‘The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 gives residential tenants
clear and ample legal redress against their landlords, as regards any problems
with the condition of their rented properties.’ Critically discuss.
The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) H(FHH)A 2018 was introduced to ensure
properties rented out are fit for human habitation and it gives tenants legal rights to be
able to force landlords to make improvements if the property does not meet the
acceptable fitness standard. This essay will argue that the HFHHA has given tenants
legal rights against their landlords but there are problems with applying these rights in
practice. There is a discrepancy between the law on paper and the law in practice. The
essay will start by looking at some of the issues pre 2018 act and assess why the
HFHHA was needed. It will go on to look at what the HFHHA has done and if it was
successful in giving tenants these legal rights against their landlords as regards to any
problems associated with the condition of their property. It will further look at future
reforms that have been suggested. It is important to access the HFHHA as it directly
affects how people who live in rented properties can take legal actions against their
landlords to improve their standard of living.
To begin, before the introduction of the HFHHA, there was the Landlord and Tenants Act
1985 (LTA). The HFHHA was introduced to amend some of the issues in the LTA and
give more legal rights to tenants. There were issues regarding how the LTA worked in
practice. For Example there were issues as to what the covenant covered as seen in
the case of Irvine v Moran were it was held that decorative work was not covered unless
necessary to fulfil the obligation to repair. There were difficulties for the courts in
deciding what was and was not part of the building structure however; the courts have
tried to extend their scope as in the case of Grand v Gill where the plasterwork was
included as part of the structure. Nevertheless, this requirement was still seen as
problematic as things affected may not just be the structure and if that is the case,
claimants would not be covered by S11 of the LTA. The LTA did make it difficult for
tenants regarding other aspects but there were public regulations in place for local
authorities to serve notices to private accommodations to deal with hazards under the
clear and ample legal redress against their landlords, as regards any problems
with the condition of their rented properties.’ Critically discuss.
The Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) H(FHH)A 2018 was introduced to ensure
properties rented out are fit for human habitation and it gives tenants legal rights to be
able to force landlords to make improvements if the property does not meet the
acceptable fitness standard. This essay will argue that the HFHHA has given tenants
legal rights against their landlords but there are problems with applying these rights in
practice. There is a discrepancy between the law on paper and the law in practice. The
essay will start by looking at some of the issues pre 2018 act and assess why the
HFHHA was needed. It will go on to look at what the HFHHA has done and if it was
successful in giving tenants these legal rights against their landlords as regards to any
problems associated with the condition of their property. It will further look at future
reforms that have been suggested. It is important to access the HFHHA as it directly
affects how people who live in rented properties can take legal actions against their
landlords to improve their standard of living.
To begin, before the introduction of the HFHHA, there was the Landlord and Tenants Act
1985 (LTA). The HFHHA was introduced to amend some of the issues in the LTA and
give more legal rights to tenants. There were issues regarding how the LTA worked in
practice. For Example there were issues as to what the covenant covered as seen in
the case of Irvine v Moran were it was held that decorative work was not covered unless
necessary to fulfil the obligation to repair. There were difficulties for the courts in
deciding what was and was not part of the building structure however; the courts have
tried to extend their scope as in the case of Grand v Gill where the plasterwork was
included as part of the structure. Nevertheless, this requirement was still seen as
problematic as things affected may not just be the structure and if that is the case,
claimants would not be covered by S11 of the LTA. The LTA did make it difficult for
tenants regarding other aspects but there were public regulations in place for local
authorities to serve notices to private accommodations to deal with hazards under the
