Tag Archives: property management

Current Property news: Increased Student fees biting deep for Student Landlords.

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

I guess everybody wondered what the effect of the new style Student fees would have and reports have abounded supporting both sides of the fence. What cannot be denied are hard facts and in Stafford there is no doubt that Students have looked differently for their accommodation needs and because of the reduction in numbers, several Landlords have found themselves with no takers for their Student accommodation.

Change of use.

Of course at this time of year it is clear if nobody has come forward yet, then they are hardly likely too for the academic year that has just started and I have had three difficult conversations with Landlords about what options they have in their properties at present. Of course change to family let has been the recommendation on each occasion, but strangely this problem has not occurred in what we have found this year.

No vacancies!

We manage a large purpose built block in Stafford with 68 rooms spread between 14 flats. Our numbers are slightly down on last year, but have held up far better when compared to what seems to be happening in the traditional Houses of Multiple Occupation. Why? Well the cost is less and a Warden is present as well as private room and en-suite facilities. Add its location next door to the main Stafford College and perhaps we have the answers. But because our occupation is still high this is why I suggest they have looked at the market differently.

Market forces.

No doubt there has been a reduction in numbers, because most Student Landlords would manage the property themselves, so if we have seen three empty houses, the Town probably has two dozen! This would represent a marked drop in the overall Student accommodation requirement. But I am also convinced that quality is starting to play a hand as well and it is Market Forces that is driving demand as students search harder for value for money.

Still need for change.

Of course, none of this assists the Landlords of houses that are still empty now, especially if they are looking to move back to Students next year! Some requirements for the general market just do not sit with a more traditional ‘Family’ let. (Not to mention furniture which is hardly ever the best and rarely matching?) Locks on bedroom doors, fire blankets, Card Meters! All of these are better removed and of course rarely can that be done without affecting appearances. But worst of all, that dreaded style of decoration, woodchip wallpaper!

Back to market forces.

I was present in a property yesterday which was very well presented, but had to be honest with Landlords who were already going to see quite a drop in monthly income, from three students to a Family in a 1st floor flat, my advice had to be based on the property they were competing with! Small properties with three types of carpet that can all be seen from most of the rooms will not be well received when judged against the common fashion of using the same carpet throughout. It is comparing against other property that has to be the benchmark.

Conclusion.

The bottom line is in most cases lots of improvements need to be made and cost is always going to be an issue, but to then change back again is going to be a double whammy as for example, hardly anybody has storage room for furniture and would therefore have to buy new. Ironically it could be that very change that might attract Students in a market being driven by services and quality as I believe it now is. Either way, tired or poor accommodation will continue to struggle and the next two years could be a very hard challenge as more Students drop off after three years and the intake continues to fall!

Share

Property Landlord advice: High Tenant fees coming home to roost?

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

There is an article in this week’s Property Drum on page 8 that has caught my eye as one of the chain of Letting Agents who have had to address issues in Scotland have commented upon the Shelter campaign surrounding the removal of Tenant fees. I would have to say I agree with  some of what they say, but I disagree with the main thrust of their argument.

Explaining the group.

First, to place some context behind what I wish to say about the subject, I need to explain where the difference lays between Martin & Co offices and Castle Estates offices, because we both have a Franchising background, but now Castle Estates is an independent group who share the same name, but operate entirely independently of each other and have no central controlling Head Office. Martin & Co remain a Franchising organisation where centre influence and dictate the policy of the group.

Comments are my own.

 Therefore I am commenting as an Independent Castle Estates in Staffordshire and not as the Head of an organisation in the same light as Sue Hopson, head of standards at Martin & Co is doing. As far as Castle Estates offices are concerned, if they operate in a manner I disagree with, then they are also the target of my comments.

Agreement.

Firstly I must say that the whole idea of dropping Tenant fees altogether as is the case in Scotland does not just move costs from the Tenant to the Landlord, for just as sure as Landlords will have to pay for the costs generated, these costs will be offset by increases in rent. Then, as has always been the case, market forces will drive rent levels to their correct rate. But they will start from and therefore remain at a higher level.

Major factor missed.

What the comments miss are the manner in which many Agents and I am not referring to anybody specifically when I say this, reduce Landlord fees and raise Tenant fees so they can market themselves as a cheap Agent in to Landlords in the first place! This is a short sighted policy and will surely attract the attention of such groups as Shelter and the CAB who have been looking at Tenants fees for well over ten years.

Bad practise.

In a market where the number of offices offering Letting services has probably doubled in the last three years as Estate Agents flooded to the Lettings Industry for financial reasons, the opportunity to advertise services to Landlords at low prices at the expense of the Tenants has seemed to much of an opportunity to miss for some. But the short sightedness of such an approach should Tenant fees be scrapped in England will need to be explained to Landlords and of course all of us will have to do this, not just those who overcharge.

Long term practise.

It is also a fact that high Tenant fees are nothing new and I have no problem in pointing the finger at Estate Agents who historically have been the main protagonists of this practise. Do I have Tenant fees? Yes, but they have hardly changed in over twelve years and I am happy to justify them, as I have done before now, to any Tenant coming through our system.

Inevitable?

Unless our Industry receives the backing of the Government in driving through legislation to ensure professional standards are upheld by all Letting Agencies, or they can no longer operate, then I believe the day will come when Tenant charges are dropped altogether justified or not, because those with this objective will always be able to point at practises that take advantage of Tenants where fees are concerned. But equally, as I have pointed out that from my own perspective I speak for my own office only, anybody else speaking on the subject should not ignore the current practise of high charges and should be able to ensure that offices under their control can justify what they charge Tenants as well!

Share

Property Landlords advise: Finding drugs in rented property.

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

Like all good Letting Agents, we carry out property visits to ensure that our Tenants are looking after the home and living in line with their Tenancy agreement. We are used to looking for evidence of unofficial Tenants, would easily spot any Tenant growing cannabis, but have found a property we manage used for the storage of drugs and that has proven to discover what the house is being used for in these circumstances is a big challenge.

First indication.

The first we knew of a problem at the house was a phone call from the local CID advising us they had suspicions concerning activity of a house in a quiet country location. This was both a heads up but also a request to allow them to go about their business following a raid at the property. They later confirmed that drugs and a large amount of money had been found and seized from the house.

Information.

This was followed up with a visit to our offices where they gathered information about the Tenant, rent payments and our knowledge of what was happening at the property. We were able to supply information which we believe was of use and hand over keys to avoid any further damage and ensure the house was securely locked.

Property inspection.

A week later, with the knowledge that little damage had been caused and confirmation from the police that the house had not been abused and was in good order, we were able to visit the property and officially check out the Tenant at their request and see for ourselves just how the drugs had been stored.

Fridge Freezers.  

Now forgive me, but I have no knowledge of how and where drugs can be stored, but as soon as we opened the fridge and freezer doors, it became evident just what the appliances had been used for. The issue for us was that we had been to carry out a property visit some two months prior and because the house was being looked after and all was clean, as you would expect, we had no indication of the problem. Because the appliances belonged to the Tenant, we would also have no intention of looking in the fridges to check how they were being used. But as soon as we opened them now, even though they had long been emptied, the smell was overpowering!

Systems.

This situation, which is subject of a review of our practises as I write this, is a warning for us all. We have no right to open fridges, washing machines, cupboards and draws or look in boxes, cases or even envelopes that are the property of the Tenant and nobody would expect us to. Cooker yes, because that is always the property of the Landlord, but we need to be aware of the possibility, for if nothing else, this incident has, to say the least, sharpened our focus.

Aftermath.

 Thankfully, the Tenant who is obviously the subject of ongoing Police enquiries (about which this is not the place to comment) was most co-operative and the property will be marketed again without delay. What we must do is build safeguards in to our system, without over-reacting to what has happened, that will ensure we keep our eyes open at all times to possible signs and the Police have been most helpful in discussing the matter with us. What it has proven though, is that ensuring a house is used for its correct permitted usage, remains as difficult as ever!

Share

Current property News: Montague report offers the Key for growth? Part 2

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

In looking at the second part of the Review of the Barriers to Institutional Investment in private Rented Homes, I have read and will comment on the sections headlined; The Barriers and Conclusion and The Recommendations.

 The Barriers.

 Most of these sections concentrate on the land and planning permission needs, but do refer to some rather confusing detail. Such as that Management costs are as high as 30% for Residential property. Now I know that National Companies specialise in offering services for Companies with large property portfolios, but when you consider the normal cost for Management on a local level would average at 10%, I find it difficult to see how this rises to 30% when managing from afar.

 Total Costs.

 I may of course be wrong, but it rather looks as though it is the cost of maintaining the property that has been added to the running costs, however, as the report confirms that it is normally Capitol growth that is considered to be the income from residential and not the rental income, whereas with Commercial investment it is the opposite way round. Surely then, if Commercial values drop over time, the cost of maintenance should be offset against Capitol growth and it is both that should be considered, as they are real income, when comparing residential to Commercial? Is this where encouraging Tax breaks can be made?

 Local market.

 Otherwise, once again, local Management will answer the cost issue, rather than distance Management having to find a local Agent to carry out the role of providing a Tenant, let the Local agent be the sole property Manager. Costs halved? – probably!

Lack of Experience.

The report then states that there is a lack of experience in knowing how any scheme would operate. But this does not exist in the market place; rather this confirms that in compiling the report, the Property Management Industry has not been approached. A fact confirmed by the later statement in Recommendation Five: that the market would benefit from; the professionalism of the management service. Had the Industry been spoken with (also confirmed in the Terms of Reference) then Sir Adrian Montague would have been aware that one already exists.

Right Model.

I also believe that the right model already exists as well. There are numerous professional Letting agents, who also operate as Property Managers as well, looking after leasehold sites (Block Management) throughout the UK. Providing that any incentives in profitability and land availability are made available Nationwide and providing there exists Agents with the ability to run both, then costs can be controlled, the whole Industry will benefit and progress can be made throughout the UK.

Professional Management.

But I believe that this is another opportunity for the Government to change their attitudes towards the rental sector, which is growing at the same speed home ownership for individuals is declining giving a thriving rental sector the opportunity to be part of the growth if not the very reason for it, that this country desperately needs. Tied with ensuring the Industry moves forward in a professional self managed, or Government managed (although I believe this is where the lack of motivation currently exists) manner, ensuring the scheme meets all the requirements listed in this report and that the properties concerned will continue to give the profitable long term return institutional investors require.

Share

Tenant advice: Trust in your Agent.

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

The question of Tenants being able to trust their Agent, or knowing that the Agent they are about to do business through is one that can be trusted has shown itself in differing ways this week. There is a great difference between the two and again, as happens so often in our relationships with Tenants, it is the need for Tenants to understand why decisions are made that matters.

Firstly, from a professional viewpoint, in a Blog that I penned earlier this week, it is clear that as an industry we need to keep banging the drum about the standards that we as professional Agents sign up to. By being a member of a professional body, in our case ARLA we are showing the standards that we operate to and confirming that monies are protected both in the manner in which we run our business and the audit checks we are subject to, in order to retain our membership. SafeAgent, the kite mark adopted and marketed to further give proof of client money protection and standards should go hand in hand.

In short, if an Agent does not belong to either (Other professional bodies such as NALS and of course RICS are of course acceptable) especially SafeAgent, then as a Tenant or Landlord I would ask why not?

Then there is the day to day life of being an Agent where we are subject to the wrath of the Tenants and prospective Tenants if matters do not develop how they wish.  These so often include either being turned down for property because of being in receipt of Housing Benefit payments and the most common one, having a pet. Not forgetting of course, retention of deposits!

The detail behind the reasons when housing Benefit payments are involved are of course individual in every case, but what is always common, is that payments are made in arrears and in 13 four weekly instalments. Set this against normal monthly payments in advance and then add the difficulty created by the Council stopping payments without any consultation with us as Agents and knowing just how long it can take for payments to start again and it is not difficult to see why we do not need to recommend this situation to our Landlords.

Again in short, legally, we have to give best advice to our Landlords at all times!

Pets in houses are another long topic. Again, each situation is different, but the standards set by some pet owners damage the hopes of so many others that we cannot ignore them. Even without bad management, pets can leave an unwanted legacy, we have had too many instances of fleas up to a year after cats have vacated a property not to ignore the possibility! It is difficult to get an x Tenant to pay for carpet cleaning after they have left, so carpet cleaning becomes a must if any pet is involved.

The point I wish to make is what I have written is not unusual, and any potential Tenant affected by either scenario will have heard this and more. But those with qualifications and affiliations with professional bodies probably, by nature of how they prepare their staff, will have a better understanding of how to manage the situation and can therefore be better relied upon to look after Tenants interests and give them the ‘Duty of Care’ they deserve!

Deposits are an altogether more complicated process now, but in dealing with issues left by Tenants and confirming the payments required to correct those issues, the excuses given at times scream that the Tenants involved have no faith whatsoever in how we go about our business when, if affiliated, as discussed above, we have been trained, have years of experience and know exactly what we can and cannot claim for.

In all cases, if we are wrong, the decision is made through arbitration. We prove our case and judgement is made. If an Agent loses a case through arbitration (and here I can only speak for the Castle Estates offices) it is usually because the case was badly prepared and paperwork let them down, rather than because they were making a false claim. Membership of organisations such as ARLA and schemes such as SafeAgent should enforce this view with Tenants.

The fact they do not means more needs to be done to gain trust as an industry, more needs to be done to further the name of professional bodies (Here comes the drum) and the Government needs to get involved and introduce the legislation confirming the fact and introducing the correct level of penalty for those who operate outside of legislation. In the meantime, look for the symbols of professional membership they all have back up, but more importantly, what they stand for is professional intent!

Share

Property Landlord advice: Why Manage privately if you would not sell privately?

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

As a professional Letting Agent I have always believed that Landlords should use professional Agents to look after their property, these excerpts are from a similar view for Estate Agents and I am repeating them in full to show just how they compare. There are of course many more reasons once a property has been rented for using professionals in their trade, but the reasoning used here in developing a sale cross over very well and I believe make the case better than being adopted specifically for rentals.

Security: Would you normally let a complete stranger wander round your house? A good estate agent will always ensure the correct identity of a prospective buyer prior to viewing.

Credentials: An agent will also establish the ability of the buyer to proceed, following up any chain if necessary. Too many buyers say they are “cash”, only for the seller to discover down the line that the buyer has a property to sell and a mortgage to arrange. Agents are familiar with the many red herrings used by unscrupulous or naive buyers and can quickly sort the panel beaters from the embroiderers.

Viewings: One of the most misunderstood aspects of the sales process is the way in which viewings are conducted. Of course you want to sell your house, but there is a lot of psychology involved here. Anything you say, as a seller, is clearly biased and not based on helping the buyer to understand how your property could fit their needs, because you don’t know the buyer nor do you have any knowledge of their preferences. If anything you could put your foot in it. Many sellers try too hard to sell on a first viewing and distract the buyer with irrelevancies like how the boiler works. A first viewing is simply about the buyer thinking “could I be happy here?” A good agent will explore the property with the buyer’s needs in mind.

Valuation: Vendors are notoriously optimistic when it comes to valuing their property (as are certain agents of course, but that’s another story). The price you paid for your home, the amount you spent on it, the amount you need for your next purchase and the amount you need to cover your commitments are sadly all completely unrelated to the value of your property. In fact, whatever some agents and even surveyors might tell you, even the apparent “evidence” of what has sold nearby can be misleading. Buyers buy by comparison, so your property has to look good in relation to what is currently available for sale. It might appear to be an easy exercise to assess these competing homes, but only an agent knows why these properties have failed to sell. If you simply follow the apparent market then you are likely to end up on the same heap. The most damaging thing would be to allow your property to go stale on the market as it is likely not only to take some time to sell, but will probably end up selling for less than it could have achieved had it been correctly priced from the outset.

In view of the above it is little wonder that there is very little appetite for private sales in the UK especially in view of the relatively small amount of commission British estate agents earn in relation to their counterparts virtually everywhere else on Earth. Whilst there will always be tales of someone who did a great job privately these are certainly the exception to the rule.

My question having read and compared the clauses with our Industry is why the appetite for private rentals IS still so strong? Most problems arise once a Tenancy has started and it is mainly by getting one of the aspects listed wrong in the first place! The problem being that it usually remains undiscovered until later in the Tenancy, when problems arise. Then is the time that Landlords have to deal with the issue professionally and within current legislation and unless they are qualified and I obviously accept that many Landlords are either by design or experience, this is the time that mistakes can be made, but I would venture that there are far more properties under the Management of amateur Landlords than bad Agents! Furthermore, when the Agents are either with a professional body or members of schemes such as TPO then the standard of service must rise dramatically.

P.S The picture with this post is meant to raise a smile, I trust you were able to do just that!

Share

TPO Explained

Posted on by

By Mike Edwards

What is TPO?

 The Property Ombudsman scheme has been offering a free, independent and impartial dispute resolution service to consumers who are dissatisfied with the service provided by registered firms for more than 20 years. If a dispute is resolved in the consumer’s favour, the Ombudsman can provide redress to place the consumer back in the position they occupied before the complaint arose. Resolutions are designed to achieve a full and final settlement of the dispute and all claims made by either party. Where appropriate, the Ombudsman can make compensatory awards in individual cases up to a maximum of £25,000 for actual and quantifiable loss and / or for aggravation, distress and inconvenience caused by the actions of a registered firm.

 Independence

 Whilst TPO charges registered firms an annual subscription, the Ombudsman reports to the TPO Council, the majority of which is made up of non-industry members. It is the Council who appoints the Ombudsman and sets his Terms of Reference (i.e. how the complaint process operates). The Ombudsman is required to report to the Council on a regular basis.

 The Ombudsman is not a regulator and does not have the authority to take regulatory or legal action against a registered firm. However, registered firms can be referred to the TPO Disciplinary and Standards Committee, appointed by the Council, which has the power to expel firms from the scheme and / or report them to the Office of Fair Trading, which has the power to ban firms from carrying out estate agency business.

 TPO is a member of the British and Irish Ombudsman Association (BIOA).

 Membership

 At June 1, 2012, more than 21,770 offices were registered with TPO. This figure includes 11,749 sales offices and 9,301 lettings offices. TPO estimates that these figures represented 93% of sales agents and 64% of lettings agents operating within the UK.

 Further information

The Ombudsman’s Terms of Reference, the Codes of Practice, Consumer Guides and other documents about the operation of the scheme are available at www.tpos.co.uk, together with previous annual and interim reports, further explanation of governance arrangements and a full list of registered firms.

 

Share

Property Landlord advice: The responsibility for Tenants in rented leasehold property.

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

It is strange how issues worthy of writing about as far as Block Management are concerned have been somewhat thin on the ground and then within the space of two weeks several matters arise which  are worthy of note. This time it is the question of Fire and Health and Safety information in a block of leasehold flats.

The Story.

What happened here is we received a letter from the Fire Brigade, telling us of a call out they had received from a resident at a block that we manage because an alarm was set off over the bank holiday weekend. The problem here was that the letter was accompanied by an invoice for a wrongful call out, effectively billing the site for wasting the Fire Brigade’s time. A fine in effect, which they priced at (and no doubt the courts would uphold) £500.00.

The Impact.

We phoned the Landlord, who self manages the flat (looking after the Tenant themselves) and informed them that their Tenant had failed to read the notice displayed on the ground floor, or that the Landlord when moving somebody in had failed to point out the correct procedure, which clearly stated that when the alarm sounded, the first person to contact was our service providers Chubb Fire. This was the mechanism put in place to ensure the Fire Brigade were not called out as a false alarm.

The Responsibility.

As I have confirmed here, it is not our role to advise sub-let Tenants how the site runs. Their contract is with the Landlord and his agent and that is clearly where the legal duty lies. But this was not the reason given as why the Tenant did not deal with the incident in the manner instructed. Rather because they were Polish they were unable to understand or read clearly the instructions. I will leave aside the course of action any Landlord should take in ensuring their Tenant is well advised although the answer does lie partly in that fact.

The Information.

Several years ago during our first Health and safety check of the site, I had held a heated debate with the Company charged with carrying this inspection out, about the need to have notices in several differing languages, to ensure we were seen to do our best to ensure everybody on the site understood the necessary safety  instruction. My point was that the walls of the corridors were only so big and it would be impossible to supply sufficient translations to cover all possible nationalities and there subsequent language needs.

The Solution.

There is a serious point here, which is that it is impossible to supply a copy for all possible language requirements. Therefore our solution was to offer free translation, which it is not that difficult to do, for all requested languages. This way, whilst the legal responsibility does not lie with us, as stated, the relationship is between the sub Tenant and the Leaseholder, we could be seen to do our best for our Leaseholders and to reinforce what was happening, we wrote confirming this as part of a change to what have been called site rules, which we advised all owners are to be handed over to all subsequent owners. We also confirm this when we are able through requests for information for new owners as purchase questions are raised by the legal profession.

The Outcome.

All of this though definitely confirmed that the current Landlord is wrong in their assumption that the cost was not the responsibility of the Polish Tenant who called the Fire Brigade in the first place because he could not read the instructions correctly, therefore they will remain liable for this cost. The fact that we were accused of failing to supply a translation sits squarely with the Landlord as we had not been asked to supply one. What remains a fact is that It is impossible for us to cover every eventuality, and Landlords should realise that they are the party, as the second signatory to the agreement along with the Tenant, that carries the responsibility for ensuring the Tenant is correctly informed.

Share

Property Landlord advice: Lesson learned when accepting second hand Tenants.

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

Nowadays, especially with the profusion of property currently available in Staffordshire, it is becoming more popular for some Landlords to consider employing a second Agent to source a Tenant for them.  This is especially the case with Tenant find Landlords as the Tenant is easier processed if there is no Management scenario, which makes swopping between Agents much more difficult. We have just experienced such a scenario for a Managed property and the consequences are not ideal.

The Problem.

The house itself was the problem, not only was it a large four bed roomed detached house, but it sat right on the edge of a natural area of outstanding beauty that justified the expensive valuation. Understandable when the garden is surrounded by deer fencing and the road stops right outside your home! The problem being that property of this value has been as difficult to rent during the spring as it has been to sell! The Landlord spoke about his urgent need to rent and we chose a second Agent between us that we thought would best help his cause.

Control.

In effect when using this method we control and therefore retain Full Management. In this instance the second Agent found the Tenant, this of course does happen, but we take over as soon as the Tenant confirms their interest and we negotiated the referencing procedure through to check in. What confused the issue with this Tenant, was that we were dealing with the parents of the Lady concerned who held the same surname (the same surname we were provided with by the second Agent) they lived out of the area and were not the quickest when going through the procedure.

Procedure.

This meant that the process took about twice as long as it should have done, and after passing referencing, we raised the paperwork in the same way as always, confirming addresses, bank details, asking all relevant questions at the relevant times and carried on booking the check in and clearing payments prior to the date.

The Check in.

Therefore, it was not until the actual check in that we discovered the person renting the property had never even visited the property before until that day and that even the forms were completed by the Tenants parents (Although signed correctly by the Tenant) The problem being, that even though the Referencing forms had been completed indicating no pets, when asked as part of our inventory procedure, the Tenant suddenly announced that they had a small dog!   

The reolution.

In the end, after confirming we would not proceed until clarification from the Landlord, the check in was delayed as we would not proceed and hand over keys without specific approval, the Tenancy commenced one day late and the Landlord ended up with a dog in his house, accepting a larger deposit rather than lose another month at least finding a replacement.

The Lesson.

It is a rule for our office never to accept a Tenant for a property until they have viewed the house concerned, accepting that sometimes, when people are abroad, differing arrangements need to be made. But at these times we do everything we can to avoid problems prior to the check-in. Needless to say, having looked at how this situation arose, we will ensure that we meet any and all Tenants if the same situation arises again if at all possible and there is no doubt this has been a lesson for us as well as a check on our systems.

Timely reminder.

A reminder because we would normally go through such questions when carrying out property viewings which are always carried out accompanied, giving us the chance to ensure we are fully aware of the Tenants circumstances. The problem arose because we assumed the second Agent had already done what we did when assessing the Tenant at the initial viewing and there is the lesson – never assume – you know the old saying, it can make an ASS out of U and ME!

Share

Current Property News: EPC Clarification? – Hardly!

Posted on by

By Steve Roulstone

Last week I spoke about the confusion surrounding the introduction of the new legislation surrounding the supply of EPC’s to potential Tenants and how they need to be displayed when advertising properties in both the media and standard window displays. This week we have achieved some clarity through this link to a Q&A paper supplied by the NFPP.

Display documents.

Thankfully, it confirms that window display do not need to have the EPC displayed, which would as a stated, have meant whole scale changes throughout. In fact the clarification does make sense and now every time we give the same property documents as displayed actually out upon request, a copy of the first page of the EPC will be attached. Internet documents have always been clear and a copy needs to be available via a link for every property displayed.

Remaining question.

One area still remains unanswered and this is mainly because the Trading Standards Office (TSO) have as yet failed to contact me to confirm how they view electronic window displays, such as a TV with a scrolling image. As the TSO are the agency charged with enforcing the regulations and the body who will issue fines for non compliance, they will be the body I will seek confirmation from, but hopefully common sense will again prevail and the term ‘window display’ will win over ‘electronic display’ when they confirm an answer as it is the difference between the two definitions that is causing the remaining confusion.

Remaining confusion.

However, one area of the new regulations is still causing confusion and that is whether an EPC in the new format is required even if the existing one is still within its ten year time frame. At present each EPC for a rented property does have a ten year life, but the new regulations ask for certain pieces of information, as displayed on page one of the new style certificates to be included, but this information is not on page one of the old style certificates.

Legal view.

 The legal view is that to comply with the legislation, a new certificate has to be supplied, otherwise how can we provide the information as needed on page one of the new style certificates. Bearing in mind the regulations actually confirms the data as listed on page 1 of the new certificates.

Industry view.

Surprisingly, the view of the industry (at least locally) is that a new certificate is NOT required, and that the old style, even though it does not include the data referred to on page 1, is sufficient. Surprisingly because one would assume they would take the line of least resistance and of course, increased revenue!

Still waiting.

Having now been waiting for over a week for TSO to phone me back, had a row with my legal advisor because he cannot see the commercial sense with which I will be putting my Company at a disadvantage if I only took his view locally and had to insist that my current EPC provider asks again specifically about the issue of providing the data as specified when he has already responded to my question, means I am winning no friends in trying to resolve the issue, but as it is my Company that would be fined if we get it wrong, I must be persistent. But the worst comment that has come out of this shambles and I firmly believe that it is a shambles, is that there is no definitive answer, and only the courts could provide one! Perhaps I should just ignore the law then unless my Company is successfully prosecuted? It just makes further nonsense all round!

Share