Rent Board seeks to balance interests

Published: Sunday | March 8, 2009


The Editor, Sir:

I got the sense that the editorial of March 4 was an emotional, uncontrolled, incoherent babbling about the activities of the Rent Board.

Your editorial spoke from a perspective which does not reflect an understanding of the reality faced by ordinary people in the society.

The Government has a responsibility towards the public. One of the justifications for much legislation is to prompt public policy and it is in the public's interest to balance the interests of landlord and tenant so that no side feels disenfranchised, given the excesses to which the industry is inclined.

The role of the Rent Board is to be seen in this context.

It is primarily because the Rent Board was in hibernation during the previous administration why excessive security deposits are being collected and have become almost institutionalised. On the other hand, some landlords are afraid to collect a security deposit because of ignorance of the law.

The recommendation of the Rent Board in this regard is with a view to balancing the interests of the two groups.

The Rent Board is not against enterprise or a booming construction industry. As long as a significant percentage of our people depend on renting residences for shelter and the State is unable to fill the gap in the near future, a reasonable way has to be found to reconcile both interest groups.

Security deposit

The Rent Board is attempting to do just that under my watch. Where tenants vacate properties without meeting their obligation, there was and still is remedy at law and we have recommended that landlords be specifically allowed to charge one month's rental as security deposit for unfurnished premises, or two months' rental as security deposit for furnished premises. This, our investigations reveal, is the norm in the industry today.

We have also proposed that the new legislation exclude from its ambit public and commercial properties since the supply outweighs the demand and the collective experience of the board does not indicate any significant problems in those areas.

There are other boards which are in a permanent state of hibernation. This Rent Board will not be named among them. Until such time as we are disbanded on the recommendation of The Gleaner and its associates, we shall perform in the interest of both landlord and tenant.

I am, etc.,

MARVALYN TAYLOR-WRIGHT

Chairman

Rent Assessment Board