Analysis of the register of interests for the House of Lords by the RRC finds that at least 14 of the 44 peers speaking at the bill’s second reading are landlords of properties in England which will be affected by the new legislation, with a further three letting out properties in other countries. Across the House of Lords itself, the RRC believes that at least 134 peers are landlords, owning at least 626 properties in England – meaning roughly one in six peers in the upper chamber is a landlord affected by the new bill.
The real number of properties owned by landlord Lords is likely to be significantly greater, as peers are not required to list the number of properties which pay rent to them, and in many cases only name the areas in which their properties are based. The Renters’ Reform Coalition and Electoral Reform Society are calling for greater transparency and a stronger register of interests.
Many Lords own rental homes through a trust and do not declare the number of properties in their register – for example Lord Benyon does not declare rental properties on his register of interests, but is Chair and Director of the Englefield Estate Trust Corporation which owns at least 200 rented homes in Hackney (the Benyon Estate) – likely worth at least £5 million per year in rental income. The Earl of Leicester also owns at least 200 private rented homes through the Holkham Estate (his register of interests simply refers to rent from “agricultural and amenity land, and commercial and residential buildings in Norfolk”). In about half (63) of cases where peers disclose rental income, they do not specify the number of properties.
Other Lords disclose no rental income or properties, but own or have significant control in companies that manage property and rentals – for example, Lord Agnew of Oulton declares no residential rental properties but owns “Ovington Operations LLC” with his wife, a partnership holding rental property.
Due to the difficulty in accessing the information, the real number of properties owned by peers is unknown, but the RRC say it could “easily run into the thousands”. The RRC is calling for more transparency in Lords’ declarations of interests, and for the register of interests to state the specific number of properties owned and amount of income received.
In the RRC analysis of House of Lords interests, Conservative affiliated peers declared the most properties (at least 108), while Crossbenchers, Bishops and ‘Non-affiliated’ peers declared at least 67 rental properties, and Lords from Labour and the Liberal Democrats declared at least 32 and 19 respectively.
Renters’ groups are calling on the Upper Chamber to back a number of amendments to strengthen the Renters’ Rights Bill, including two months’ compensation for renters facing no fault eviction under new grounds, restrictions on when landlords can require guarantors to reduce discrimination, and a cap on in-tenancy rent increases to prevent unfair rent hikes forcing renters out of their homes.
Tom Darling, Director of the Renters’ Reform Coalition said:
“Landlords make up 1 in 25 of the public, but almost a third of the peers due to speak in today’s House of Lords debate on the Renters’ Rights Bill.
“What peers must declare in the register of interests only scratches the surface – at the very least the register should require landlords to state how many rental properties they own and the income they receive. What is clear however is that peers do receive rent from hundreds of renters around the country at a minimum, and the real number could easily run into the thousands. Peers now have a crucial role in scrutinising rental reform and fixing loopholes. The RRC is calling on them to strengthen the bill, and warning against attempts to water it down to benefit landlords.”
“Our view is being a landlord shouldn’t prohibit someone from being a legislator, but I do think it’s in the public interest that peers who unambiguously declare an interest in debates on this bill and other renting matters, and as part of which we should precisely the scale and nature of their outside interest in these matters.”
Jess Garland, Director of Research and Policy at the Electoral Reform Society said:
“There is a concern that the second chamber is vulnerable to outside influence and lobbying as many peers have jobs and interests outside of parliament, something that is encouraged by the appointments system. On top of this, there is also no way for the public to hold unelected peers to account or to ensure that the needs of citizens are considered above the business interests of individuals appointed to the chamber.”
“In these circumstances it is even more important to have high levels of transparency, so the public always know what may be influencing the people shaping the laws they live under. To that end we support calls for a stronger register of interests.