought that rent control should be universally applied across Scotland and 41% that it should be introduced on a local basis where assessment shows there is a need. Private and social tenants tended to favour the universal approach, and private landlords and landlord organisations generally supported rent control being introduced on a local basis.

Where restrictions on rent increases are being applied, 58% of those answering thought they should apply to both sitting tenants and in between tenancies, while the remaining 42% thought they should apply to sitting tenants only. Private and social tenants tended to favour restrictions applying to both sitting tenants and in-between tenancies, while private landlords and landlord organisations in particular supported restrictions for sitting tenants only.

However, a clear majority, 80% of those answering the question, agreed that, if rent controls in a rent control area apply both within and between tenancies, the first rent increase in a tenancy should be possible at any point after the start of the tenancy, provided that at least 12 months has passed since the rent was last increased during the previous tenancy.

Greater protections during the eviction process

A majority (59% of those answering the question) either strongly agreed or agreed that, in the private sector, the Tribunal should be required to consider whether it is reasonable to delay the enforcement of an eviction at any time of year. This rose to 98% of PRS tenants. However, 67% of PRS landlords either disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Keeping a pet (PRS)

A majority of respondents, 63% of those answering the question, agreed that private tenants should have a right to request to keep a pet and should not be unreasonably refused. A substantial majority of PRS tenants supported the introduction of the right, while a majority of PRS landlords did not.

Making changes to let property

A majority of respondents, 75% of those answering the question, agreed that some small changes (for example putting up pictures and posters) should not require consent. While a substantial majority of PRS and SRS tenants agreed with the proposal, PRS and SRS landlords were evenly divided on this issue. A majority of respondents, 70% of those answering the question, also agreed that other bigger changes can be requested and not unreasonably refused. Although a substantial majority of PRS and SRS tenants agreed, a majority of PRS landlords disagreed.

Unclaimed tenancy deposits

Respondents were asked about five potential uses for any unclaimed deposits that have been transferred to the Scottish Government. Overall, respondents were most likely to strongly agree that any unclaimed funds should be used on the prevention of homelessness from the PRS. A majority also strongly agreed or agreed with providing advice, information and assistance to private tenants and with assisting private tenants to exercise their rights.

Ending a joint tenancy

On the proposals relating to ending a joint tenancy, a substantial majority of respondents, 87% of those answering the question, agreed that the notice period which the departing joint tenant must give to the other joint tenants should be two months. A clear majority in all groups agreed with the proposal, although at a lower level for private landlord and private landlord organisations, at 76% and 74% respectively.

Social Rented Sector proposals

A majority of respondents, 76% of those answering the question, agreed that social housing tenants should have a right to request to keep a pet and not be unreasonably refused. While 100% of SRS tenants supported the introduction of the right, a small majority of SRS landlords did not. In relation to greater protections during the eviction process, a majority (69%) either strongly agreed or agreed that, in the social sector, the court should be required to consider whether it is reasonable to delay the enforcement of an eviction at any time of year. This rose to 100% of SRS tenants. However, a small majority of SRS landlords, 54% of those answering the question, either disagreed or strongly disagreed.

A substantial majority of respondents, 83% of those answering the question, agreed with the proposal to amend social housing pre-action requirements. A majority of respondents in all groups agreed, although there were considerable variations in the levels of that agreement. At one end of the spectrum, a very substantial majority of private and social tenants, and those in the ‘None of the above’ or ‘None selected’ groups, agreed, with support ranging from 98% to 100%. However, at the other end of the spectrum, only 53% of social landlords agreed, although the level of agreement was higher among social landlord organisations, at 75%.