Exposed: Cash for logos and drive by inspections

Private Rented Sector landlords are businesses, on this occasion I am not suggesting that private home owners should be upgrading their electrical installations, I am merely saying that business owners who rent out homes to tenants should maintain and upgrade the properties they rent out.

Other businesses have to maintain and upgrade their business assets, for example the maximum age for a taxi in London is twelve years, all taxis have to comply with current legislation as well as being inspected and tested above the standard's for private cars and other commercial vehicles. If you pay to ride in a London taxi you expect it to reach minimum standards that have been revised within the lifetime of the taxi, why should a privately rented home in London be any different? There generally is not any need to demolish older rented homes, though I see some that should be, but they do need updating.

Many of the PRS homes would be classed as in a state of disrepair using social housing standards, can you name me another business that can make money renting out assets that have not been maintained and updated in the last thirty years or more?

But all this discussion that will lead nowhere could have been settled by the government publishing guidance on the requirements for RCDs in PRS homes as recommended by the working group, which the government have either failed to do or deliberately avoided, personally I think they probably deliberately avoided it.

Going right back to the start of the discussion saying "Cash for logos" and the NICEIC and NAPIT are responsible for this mess is completely unfounded, because they were never put in the position of supervising PRS EICRs in the first place, it is not their job to sort it out.

Any problems are directly as a result of the government legislation and a failure to follow the working group recommendations.

Private Rented Sector landlords are businesses, on this occasion I am not suggesting that private home owners should be upgrading their electrical installations, I am merely saying that business owners who rent out homes to tenants should maintain and upgrade the properties they rent out.

Other businesses have to maintain and upgrade their business assets, for example the maximum age for a taxi in London is twelve years, all taxis have to comply with current legislation as well as being inspected and tested above the standard's for private cars and other commercial vehicles. If you pay to ride in a London taxi you expect it to reach minimum standards that have been revised within the lifetime of the taxi, why should a privately rented home in London be any different? There generally is not any need to demolish older rented homes, though I see some that should be, but they do need updating.

Many of the PRS homes would be classed as in a state of disrepair using social housing standards, can you name me another business that can make money renting out assets that have not been maintained and updated in the last thirty years or more?

But all this discussion that will lead nowhere could have been settled by the government publishing guidance on the requirements for RCDs in PRS homes as recommended by the working group, which the government have either failed to do or deliberately avoided, personally I think they probably deliberately avoided it.

Going right back to the start of the discussion saying "Cash for logos" and the NICEIC and NAPIT are responsible for this mess is completely unfounded, because they were never put in the position of supervising PRS EICRs in the first place, it is not their job to sort it out.

Any problems are directly as a result of the government legislation and a failure to follow the working group recommendations.