Government told to get timings right over fees ban and compulsory CMP to stop agents dipping into client money

The Government has been warned that steps must be taken to stop agents who lose income as a result of the fees ban from dipping into client funds to try and keep their businesses afloat.

Specifically, says ARLA Propertymark, the mandatory requirement for all letting agents to offer Client Money Protection should come into force either before, or at the same time as, the ban.

It has told the Government: “We recommend that the requirements to join a CMP scheme are introduced from April 2018 with enforcement commencing from April 2019 so that CMP comes into force either before or at the same time as the ban on tenant fees.

“This is to ensure that consumers are protected should an agent use their client funds to try and keep their business afloat once they lose their tenant fees.”

The recommendation is part of ARLA’s response to the Government’s plans for mandatory CMP.

Elsewhere in its response, ARLA says that any tenant or landlord wanting to make a CMP claim should be required to report it to the police and request a crime number.

It says: “This will ensure that the police do not see the matter as a civil offence when it comes to prosecution and will allow the scheme operators to make claims against the agent under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.”

ARLA also proposes that any agent breaching the requirement to belong to a CMP scheme should be fined up to £30,000 and given a banning order.

ARLA also says that CMP providers should have to deliver minimum cover:

  • £25,000 to reimburse a tenant or landlords for loss of rent of deposit
  • £500,000 on a claim made against any single company or agency

In addition:

  • Schemes should prove they can pay out up to £5m a year
  • Schemes should be able to cover the possibility of 100 agents going out of business each year
  • Landlords should only be able to claim up to three months of missing rent, on the basis that landlords should take some level of personal responsibility for checking they have received rent payments from their agent
  • Any agent expelled from one CMP scheme should not be able to join another

As far as the actual operation of the schemes goes, ARLA says:

  • All client funds should be deposited into a specially designated account at a bank or building society, which should be kept separate from the firm’s own money
  • Each transaction would have to be first recorded, then monitored and reconciled
  • Firms should have Professional Indentity insurance to cover theft by staff

The ARLA response says that CMP schemes should be market-led with more than one scheme available, to offer competition, and all regulated by the Government.

A single scheme, one of the Government’s proposed options, could lead to agents paying a much higher CMP levy.

ARLA says that similar to the existing tenancy deposit protection and redress schemes, there should be a tendering process with five-year contracts.

Only government-approved schemes should be allowed to provide CMP.

The schemes should be required to cover loss of rent; other funds held by agents such as floats to pay for repairs; and unprotected deposits.

The schemes should also be required to cover any deductions from deposits that are due to the landlord.

Currently, says ARLA, insurance-backed deposit schemes pay out any money due to the tenant but not to the landlord if the agent has misappropriated the deposit money.

x

Email the story to a friend



10 Comments

  1. spin2009

    At least they dropped their controversial proposal that agents should be obliged to “stand on their heads” twice a day.

    Report
    1. 247property-Services-HQ

      So funny.

      Report
  2. eltell

    So ARLA have at last woken up to the fact that hundreds of letting agents, including their very own members, could go out of business as a result of the proposed fees ban.  Clearly ARLA have rolled over and accepted the ban without any thought of using social media to influence decision makers.  Never in the field of commercial conflict has so little been done for so many!

    Report
    1. Chris Wood

      “Never in the field of commercial conflict has so little been done for so many!”

      Comment of the week!

      Report
  3. 70GJ

    I always felt that ARLA poorly represented its members when it came to lobbying the Government

    Report
    1. BillyTheFish

      I think they gave up with a whimper

      Report
      1. appledorelettings24

        Never a truer word spoken BillyTheFish.

        Report
    2. spin2009

      If you are a trade body you get to a fork in the road where you have to decide whether you vigorously represent and defend the interests of your members or just morph into the “Ministry of Lettings and Inventory Checks”.

      Only time will tell.

      Report
  4. TheLondonAgent

    ARLA is a profit making business, the government is too lazy to properly regulate the Industry.

    Report
  5. Robert May

    Elsewhere in its response, ARLA says that any tenant or landlord wanting to make a CMP claim should be required to report it to the police and request a crime number.

    Looks like  it should be noted that unless a desk sergeant at the local police station can be convinced an agent principal has committed a crime and not a civil tort they won’t be paying out.

    I seem to remember a few years back (2012) when I pointed out no insurance  company is  going to  pay out to the victims of burglary on a policy taken out by the burglar.

     

     

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.