Poorly utilised rental mediation service ‘should still form an important part of reforms’

Timothy Douglas

A pilot, which allowed tenants and landlords to access a free independent mediation service during the landlord possession process, resulted in just 0.73% of potential referrals between February to October, 2021.

The Rental Mediation Service, a joint pilot project  between the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the Department for Levelling Up Housing and Communities (DLUHC), was created in the County Court service to resolve disputes, sustain tendencies, and reduce pressure on the courts.

The pilot was set up in response to the Covid-19 pandemic and was operational between February and October 2021. There were only 22 referrals made out of an estimated 3,000 potential cases during the nine-month period, indicating a lack of awareness and communication of the scheme by Duty Advisors in the County Court. Of these 22 referrals, only nine went through to the Rental Mediation Service.

The general consensus of participants in the pilot, referenced in the Rental Mediation Service Pilot: Post Implementation Review, discusses how mediation was offered too late in the possession process. It was offered after relations between tenant and landlord had fully broken down, and the case had already progressed to the court stage.

Participants also reported tenants did not have specialist legal advice during mediation making it confusing and overwhelming for all parties involved.

Propertymark believes there is a missed opportunity to include Local Authority housing and homelessness departments in the referral process, who are usually in contact with tenants at a much earlier stage and may be able to deliver guidance and signposting to the scheme.

Mediation needs to be implemented at an earlier stage, as it could delay  possession proceedings and  cause more issues from tenants.

If effectively implemented, the Rental Mediation Service would also be beneficial for landlords not wanting to lose good tenants, who are happy to engage in order to  resolve  disputes.

Propertymark’s head of policy and campaigns, Timothy Douglas, said: “The UK government’s PRS White Paper includes proposals for mediation to be used as a tool to resolve renting issues and despite the pilot receiving an extremely low number of referrals, we believe that mediation should still form an important part of reforms to eviction rules and dispute resolution going forward.

“What’s key is that decision makers recognise that the timing of mediation is vital, and it is utilised early before relations between landlords and tenants have broken down.

“Propertymark’s The Future of Renting position paper sets out action across ten areas, which we believe can help enhance dispute resolution and improve the possession process. These include communication and reporting, negotiation, and conciliation, complaints, escalated complaints, mediation and mandatory pre-action consideration of alternative dispute resolution.”

 

x

Email the story to a friend



One Comment

  1. northernlandlord

    Not surprised the pilot was a failure. What use is a mediation scheme if it has no powers? Landlord tenant problems are rarely resolved by having a little chat. That this scheme was tenant biased is shown in the statement intended to justify it as a benefit to landlords. “The Service would also be beneficial for landlords not wanting to lose good tenant” I think that in common with most landlords if even a good tenant wants to leave they are most welcome, I won’t stand in their way. The way things are shaping up it would probably be a blessing in disguise. However, the scheme will live on in the proposed Ombudsman scheme that is part of the renter’s reform bill although while the trial scheme was free, Landlords will have to subscribe and pay for it even if they don’t use it while naturally it will be free for tenants. The way it looks, it seems like it will be just a tenant complaints scheme with the power to fine landlords £30,000 and award tenant compensation with no power to fine tenants and compensate landlords if any claims are proven false. Savvy tenants (or those egged on by Shelter and the like) are going to have a field day with this.  I expect that if there is a dispute via the ombudsman the landlord will not be able to pursue eviction until it is resolved. Expect loads of spurious tenant claims to slow things down. Now, if instead of the Ombudsman scheme we had the fast dedicated housing court that formed part of the original proposals that would be welcome. While I begrudge paying for an Ombudsman scheme I would be more willing to pay the same amount towards the cost of a dedicated, fast housing court. Of course the Government can’t house anybody so it is in their interest to delay eviction proceedings as long as possible and make it harder for Landlords to initiate in the first place. If labour get in they are liable to delay the eviction process forever.

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.