The government has this week produced its further substantial amendments to the Renters Reform Bill which is expected to have its report stage in the House of Commons on 24 April. After that it is likely to progress fairly rapidly through third reading and head to the House of Lords. Indications are that the government has renewed its commitment to the Bill and is keen to get it done before a general election.

The amendments are significant running to well over 200 changes. This makes understanding them somewhat challenging! However, this post is focused on one specific area, that of students.

One of the key concerns for student landlords has been the lack of certainty about being able to recover possession from one group of students in order to let to a subsequent group. The government had proposed to resolve this by providing a new ground for possession, ground 4A. However, this new ground was in itself criticised as it had limitations, such as requiring the property to be an HMO, that made it unworkable in practice. As a result the government has significantly rewritten ground 4A.

I have reproduced the amended ground 4A below with italics showing the new text.

Ground 4A

The following conditions are met—

(za) the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them, gave the tenant, before the beginning of the tenancy or on the day on which it began, a written statement of the landlord’s wish to be able to recover possession on the basis that—

(i) at the beginning of the tenancy, as regards each tenant either—

(A) the tenant was a full-time student, or

(B) the landlord reasonably believed that the tenant would become a full-time student during the tenancy, and

(ii) the landlord intends to let the dwelling-house, on the next occasion on which it is let, to people who are full-time students or who the landlord reasonably believes will become full-time students during the tenancy;

(a) at the beginning of the tenancy, as regards each tenant either—

(i) the tenant was a full-time student, or

(ii) the landlord reasonably believed that the tenant would become a full-time student during the tenancy,

(c) the relevant date falls within the period beginning with 1 June and ending with 30 September in any year, and

(d) the landlord seeking possession intends, on the next occasion on which the dwelling-house is let, to let it to people who are full-time students or who the landlord reasonably believes will become full-time students during the tenancy.

In this ground, “full-time student” means a person receiving education provided by means of a full-time course—

(a) of any description mentioned in Schedule 6 to the Education 20 Reform Act 1988 provided by an institution in England or Wales;

(b) of any description mentioned in section 38(2) of the Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act 1992 provided by an institution in Scotland;

(c) of any description mentioned in Schedule 1 to the Further 25 Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 (S.I. 1997/1772 (N.I. 15)) provided by an institution in Northern Ireland.

Large chunks of the ground are unchanged, particularly the definition of a full time student. However, the real meat of the ground and how it can be used has been substantially altered. First and foremost, there is now a requirement to notify tenants at the start of the tenancy the possession might be recovered under the student ground. This is, to some extent, bringing back prior notice which has been largely removed by the Renters’ Reform Bill but it seems to be a sensible compromise in this area. Any requirement for the tenancy to be a joint tenancy or for the property to be an HMO have been removed and the dates that the notice must expire have been rewritten for greater clarity.

This ground will be far more acceptable to many student landlords as it is far simpler to use although it will be important to get the prior notification correct. It still does not deal with the primary complaint of most student landlords that having to give notice, as opposed to having a clearly established fixed term, reduces certainty that students will in fact leave when they are expected to. However, given that the government was never likely to compromise over fixed terms this is likely to be the best outcome that will be achieved or the student sector.