The current Housing Ombudsman, who presides over redress within the social housing sector, says private landlords should not fear the extension of such a service to buy to let.

However Richard Blakeway, writing on the Conservative Home website, says there should be just one private rental sector Ombudsman service to make enforcement clear to landlords and consumers alike.

Blakeway says some private landlords may feel the creation of a private sector Ombudsman is another burden and more bureaucracy, but he insists this would be to misunderstand the role.

He writes: “Our decisions are impartial and rooted in fairness: around half of the cases we investigate are not upheld. This can be an effective way for the landlord to resolve a dispute where relationships with tenants have broken down. If something has gone wrong, the remedies are not punitive – they are simply aimed at putting the consumer back in the position they would have enjoyed had things been as they should. If requirements are not being met, surely it is better to learn through an Ombudsman decision than risk repeating the same mistakes?”

He says that he has long argued for the extension of the Ombudsman principle to the private rental sector and that he therefore welcomes the provision within the Renters Reform Bill.

But he cautions that this risks being undermined because the legislation allows for the creation of one or more redress schemes in the private rented sector. 

Blakeway dislikes this idea because he says the role of freeholders, developers, agents, and landlords (both social and private), intersect alongside a multitude of private, social, and home-ownership tenures. 

He says these relationships can be complex, making accountability and responsibility diffuse – and so he believes that “salami-slicing redress when there are disputes” risks confusion, unintended gaps, and consumers being passed from pillar to post.

Blakeway says the recent history of redress should be a case study for the government of how not to do it.

“Six years ago, ministers declared the system of housing redress broken. Then the proposal was to simplify and strengthen it, including consolidation through a single housing Ombudsman, providing a modern and agile response to a changing housing market. Yet today there are more bodies than ever. Consumers may have to approach at least seven different organisations to get their issues addressed. This may mean neighbours going down different routes – even for the same issue.”

He insists this benefits neither the consumer nor the provider, who may end up having to join and navigate multiple schemes. 

“It sucks up energy and innovation, and makes it harder to identify and implement lessons to improve services … The dysfunctions in the housing market should not be compounded in the way problems are redressed.”

You can read Blakeway’s full article here.