---

Renters’ Rights Bill

My Lords, my name is down in support of Amendment 262 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, which, as he so eloquently explained, calls for a review of the position of river houseboat residents. I also support his Amendment 206A, which would give houseboat residents similar protections to those afforded to renters in the Bill before us. Protections are needed for those on houseboats against evictions and massive increases in mooring fees and licences, which are simply not affordable to many who have made their homes on our rivers and canals.

I couple these houseboat amendments with Amendment 206B, so convincingly covered by the noble Baroness, Lady Whitaker, and supported by the noble Lord, Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth, which would enhance the rights of those living in so-called mobile homes, often known as “park homes”. There are obvious parallels between those living in mobile homes where the site is owned by someone else and those living in houseboats, where, again, the resident does not own the place where their home is situated, as the noble Lord, Lord Young, explained. In both cases, there is a need for protection just as much for the rights of those occupiers as for those living in permanent bricks and mortar homes that cannot be moved.

I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Whitaker, for her fearless campaigning for Gypsy and Traveller rights, and I will not attempt to speak on her expert amendments in respect of those communities.

My interest in respect of mobile homes stems from the Mobile Homes Act, which the former MP, Peter Aldous, introduced as a Private Member’s Bill and I piloted through your Lordships’ House in 2013. Today, some 200,000 people—many of them elderly—occupy such mobile homes, on about 2,000 sites. Although some are living in happy communities, there have been too many cases of unfair practices by site owners taking advantage of those residents.

4.30 pm

Some important protections for park home residents have been introduced by the earlier legislation, and those protections have parallels to the circumstances facing houseboat residents. Park home residents pay pitch fees, which are similar to mooring fees. There are legal protections from excessive increases in charges, which broadly keep rises in line with inflation, and there are controls on resales of electricity and water. The position facing mobile home owners is far from perfect—indeed, park home campaigners will tomorrow present a petition at 10 Downing Street calling for the abolition of the 10% commission that they must pay site owners when they sell their park homes—but

there are lessons to be learned from the rights already afforded to park home residents. Those could be adopted to improve the position for houseboat residents.

Amendment 206B relates specifically to residents of park homes who are renting, not owning the property. Some site owners act as landlords to the minority of occupiers who are tenants. The amendment would ensure that they had the same rights as any other tenants. Since most are older people and there is a history of exploitation by some site owners, it is important that they have the key protections which this Bill confers.

The point of principle is that all residents in park homes and all those living in houseboats share a need for security and for constraints on increases to the charges they must pay, charges that are akin to rental payments. In other words, they should be treated, as nearly as possible, like all the other renters whose rights are enhanced by this Bill. These amendments take this forward, and I support them.