Owner-Occupied Let Property: Repossession (Hansard, 3 May 1985)

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the Government fully understand the implications of the Court of Appeal's decision for landlords who have let their homes intending to seek possession using Case 11 of Schedule 15 to the Rent Act 1977. My honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Construction hopes to make an announcement very soon about what action will be taken.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord the Minister for that comment. I am delighted to hear that some action will be taken. I should like to ask him whether he agrees that this is at the moment a great disincentive to an owner-occupier who lets his property, and that because of that it is keeping off the market properties that would otherwise be available at a time when there is a great need for further accommodation for rent.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, at this remove it is of course difficult to say precisely how Parliament intended Case 11 to work when it was originally enacted in the Rent Act 1965. However, the decision of the Court of Appeal has overturned the widely accepted view of its effect—the widely accepted view, I might add, which has been held by all Governments since. I agree with my noble friend that the decision may well deter owners from letting their homes. That is one of the reasons why the Government are looking urgently at what action can be taken.

§ The Earl of Lauderdale
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the use of the term "urgently" falls like honey among us because there is a real problem in relation to rented accommodation? Has my noble friend's attention been drawn to the statement by the Small Landlords Association that yesterday's decision in the Street v. Mountford case makes the matter even more acute and threatens to deprive labour of the opportunity to rent accommodation?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the House often hears the words "urgently", "very shortly" and so on from this Box. However, may I say that in this case "urgently" is a good deal quicker than "very shortly". However, in answer to my noble friend's question I am aware of the judgment given yesterday by the Law Lords in the case of Street v. Mountford on the subject of letting under contract, the press reports of which I read this morning. The Government will obviously need a little time to consider the implications of this most important case. We shall certainly take account of it in the review of the Rent Acts which we are currently conducting.

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, will the Government agree that the need for an increase in the amount of rented accommodation available is now extremely urgent? Can the Government assure us that their inquiry will not only go into this particular case, nor even only into the reform of the Rent Acts which may be necessary, but will look at the general need for more rented accommodation, in particular possibly the encouragement of local authorities to provide some more rented accommodation?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I cannot remember whether the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, took part in our discussions on this very wide subject on Wednesday of last week. However, I accept that the inquiry to which I have just referred has been taking a long time to accomplish. There is very good reason for this, as the subject surrounding the review has wide implications for a large number of people. I can only add that only fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

§ Lord Broxbourne
My Lords, will my noble friend agree that the obscurity and complexity of the Rent Acts lead to a frustration in regard to lettings, and not only in this particular context? Does he recall the words of an eminent lawyer and parliamentarian that anybody is very lucky if he is ever right about anything on the Rent Acts?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, no. Not having the legal experience of my noble friend, I am afraid I do not recall that particular comment, but, of course, I totally agree with what he has said.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, will the Minister accept that Members of these Benches will warmly welcome the Answer he gave to the original Question, which was that the matter is being looked at urgently? The judgment in the case of Pocock v. Steel is a judgment whereby the Government have an obligation to protect landlords from what the judge in fact said was his own illogical decision. Bearing in mind that as long ago as March 14th his right honourable friend the Minister for Housing told me that he well understood the problems, I want the Minister to understand that when he says that he and his colleagues are looking at this matter urgently we very much hope that that means it will be done as quickly as possible. Unless the matter is put right, we shall have a situation whereby people who go abroad will be deprived of their homes—in other words, will be homeless—or, alternatively, where a source of letting, which has been of benefit both to landlords and to tenants will be taken off the market.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I almost totally agree with the noble Lord, Lord Graham, but this particular judgment concerns a case where a landlord relets while he is still abroad. With that proviso, I accept totally what the noble Lord says.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, will the Minister confirm the information that I have been given that it is not even necessary to relet but that even to extend the original letting to the orginal tenant could still disqualify the owner from obtaining possession?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, this is obviously something that we shall be looking into in our urgent consideration of this case.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, can I ask the Minister just one further question? Does he realise that many people may already inadvertently be finding themselves in the position where this has happened to them? Will the Government take that into consideration?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
Yes, my Lords. But I do not want to trail any false herrings.