x

Don Higgs

1127 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Don's Recent Activity

There is no doubt about it, that the continuous tinkering by Government/s - even more so here in Wales where the wonderful Welsh Assembly imposed the "Renting Homes Wales" act on the housing sector which included legislation that has not been legally workable to the present time which is somewhat concerning when the deadline for complying with the particular aspect of legislation is the 31st May 2023. (Ironically we were being told by the so called Welsh Housing Minister in May 2022 that the Welsh Government were fully ready for the issuing of the legislation. Add this to the raft of other impositions from Westminster plus the increase in interest rates and it is little wonder that many smaller Landlords are becoming exasperated and have decided to sell up. There is no doubt that the Investors who are buying up properties at this time will undoubtedly do a good job and will continually increase rents in order to ensure that their investments provide decent returns.

From: Don Higgs 27 April 2023 20:46 PM

As others have already stated/intimated, any such "probe" needs to ensure that it looks at the situation from everybody's perspective, not only the Tenants but also Landlords and also needs to look into the inherent basis on which the very existence of - say - Shelter is founded, that being that all Landlords are "AHoles" whenever a Tenant contacts them and shouts loud enough about the alleged failings of their Landlord. Whilst some may be legitimate, there will, as many decent Landlords will be able to attest, be a certain proportion of Tenants who are themselves the creators of the problem/s. Such a "probe" will provide the result that, directly reflects the current thinking of those who are "in power" at that time given time, as we have all seen and witnessed whenever there is a public consultation over any aspect of life - in short a whitewash. Don't you just love politicians.

From: Don Higgs 02 March 2023 12:02 PM

It is unfortunate that, because Shelter are funded by our - taxpayers - money there is an inherent need to try to justify their very existence. Therefore instead of working with Landlords and Landlord Associations to ensure improvements are made for the mutual benefit of both Tenants and Landlords, they invariably tend towards "Landlord bashing" which effectively labels all Landlords as being "rogue Landlords", which clearly is not the case for the majority. Similarly, Shelter need to recognise that there is a percentage of Tenants who can readily be described as rogue Tenants, whether this be due to anti-social behaviour, non payment of rent etc and who are very adept at presenting themselves as victims when they are in reality people who ignore their responsibilities to others and their legal obligations. I should stress that this last statement is based on a historic representation of such tenants in regard to non-payment of rent, which clearly will not be pertinent to the legitimate problems some or many "decent" Tenants are now facing given the current financial situation. So Shelter, seriously consider amending your modus operandi such that you work with and not against Landlords, then and only then might there be progress made in decreasing the numbers of S21 notices and the like.

From: Don Higgs 28 November 2022 09:55 AM

For so many years now I - and all other Landlords - have heard the rhetoric from Governments - and Assemblies - that increasing levels of legislation are required to "get rid of rogue and bad Landlords", unfortunately many such operators are still in existence. Indeed, with the number of established/longer term Landlords either considering or actually starting to sell their properties, it is likely that, either the rogue element will flourish or, newbie Landlords will enter the market and will not be fully aware of their responsibilities under the myriad of legislation. Governments and the Assemblies do need to touch base with the realisms of the situation instead of their bubbles of fantasies and idealisms, if not there will be an even larger housing problem, all as a result of their own incompetence.

From: Don Higgs 23 May 2022 08:10 AM

AS with others commenting on yet another set of impositions that have been dreamed up by people who obviously are trying to justify their very existence - as has been to case in many public bodies for many years where empire building has been and still remains rife. One has to ask - because there is always a sledge hammer involved in most modern legislation, how much will one be penalised - fined - if one or more restrictive covenants are missed on the information, additionally - as is the case with my main property - if one looks on the relative official sites for such information based on computer modelling, the details show that my property has the potential of flooding, but the realistic fact is that this will never, yes never happen (unless we have a tsunami of such proportions that much of the UK will be under water). So, would I be expected to state the totally farcical info based on the computer modelling or would I be permitted to state the actual factual situation. Another farcical scenario relates to EPC’s. Landlords - and it has been muted that it may apply to all properties in the UK whether let or privately owned - will in the near future have the imposition of a minimum EPC rating of "C" for our properties before we can let them out. Given that many of the EPC's for my properties undertaken in recent times fail to take account of insulation that is within loft areas and roof voids associated with flat rooves ultimately resulting in a "D" rating for a number of them. When I questioned the "surveyor" about this, his input was that, in their "training course" they were informed that their surveys were to be non-invasive!, in short the "surveyors" do not do the job in its entirety, thereby resulting in an EPC rating that is totally incorrect and which could lead to myself – and many others like me - having to spend substantial sums of money on so called improvement works in order to raise the existing fictitious rating to a “C” rating which, if the “surveyors” were informed to so do and undertook a thorough survey in the first place, would not be necessary. This is without doubt another facet that needs to be corrected; if not then I would suggest that many property owners are being fleeced by Legislators, Government and their advisers.

From: Don Higgs 23 February 2022 17:42 PM

Hi Mike, They certainly appear to do so. Unfortunately the Landlord association/s that are meant to have the ear of Government must just be in a "buddy buddy" arrangement with those advisers they meet because we are constantly faced with additional impositions and costs - some of which are valid but others have little or no rationale behind them whatsoever. Unfortunately we mere mortal Landlords will be unlikely to be given the opportunity to meet with Governments and/or their underlings in a bid to provide them with an input "from the other side" because the "system" falls rather short of being a democratic one.

From: Don Higgs 11 January 2022 09:37 AM

Such proposals were/are all in the name of making privately rented properties on a par with privately owned properties which, as many of us are aware, total garbage. Once again, an ill considered proposal aimed at Landlords from the Government, based on totally false information. Additionally, as has already been stated, there is a great discrepancy in the actual situation in regard to the energy measures within a property and those actually "allowed for" within EPC assessments, such as insulation in false ceilings and/or in roof voids etc. I believe it is fair to state that, if 2 EPC assessors undertook an assessment of the same property the likelihood of their assessed rating/s being "in the same ball-park" as each other is unlikely.

From: Don Higgs 11 January 2022 08:39 AM

As has already been stated, Landlords with properties with EPC's below "E" should not be letting those properties. The Council should be monitoring such aspects themselves as all the relevant information required should be readily available. Unfortunately this is another case where the "management" within a Local Authority don't want the responsibility of taking on given tasks themselves, opting instead to pass such aspects on to third party providers.

From: Don Higgs 07 January 2022 08:40 AM

Whatever name is used, within a short period of time the media, Shelter, mindless politicians - who have little or no idea of the responsibilities placed on us - and the like will be trying to blame us for the failings of the system and successive Governments and advisers. So I suggest be proud of the name "Landlord" as we are doing what all the others are shouting about but failing to do. Thankfully as with the comment by Michael F, my relationship with tenants is very good and indeed several existing, and some ex tenants, could be readily deemed as being friends and I am sure that we are not alone because without a good respectful relationship between both parties things can be problematic if or when there is a "problem".

From: Don Higgs 06 January 2022 08:13 AM

Some very good points made here which I totally agree with, including - as with others - the commencement of selling my properties due to my complete lack of faith in those who are in "positions of influence". Sadly, it doesn't matter what party is the government of the day because the same highly paid - indeed over paid - civil servants occupy posts which Ministers and their underlings are reliant upon for guidance, unless of course the given Ministers have some backbone or inherent knowledge which is rarely the case.

From: Don Higgs 05 January 2022 17:44 PM

Successive Governments have failed the UK public in many ways, from the current hot potato of security and continuity of affordable energy supplies to the ever increasing influx of people from abroad into the UK for which housing will - for many - be needed. Governments have always paid more attention to the views of the more vocal minority, instead of making long term strategic plans for all. The naivety demonstrated in the 4th paragraph really sums this young person up. She clearly fails to understand that Landlords are also funding the aspects she is so concerned about via taxation, and other financial impositions, additionally many Landlords have children and Grand children and therefore have an inherent concern about their futures and whatever mess they inherit from us - including Miss/Mrs Gill.

From: Don Higgs 05 January 2022 08:47 AM

I have no idea who this guy is but - as with many MP's - he has little or no idea. That said, I agree with one aspect - albeit he stated about large scale new build schemes as pertaining to rural areas but, he should open his eyes a little more as this is certainly applicable to urban areas nowadays, where even modest pieces of land have a large number of rabbit hutches with minimal or no gardens squashed in. TODAYS HOUSING WILL BECOME TOMORROWS SLUMS is a statement that comes to mind. With regard to the statement about restricting the purchase of buy to let properties, one assumes that he is on about the private sector Landlord and not the "social" sector. I have a suggestion, and I am sure I would not be alone in this. If Shelter or any social Landlord wishes to purchase my properties at the rate of 1 property a year with the value based on an average of the local figures whatever that be at the given time, I am prepared to consider selling all my properties thereby making one less private Landlord for this guy and/or whoever to worry about - it'll mean temporarily making Tenants homeless but hey, why should that matter at all.

From: Don Higgs 04 January 2022 19:42 PM

It would be good if this same body took a constructive look at the inherent failings of the court "system" that is - and has been for so long - an inefficient and expensive means of legally removing "rogue tenants". Sadly that is unlikely to happen because such facets as "rogue tenants" don't appear to exist as far as Governments, their advisers, Shelter and the "do-gooder" element is concerned.

From: Don Higgs 04 January 2022 11:33 AM

Having worked closely with the homeless sector for many years - a long time before it became a standard political "problem" I fully understand there has been and still remains a homeless problem - for whatever reason. Shelter has been in existence since 1966 and, one does have to ask why they have never applied to extend their remit to provide accommodation and/or hostels for the homeless which would be a natural progression for any organisation that wishes to improve the situation. There have been many homeless charities who have come and gone during that period of time so, Shelter, why don't you step up to the plate and, actually do something that will actually help some of those people - women and men - who need such help and approach Government for additional funding in order to provide hostels and the like instead of lambasting private Landlords as being part creators of the problem.

From: Don Higgs 30 December 2021 09:50 AM

Setting unrealistic targets for the UK when many, if not all of the other countries around the world will be "fiddling the books" to show that they are achieving the impossible in regard to net zero by the target date will - as a direct result of higher taxes/charges etc - drive the larger percentage of people in the UK into even greater debt. Even if one ignores rent monies owed, several of my tenants are in debt to amongst others, utility companies and those debts alone will be greatly increased in the light of impending increases in the cost of energy. Unfortunately the Government appears to be hooked on the idea that by forcing Landlords to improve the energy efficiency of their properties to a "C" that this will greatly help to achieve targets etc and the problems will disappear which is naivety at its extreme, because, in the same way that we in the UK cannot "save the world" on our own by making ourselves net zero, the improvement of private rented properties alone will have very little effect on the overall energy usages within the UK. Any, and all measures undertaken to create a net zero environment needs to be undertaken by everyone, whether it be - in the first instance - by all the countries of the world or - in the second instance - applicable for all properties whether domestic, commercial or industrial throughout the UK. I wonder what EPC rating any and all of the royal palaces are, or parliament, chequers, and all of the other public buildings around the UK.

From: Don Higgs 29 December 2021 09:43 AM

Interesting info Damian, with averaged "wages and salaries" of £29k per employee - and bearing in mind Polly N is reportedly receiving over £130k, there will be quite a few who are riding on a very good gravy train. So they will continue to perpetuate whatever mantra will ensure their longevity regardless of how baseless the details presented may be - they have obviously learned from our successive Governments. As is the case with the mantra spewed from Shelter themselves the Government and its advisers need to comprehend the facts from the Landlords perspective. Sadly, the Landlord Associations who claim to "have the ear" of the Government and others have clearly - for so many years - failed to present the facts as they actually are for the majority of Landlords.

From: Don Higgs 27 December 2021 10:18 AM

As is the case with governments, Shelter appear to pluck figures out of the air that suit their given "hobby horse" of the moment. What a shame that Polly Neate does not consider WHY there are evictions regardless of the figures involved and also the counter part of the argument. Indeed, as is the case for some 50% to 60% of cases where tenants have been served with eviction notices due to non payment of rent, with the remainder attributable to amongst other things vandalism and the like which can have severe financial implications for the Landlord. What about the children of the Landlords who are not receiving rent monies for their property or who have to fund major works etc, those same Landlords may have mortgages on such properties etc that still need to be paid regardless, I would suggest that possibly the numbers will be not be too far removed from whatever the figure is for the numbers of " children living in fear of eviction". The cause of the problem is not those who have need to issue eviction notices but more associated with the Tenants/parents themselves who; 1. Do not make any effort to pay rent 2. Do not make the Landlords when there are problems with incomes or monies 3. Pocket the Housing benefit monies as though it is theirs to keep. 4. Fail to act in a reasonable manner whether towards neighbours or others. 5. Drug usage and/or taking which impinges on others. I have experienced all of these in one form or another in my 27 years as a Landlord of a number of properties and I suggest there are many Landlords with similar experiences. Once again Shelter demonstrate that, whilst they have never been interested in liaising with or entering into a dialogue with Landlords - not the associations but Landlords themselves - in order to gain "the other side of the story", but are far more interested in presenting a totally false and biased take on the facts, undoubtedly in a bid to try to justify their funding from Government.

From: Don Higgs 23 December 2021 12:07 PM

As far as I can recall there have always been far greater / more onerous legislative impositions placed on private Landlords compared to Social housing providers. As for the prospective increase in Social rents, it is just another example of this because, If we, private Landlords proposed putting up our rent/s by a similar percentage we would be lambasted by everybody and his dog. It's about time for all providers of housing to be treated exactly the same

From: Don Higgs 22 December 2021 16:25 PM

With you all the way Michael and Edwin. The existing so called "system" is not - as they say - fit for purpose and is heavily biased towards the Tenant. It is not only inefficient, but is also overseen by Judges who are not experts in housing law and therefore make some odd decisions, some of which appears to be to justify their very own existence. So scrapping Section 21 may not be too bad providing the powers that be replace it - and the shambles associated with gaining possession that is in place at the present time - with additions within Section 8 that can be used by Landlords to evict those Tenants who, through the tenants own lack of appreciation and/or respect of their obligations whether non payment of rent or anti social behaviour etc, deserve to be "moved on". Added to which, and something that has in the past been muted, that a separate court system with presiding Judges who are well versed in Housing Law to be set up to deal with possessions and the like. I somehow doubt whether either of these will ever come to fruition because, as is so often the case, Legislators fudge around and create legislation that is so ambiguous that it will be left to Judges to determine exactly what is meant by the ambiguous wording and that will undoubtedly be based, in principle, or what has gone before.

From: Don Higgs 22 December 2021 08:21 AM

Totally agree with many of the opinions stated here already but a few stick out, like the £4.5K net income - I assume profit - per property, maybe readily achieved in the Home Counties and in cities around the UK but for many locations it not realistic by time one takes out the associated expenses. As for the st6atement that " over 58 per cent of private rented households have an energy rating below a C", again the more modern properties possibly with associated profits greater than £4.5K may have EPC ratings of "C" but for the older housing stock that is standard in many "not so well off" areas of the UK that percentage increases dramatically. Once again the private Landlords are seen as a soft touch, why not - in the name of saving the planet etc - does the Government impose the same criteria on Social Landlords and also properties owned by private individuals and business premises if you are going to do it at all. As with others, after many years as a Landlord I have started shedding properties purely as a result of the ever increasing, ever ridiculous impositions made on Landlords.

From: Don Higgs 21 December 2021 15:41 PM

100% with you Michael. Shelter shout loudly about the state of housing and those who provide it. They need to invest in the sector to actually experience the actions etc of the few rotten egg/rogue Tenants. Sadly, although Shelter will undoubtedly have those same Tenants approaching them with their tales of woe and Shelter will believe their input as being a true reflection and act on their behalf! By the way, it is fully accepted that there is a minority of Landlords who could be deemed as rogue Landlords but the majority do attempt to provide decent properties at reasonable rents. In regard to the proposed "reforms" stated; Restricting evictions during winter, as stated by many before, good tenants have little to fear but tenants who do not uphold the criteria basically set out in their tenancy need to be aware that they can be evicted regardless of the time of year - that is what is called encouraging them to take responsibility for their actions which is something that is totally ignored. As for "personalising their homes and keeping pets" I allow pets in my properties, however, I have had some tenants who, after asking me whether they can have a pet then go on to have 2 or 3 large dogs in a 2 bed house with small garden with the associated "mess" created, to say nothing of the barking when the tenants are out etc etc. Therefore proportionality needs to come into play, and, in regard to "personalising" the property, following one or two early experiences of tenants who have painted rooms black or deep red, I now stipulate that if they wish to paint the walls only pastel shades should be used, so it all depends on the wording of the proposals as to what farcical colours or alterations Landlords could be faced with in THEIR properties. I have previously and state once again that I would welcome a face to face meeting with those in Shelter who tarnish all Landlords with the same brush, in order to provide them with factual experiences I have gained over some 27 years of being a Landlord. I am sure that other Landlords would similarly be only too willing to join in such a meeting.

From: Don Higgs 21 December 2021 08:19 AM

Wouldn't it be nice if - just for once - there was some balanced thinking in the proposals being issued from Governments in regard to reforms. For some time now - even before the pandemic - the whole process in removing tenants from a property, regardless of whether serving a Section 21 or a Section 8 notice has been a long drawn out and inefficient, to say nothing of expensive process mainly because of the continued reduction/s in the number of courts within the UK. As is so often stated, in the norm, excepting for certain "personal reasons" or wishes, Landlords do not evict decent tenants, there is usually a reason, whether debt related - that is beyond what the Landlord is able to cope with, anti social behaviour etc. For any such cases it would be refreshing if, just for once, the proposals included an efficient, quick and reasonably priced option open for Landlords to gain possession of their properties in a timely manner. Additionally, I have seen proposals relating to the creation of a register of "rogue Landlords", how about creating such a register for "rogue Tenants". I would suggest that, if all tenants were made aware of the existence of such a register, then maybe - just maybe - its very existence may be sufficient to influence/modify the potentially rogue tenants behaviour. In regard to EPC's, well, I am aware that the energy measures in many if not all of my properties are on a par with or are better than those within adjacent properties and yet we have Governments issuing statements that the reason for the EPC rating for properties that are let by private Landlords is to bring them in line with the privately owned properties - which is absolute rubbish. I wonder if the proposals of the document also apply to the Social Landlords, Housing Associations, in the past there have been impositions on private Landlords, however Social Landlords have been exempt from these - why!. With regard to EPC ratings, one only has to take a quick look on Rightmove etc to verify the average EPC ratings at present.

From: Don Higgs 19 December 2021 09:24 AM

The proof of the pudding etc as they say Jo. There is certainly a great deal of merit in the factual information in regard to usages etc to be part of the assessment, but of course much as is the case with so many other aspects of life at the current time, there is a great reliance on "computer modelling" whether being the weather, global warming, the Covid "problem" etc and, in this particular case the energy performance of properties which - as is always stated - if you put garbage in, you get garbage out.

From: Don Higgs 18 December 2021 08:24 AM

We are in agreement Tricia, after 27 years as a Landlord I have started to "shed" my properties and would imagine that many others are similar, principally as a result of the constant impositions being placed on Landlords, including mind numbing concepts being put forward in the name of energy efficiency. The original reasoning for improving the EPC rating of those properties let by private Landlords - as was stated by Minister/s - was to ensure that their EPC rating/s are brought into line with those privately owned properties in the same area. This without doubt based on total falsehoods/lies, as I don't know of any of the properties in the general vicinity of any of my properties that have measures that surpass those associated with my properties in regard to energy efficient measure, indeed many fall behind mine. Rather annoying that we are dealing with people who have no idea at all.

From: Don Higgs 17 December 2021 10:55 AM

So very true Tricia, unfortunately there are failings associated with EPC's and more particularly those who actually carry out the assessment. I had the EPC's of a number of my properties done dur to the originals being due for renewal and observed that no allowance had been made for insulation in roofs whether pitched or flat. I mentioned to the assessor that he had not allowed such insulation and he said that they - assessors - are instructed that their assessments should not be "intrusive" and that going up steps etc for access is not to be done, result is that several of those properties have an EPC rating of "D" or "E". Now, that creates a total farce for all of us who, given the current obsession of Government/s about insulating external walls of properties which, is not only impractical whether a tenant in situ or not but, for many of us apart from the installation of PV panels is the only other realistic, but very expensive "solution" in improving the EPC rating of our properties. Unfortunately anyone, from any background can do the course and become an Energy Assessor and accordingly very few have any instinct or experience to do other that what is presented to them when becoming "accredited".

From: Don Higgs 17 December 2021 08:48 AM

As has been stated, gas boilers are fine when they are working but can prove to be an absolute nightmare when they go wrong especially at this time. I have several Biasi boilers in properties and one of them had a "flue sensor" fault reported to me - on 29th Nov, an Engineer called the same day as reported and placed one on order. After 10 days with no show I spoke with a different company that has historically had close links with Biasi and they also visited the property and again, they ordered a replacement direct with Biasi - the first company being made aware and in agreement that whoever could source the item first fits it. Fast forward to 10th Dec, still no show. The 2nd contractor spoke yet again with Biasi and they stated that the item would be re-sent on Monday via Fed Ex, the item was finally received yesterday the 15th Dec and should be fitted today. I realise that the carriers have a lot on but the delay/s associated with the original items ordered is totally unacceptable, why did Biasi continue to use the original carriers when they are totally aware that the carrier has major delays etc. A lesson to be learnt I would say. This same scenario may be applicable to other boiler producing companies. I wonder if the "Chinese effect" where components are manufactured there are being used.

From: Don Higgs 16 December 2021 08:04 AM

Interesting there's a proposed rogue agents and landlords database but not one for rogue tenants, wouldn't it be good just for once if the proposals were balanced. Also, "privatise CC Bailiffs" - so that will further drive up costs for landlords, you know decent ones who have the need to remove rogue/anti-social tenants The complete court system associated the eviction process is, inefficient, slow, very expensive - indeed, if it were a private company that had competition it would not last long. It needs a complete overhaul to make the process of evicting the rogue element of tenants, far more streamlined, but no mention! ARLA, or whoever put the proposals together, appear to be out of touch or somewhat removed from some of the important issues associated with those who let properties.

From: Don Higgs 15 December 2021 17:29 PM

There's no doubt about it, there are some bad/ rogue Landlords out there and, in my 27 years as a landlord of multiple properties - which by the way, Dave E, I worked many long hours and years without holidays to purchase - very little has changed. Many words spoken but!! LA's fail to pursue them. That said, regardless of some commenting in this item who seem to have one agenda only and that is all Landlords are providing poor quality accommodation at "top dollar"!, you're wrong, although you will never realise it because you are blinkered by your own prejudice/s. The vast majority of Landlords are happy to provide decent quality properties, will try to keep abreast of the ever increasing level of regulation etc and charge fair rents. This may be a surprise to those same individuals, but there is such a thing as bad or rogue Tenants who, either fail to understand their responsibilities to pay rent and/or act in an anti social way - drug dealing/usage, loud music into the early hours the list goes on. Good/decent tenants have little to fear because no sane Landlord will even consider evicting them.

From: Don Higgs 15 December 2021 13:58 PM

The concepts stated by the "powers that be" originally was that this measure to improve the EPC rating of properties that are tenanted to a "C" in order that they are brought up to the same standard as the properties that are privately owned, which is absolute garbage. As with many other Landlords, I can categorically state that none of the properties in the vicinity of my properties have a better EPC rating than mine (D's and E's) indeed most will have a worse rating. Once again it is Government and their "advisors" who are totally misleading - indeed lying - to everyone on this matter. Just look on Rightmove and not the general EPC ratings stated.

From: Don Higgs 15 December 2021 10:02 AM

Don't you just love politicians with their constant fiddling. I agree with the inputs provided previously about the need for a similar scheme for bad/rogue tenants, yes I know Landlordreferencingservices exists however, wouldn't it be better to have a comprehensive government backed scheme whereby all verified "rogue tenants" are listed. Although, of course we have the idiocies of certain sections of the Data Protection Act which would prevent such a useful facility. Additionally - and in line with Governments own stated criteria - how about having a system in which a "rogue tenant" is held accountable for debts, costs etc as a result of their tenancy/tenancies which will continue to be paid for - if relative out of their benefit payments - even after they have vacated the given property.

From: Don Higgs 25 January 2019 16:37 PM

Breaking News