Political meddling may upset tenant owner relations
Ihave a reputation amongst some of the younger members of the family for being a bit careful with the pennies when it comes to keeping our old farmhouse warm.
For, while the heating is on for an hour or two morning and night over the winter months, during the daytime hours working in the icy draughts of the office often requires a couple of jumpers, a hoodie and even a blanket over my knees – and I have been accused of rehearsing for the local am-dram production of A Christmas Carol.
I don’t know if I’m the only one who adopts such a parsimonious approach to the draughts and damp which afflict many old farmhouses – but the results of a recent survey confirmed that I’m not the only one who has to cope with accommodation which some might view as falling below tolerable standards.
A report drawn up for the Scottish Government looking into the state of farmhouses on agricultural tenancies estimated that up to £278 million would need to be spent on such dwellings across the country to bring them up to what many would view as an acceptable level.
The findings also showed that only around half of tenanted farmhouses had central heating and that a high proportion still had single glazing.
The survey was conducted after MSPS who had been out and about taking evidence in the run-up to the 2016 Land Reform Act had been dismayed by the state of some houses on tenanted farms.
Farmhouses associated with agricultural tenancies do not fall under the same regulations as normal rented housing – and landlords are not legally required to meet the same standards as they would under residential leases.
The report was the first step in taking a closer look into the situation with the aim of bringing standards closer to those expected by people in other walks of life.
However, the survey also showed that more than half of those houses had been in the family for more than 50 years – and it’s fair to say that over that time expectations have changed.
Unsurprisingly, there was a difference of opinion in the assessment of the level of facilities provided in responses from landlords and those from their actual tenants. But the survey did reveal that the majority of tenants were either fairly content with what was provided – or had upgraded the accommodation at their own expense.
So it might seem a politically correct course for the Scottish Parliament to look into this area with a view to improving things. But while there are undoubtedly some extreme cases, amongst tenants there’s a feeling that pushing too hard on this one is likely to open a whole new can of worms which could well lead to more conflict and controversy
in a sector which already has its fair share.
Indeed it has long been a tactic of agents conducting farm rent reviews to point out that, at the current inflated levels – and with traditional farmhouses often built to accommodate families of seven or more – a landlord could get more for leasing out the farmhouse on its own than they currently received in the way of rent for the whole farm.
Obviously this is an unfair tactic – and in truth on many of the multigeneration tenancies the bulk of the farmhouse amenities have probably been paid for by the tenant. This can even extend as far as the installation of such amenities as running water, indoor toilets and electricity.
Now while tenants should obviously use the current improvements amnesty to get this properly documented, there has generally been a bit of an unspoken acknowledgement that a landlord taking a farmhouse back in hand would have to spend big bucks upgrading before he could lease a farmhouse on the residential market.
And so, with an uneasy truce in operation, the worry is that well-meaning political interference could upset the current equilibrium.
Now where did I leave those gloves…?