My landlord is refusing HAP, help?

Old diesel

Its like the inspector has the power and he or she has final say......

There should be NO need for HAP and non HAP to be different standards.....

The tricky problem with "the standards of the day it was built" is that on pre 1978 homes - you didnt actually need insulation.

So I would take a view that some form of retrofitting MIGHT actually be needed in wider rental stock.

Either way the same standards should apply to all....

The_Conductor

Old diesel wrote: »

Telling you put in a certain type of heater seems out of kilter too as are sealing and replacing windows etc.....

The deal with the windows is up to 2004 it was acceptable to have ventilation built into the window frames for bedrooms- but after a change in the building regulations, it became necessary to have separate ventilation in bedrooms. Any pre-2004 properties that have window frames with built-in ventilation normally are told they require separate ventilation to be installed. It doesn't mean the pre-existing windows have to come out- simply, that new ventilation must be drilled into the applicable bedrooms. Safety proofing is a separate matter (and easily remedied).

sk8board

Following on from my post above, I got the HAP inspection report yesterday.
It’s a 2014 3-bed semi in good condition.

The categories assessed are:
Structural condition
Sanitary facilities
Heating facilities
Food prep and storage + laundry facilities
Ventilation
Lighting
Fire safety
Refuse facilities
Electricity and gas

I have 3 ‘non-compliant’:
- carbon monoxide alarm needs batteries
- safety restrictors on all windows over 1400mm upstairs and downstairs except ones that are ground level downstairs
- the gas boiler was serviced 14 months ago, but needs have a ‘declaration of conformance within the last 12 months’, which I assume I can get with the regular service.

6 weeks to resolve all non-compliance and re-inspect

beauf

What happens if the LL can't afford the changes required?

sk8board

beauf wrote: »

What happens if the LL can't afford the changes required?

I wondered the same thing - you only find out about the inspection a few months after the tenant moves in (in my case they moved in May 1st and the inspection was Aug 24th.
Also, it’s not like the LL can refuse HAP, but if it’s uneconomical to make the fixes then presumably they evict the tenant and can justify ‘substantial renovations’ and start afresh with a new tenant.

Again I say it - the HAP documentation is so lacking in detail for the LL and the hoops that ACTUALLY happen, it borders on misadvertising.
In my case it was an excellent/existing tenant that I was glad to help.
I would do my best to avoid it in future - and I consider myself a very progressive landlord; there’s also zero opportunity to provide any feedback on things that would help LL and tenant alike to understand what actually happens in a HAP application, rather than what the stupid leaflet says!

And lest we forgot the LLs prize for all this is payment of rent in arrears and should the tenant sneeze the wrong way with their payments to the council, they will immediately stop payments to the LL.

It’s a ll of the risk, with very little of the gain (certainly no gain that wouldn’t have been got from a non-HAP tenant).

Cuddlesworth

beauf wrote: »

What happens if the LL can't afford the changes required?

HAP stops being paid. In most instances, the landlord will then need to go down the eviction process if the tenant won't leave.

Old diesel

sk8board wrote: »

beauf wrote: »

What happens if the LL can't afford the changes required?

I wondered the same thing - you only find out about the inspection a few months after the tenant moves in (in my case they moved in May 1st and the inspection was Aug 24th.
Also, it’s not like the LL can refuse HAP, but if it’s uneconomical to make the fixes then presumably they evict the tenant and can justify ‘substantial renovations’ and start afresh with a new tenant.

Again I say it - the HAP documentation is so lacking in detail for the LL and the hoops that ACTUALLY happen, it borders on misadvertising.
In my case it was an excellent/existing tenant that I was glad to help.
I would do my best to avoid it in future - and I consider myself a very progressive landlord; there’s also zero opportunity to provide any feedback on things that would help LL and tenant alike to understand what actually happens in a HAP application, rather than what the stupid leaflet says!

And lest we forgot the LLs prize for all this is payment of rent in arrears and should the tenant sneeze the wrong way with their payments to the council, they will immediately stop payments to the LL.

It’s a ll of the risk, with very little of the gain (certainly no gain that wouldn’t have been got from a non-HAP tenant).

To be fair your list doesn't sound off the wall.

I can see why they want to ensure the boiler is okay for example .

Thing is - inspections should be a normal part of being a landlord .

Problem is most Landlords experience of inspections is when they have a HAP tenant .

A variance of standards required between HAP/non HAP would be a big issue but we would need to see an inspection report for house of similar standard thats normal non HAP tenant to verify this.

BronsonTB

As a landlord, took 9 months to sort all the red tape for a tenant with HAP.
Simple inspection my ass....
Had no idea the hassle & cost it would cause...I don't blame your landlord for having second taught at all, learning experience for all involved incl the tenant....

But as you are now already a tenant, they will have to work through the red tape to get it sorted for you now...Like opening a can of worms...

jimmycrackcorm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

HAP stops being paid. In most instances, the landlord will then need to go down the eviction process if the tenant won't leave.

I wonder what happens if after then the landlord days to future clients that the property failed the HAP indirection and that HAP don't be paid therefore they'd only like hey evicted?

I.e. there is no legal mandate to force a landlord to implement HAP requirements and it couldn't be enforced by legal means either on the basis that it discriminates against laird's who are renting to private tenants and don't have to follow suit.

Cuddlesworth

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I wonder what happens if after then the landlord days to future clients that the property failed the HAP indirection and that HAP don't be paid therefore they'd only like hey evicted?

I.e. there is no legal mandate to force a landlord to implement HAP requirements and it couldn't be enforced by legal means either on the basis that it discriminates against laird's who are renting to private tenants and don't have to follow suit.

They would be discriminating against HAP payments and would be liable for fines.

There is also a argument that any landlord who fails a inspection, fails to complete remedial works would be discriminating against the tenants and again would be liable.

Very much like a workplace who could make some adjustments for a wheelchair person but chooses not to and then tells them that.

The_Conductor

Regardless of whether its affordable or not?
E.g. its a couple of grand to get holemasters out for a day- and the most common demand of HAP inspectors is new ventilation in bedrooms and kitchens, along with new radiators with individual thermostats etc.
The fact of the matter is- many landlords will not have a couple of grand sitting around looking for something to spend it on.
Its all well and good saying that by not completing noted works that you are discriminating against HAP tenants- however, the fact of the matter is- the requirements have no basis in law and have nothing to do with the standards demanded for rental property- they are specific to the HAP scheme, and it is deeply unfair and unreasonable that landlords and tenants are held to significantly higher standards on the HAP scheme- than is anyone else. It wouldn't even be fair to demand that all these standards be rolled out to all rental properties- what do you do with all the owner occupiers in substandard property then?

Property has to meet the regulations in place when it is constructed. It is unfair, unreasonable and inequitable to come up with a whole new set of standards after the fact and demand that they be retrospectively applied to pre-existing property.

jimmycrackcorm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

They would be discriminating against HAP payments and would be liable for fines.

There is also a argument that any landlord who fails a inspection, fails to complete remedial works would be discriminating against the tenants and again would be liable.

Very much like a workplace who could make some adjustments for a wheelchair person but chooses not to and then tells them that.

Not quite the same. Disability is protected in law. But where is the law to determine HAP standards?

The_Conductor

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Not quite the same. Disability is protected in law. But where is the law to determine HAP standards?

There isn't. There are minimum rental standards. There are building standards. Any given building has to comply with the building standards in place *when it is constructed*. There is no reasonable person on earth who specifies that all buildings must be upgraded to current building regulations- as they evolve- other than HAP inspectors. If this was a government Department they'd be terrified they'd end up in court on account of failure to adopt reasonable processes and procedures for customers- but not HAP inspectors- they get to wave the threat of a discrimination case at you- if you fail to comply with their wholly unreasonable and unrealistic expectations.

Its staggering that no-one has taken them to task for their nonsense (yet).

Old diesel

The_Conductor wrote: »

Regardless of whether its affordable or not?
E.g. its a couple of grand to get holemasters out for a day- and the most common demand of HAP inspectors is new ventilation in bedrooms and kitchens, along with new radiators with individual thermostats etc.
The fact of the matter is- many landlords will not have a couple of grand sitting around looking for something to spend it on.
Its all well and good saying that by not completing noted works that you are discriminating against HAP tenants- however, the fact of the matter is- the requirements have no basis in law and have nothing to do with the standards demanded for rental property- they are specific to the HAP scheme, and it is deeply unfair and unreasonable that landlords and tenants are held to significantly higher standards on the HAP scheme- than is anyone else. It wouldn't even be fair to demand that all these standards be rolled out to all rental properties- what do you do with all the owner occupiers in substandard property then?

Property has to meet the regulations in place when it is constructed. It is unfair, unreasonable and inequitable to come up with a whole new set of standards after the fact and demand that they be retrospectively applied to pre-existing property.

Has anyone seen an inspection report for a NON HAP property recently .

You would need to see a report for Non HAP that passes the house even the house has features/issues that would fail it for HAP.

Who makes up the HAP rules - minister????. Council?????? .

Edit - the ventilation in Bedrooms is a particularly interesting point of reference.

HAP requires hole in the wall - so if we have a new non HAP inspection that passes a house with no hole in wall then we have something to work from.

The_Conductor

Old diesel wrote: »

Who makes up the HAP rules - minister????. Council?????? .

Local authorities.
Often their HAP inspectors have a list of other jobs they do- which have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rental sector. Someone somewhere digs out current building regs- tosses them across the desk at Dave, who is a local authority tenancy officer today- possibly a fair trade standards officer tomorrow- and an animal warden the day after. He/she takes the building regs and runs with them for all they're worth.

There is no consistency- one local authority will rip through you for no good reason- whereas another will be fair and reasonable- however, there is no consistency. You shouldn't have to rely on a game of chance. Looks like its what we're all doing though.

Old diesel

The_Conductor wrote: »

Old diesel wrote: »

Who makes up the HAP rules - minister????. Council?????? .

Local authorities.
Often their HAP inspectors have a list of other jobs they do- which have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rental sector. Someone somewhere digs out current building regs- tosses them across the desk at Dave, who is a local authority tenancy officer today- possibly a fair trade standards officer tomorrow- and an animal warden the day after. He/she takes the building regs and runs with them for all they're worth.

There is no consistency- one local authority will rip through you for no good reason- whereas another will be fair and reasonable- however, there is no consistency. You shouldn't have to rely on a game of chance. Looks like its what we're all doing though.

So have we different inspectors on non HAP inspections then - say guys that know their stuff and can say "yes thats okay" Vs your Dave that knows sod all on HAP work.

Because your guy Dave will inspect the non HAP property using the same protocol if he's given those properties to check but is reliant on someone giving him a copy of latest building regs.

The_Conductor

Old diesel wrote: »

So have we different inspectors on non HAP inspections then - say guys that know their stuff and can say "yes thats okay" Vs your Dave that knows sod all on HAP work.

Because your guy Dave will inspect the non HAP property using the same protocol if he's given those properties to check but is reliant on someone giving him a copy of latest building regs.

What happens is 'Dave' doesn't bother inspecting non-HAP properties, ever........

sk8board

I don’t mind the inspection per say, but two things:

1. It doesn’t say anywhere that an inspection would happen. It’s clear to me that they don’t want LLs to know the sheer extent of the application process
2. Allow landlords form companies, register for VAT etc, carry out remedial works as needed and generally professionalise the market.

Otherwise you maintain this status quo of 120,000 landlords with one rental property from the 168,000 total.
those one-property guys are taking a huge investment risk, and most don’t even realise it until there’s a big bill for remedial works, or a tenant goes bad.

Those are also the ones currently exiting the market.

YFlyer

redarmyblues wrote: »

If the landlord does not have a tax clearance cert then they may not be able to receive HAP payments as mentioned above, I think you get up to 8k without one

8k fine or payout?

Dav010

YFlyer wrote: »

8k fine or payout?

There is no fine for not having a tax clearance form, you need one to receive some state payments though. Some Landlords are not in a position to provide one, therefore are not eligible for HAP payments. But, you cannot use the lack of one as an excuse to not accept it. You would have to presume that each case would be considered on its merits. There was a recent high court case where a former President of the Law Society cannot receive legal aid payments because he doesn’t have a tax clearance cert, he can’t get his TCC because he can’t get his legal aid payments, would be be fined €8k because he can’t rent to a HAP tenant? Hard to know.

The_Conductor

YFlyer wrote: »

8k fine or payout?

Neither- they (Revenue) don't issue tax clearance certs if your rental income is under 8k. They can issue them but for one reason or another- refuse to do so The process for applying for a tax clearance cert when you're over the threshold- is simple- you just hop onto your ROS profile and there is a button to apply for one. It couldn't be simpler.