Outright bans on children will breach The Property Ombudsman Code of Conduct

Children and pets are two things which landlords often object to when choosing new tenants for their property.  As both can cause damage.  Sometimes substantial damage.

It is not currently against the law to prohibit tenants with pets – but what about children?

We don’t at the time of writing, have any case law on this, but we do have a decision from The Property Ombudsman.

The Property Ombudsman Decision

The Property Ombudsman is one of the two property redress schemes which all letting agents must join as a condition of being a letting agent.

The Property Ombudsman has a code of conduct which his members are required to abide by. 

In a recent decision, a claim was brought by a nurse with four children who had found it impossible to find alternative accommodation after having been given a no-fault eviction notice by their current landlord.  She claimed that she was being unlawfully discriminated against.

Landlords have to abide by the discrimination legislation, which sets out various ‘protected characteristics’.  If they refuse to accept a tenant because they fall into one of the protected characteristic categories, then this will be unlawful.

Being a parent with children is not one of the protected characteristics (although being pregnant or on maternity leave is).  

However, the Ombudsman found that ‘no children’ bans breached the equality rules in its code of practice because they disproportionately affect women.  As discriminating against someone on the basis of their sex is unlawful.

The significance of this decision

This is not a court claim, and so will not form a precedent which Judges have to follow – although it is likely that they will take ‘judicial notice’ of it when considering claims.

It is also limited, at the moment, to complaints brought to the Property Ombudsman, as the Property Redress Scheme does not have the same code of conduct.

However, that said, I think it is probably just a matter of time being this principal is accepted by Judges and the Property Redress Scheme. 

Landlords and agents should therefore be very careful about their advertisements for properties and should not state that children are banned or tell applicants that their claim is being rejected because of their children.

I suppose if a property is clearly unsuitable for children – for example, if it could be dangerous, then mention could be made of this, but my advice would be to be very careful with your wording.

You should also be careful about how you word internal memos and records and if possible always cite a different reason for not accepting an applicant – for example, that you prefer one of the other applicants or that you are worried about their ability to pay the rent (if this is a reasonable concern).

Any Landlord Law members with any questions about this, should raise a question in the member’s forum.