-
I dug in to this, and as I understand it, the 'fit for human habitation' bit has always been in the L&T act - the problem was it applied only to properties that cost tiny amounts to rent per year.
It was there to stop people from renting their sheds as houses.
There was / is no definition of what 'fit for human habitation' means.
Karen Buck's bill was going to update the L&T act to bring the tiny amounts that triggered the habitation bit of the act in line with today's rental prices.
It was voted down because the government felt that there were enough powers held by Local Authorities to regulate the private rental market and that the power should reside with LAs to enforce, not with tenants and their lawyers.
In my view
the Tory government killed a law that would require rental properties to be 'fit for human habitation'.
is misleading - and the way this has been spun on some internet sites, is fake news.
*ducks*
You are reading a single comment by @Howard and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Howard
Fox
I don't know but in January 2016 the Tory government killed a law that would require rental properties to be 'fit for human habitation'.
At least 72 of those who voted it down were landlords:
https://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/01/housing-bill-73-mps-who-voted-down-fit-for-human-habitation-clause-are-landlords/