Lord Kingsland, the Conservative spokesman in the House of Lords, agreed to table amendments put forward by the Federation. The BPF also briefed a regular group of supportive peers. However, Government Ministers took a determined stance that, having reached decisions on the form of the Bill, they were reluctant to accept any further amendments unless they proved to be politically or technically essential.
Consequently, the Bill did not complete its passage before Parliament was dissolved for the General Election. The Bill was reintroduced, with some additional provisions relating to leasehold houses and regulation of service charges. The Federation was successful in persuading the Government to accept the principles underlying .The Federation was amongst the organizations consulted on a draft of the Guidance, which it felt showed, a lack of understanding of how the lettings market worked.
and that if this conflicted with current practice, those practices would have to change. The BPF sought to ensure that its members were aware of the OFT Guidance and of the need to review their tenancy agreements in the light of the interpretation of the Regulations and the requirement that all contracts with consumers The Tenancy Deposit Scheme continued to gather strength and momentum through the year.
Ministers have agreed to extend the pilot for a further two years, with the intention of examining legislative options to ensure that ultimately all those taking deposits are subject to the same requirements. Being a first home buyer can be a stressful experience, our conveyancers will prepare property valuers Perth and make you stress free. There’s a number for help. A homeless person needs medical care. The Government consulted on its proposals to introduce legislation to permit selective licensing of private landlords in areas of low-demand, where the activities of some landlords was regarded as a major contributory factor to the social and economic problems there.
While the BPF had no difficulties with the proposed standards, it disagreed fundamentally with the policy, describing it as poorly conceived and probably unworkable, and criticized the consultation document as lacking intellectual rigor, assuming that the problem it sought to address was a consequence of poor housing and particular tenure arrangements, rather than a symptom of broader social and economic decline.