Security of Tenure and Prevention of Evictions: Assessment of Flemish Policy Instruments Bernard Hubeau – University of Antwerp Diederik Vermeir – University of Antwerp

Brussels-capital Region (1,100,000 inhabitants) Flemish Region (6,300,000 inhabitants) Walloon Region (3,500,000 inhabitants)

Evictions in the PRS Mostly in Private Rented Sector (80%) 2014: 13,000 – 15,000 requests of evictions Strong increase reported o 2005: 100/week o 2014: /week Main cause: rent arrears (90%) o Wrong assessment of the consequences of default payments o Large share of the available budget o … No centralized data on enforced evictions

Role of the PRS Role of the PRS in policy terms o Focus on homeownership - Weakening PRS o Growing concern, but until now no general reorientation of policy Role of the PRS in meeting social needs o Serving 3 groups of +/- equal size o Starters, on the way to homeownership o Low housing quality / weak socio-economic profile of tenants o Older persons that moved to an appartment o Increasing share of vulnerable groups: low income, unemployed, unfit for work, singles, single-parents with children o Increasing problems with affordability, esp. for the lowest income groups o Evolution of market rents : general increase of 8% – 18% for the lowest income group – 17% for the unemployed – 24% for the disabled

Size of the PRS Figure 1: Tenure, Flemish region, Sources: * Descamps (1997), **Goossens et al. (1997), ° FOD Economie [Federal Economy Department] - ADSEI, SEE 2001, °°Heylen et al. (2007).

Security of tenure: general framework Article 23 of the Belgian Constitution o All branches of government are responsible, each within the limits of their power (e.g. Flemish Housing Code) o The possibility of the tenant to remain in the dwelling as long as he or she wishes – in a broader sense: connected to housing conditions European and International Housing rights o Not formally protected by the ECHR, but ‘a protectable interest’ o Balance of interests is required (ECtHR, 13/05/08, McCann vs. UK; ECtHR, 11/01/01, Lunari vs. Italy) Effectiveness on the ground? Policies of security of tenure?

Security of Tenure: Tenancy law House Rental Act (1991) Security of tenure as one of the predominant features o Duration: 9 years – Short term lease: restricted o Termination with a notice period o Notice period of 6 months, limited to specific circumstances o Termination due to violation of contractual duties o Has to be requested at the Justice of the Peace (cfr. McCann vs UK) A balanced regulation? o Mechanisms to guarantee a fair return on investment o Initial rent: no regulation – During the lease: costs of living + Review at court Results on the ground o Tenants’ perspective: 53% short term contracts o Landlords’ associations: income is too low + Eviction procedures

Prevention of eviction: procedural law Act on the Humanization of evictions (1998): Specific procedure for evictions o Standstill period of one month (can be shortened or prolonged) o Information requirements (remaining goods, actual date of eviction) o Public Centre of Social Welfare (PCSW): obligation to support the tenant in the most fitting manner o both prevention (mediation, legal aid) and management (resettlement, financial support) o Notify PCSW’s as soon as possible to enhance their ability to offer assistance Assistance by the PCSW o Any eviction requested at the Justice of the Peace: notification o Respect for individual autonomy

Assistance by the PCSW An effective policy instrument to prevent evictions? o Sector of PCSW’s: ‘has not led to a decrease of evictions’ o Not informed about the remainder of the procedure (after the request) in 57% of the cases – other cases: 90% actual evictions Possible explanations o Lack of staff and resources: how assistance is offered -> previously known (51%)? o Assistance is only offered when an eviction was already requested at the Justice of the Peace o PCSW’s are not informed about the remainder of the procedure/enforcement of the eviction

Fund to Prevent Evictions Recent initiative: 2014 Objectives o Prevention of evictions: assistance with reimbursement of rent arrears o Strengthen the attractiveness of the PRS for investors o Encourage landlords to conduct an agreement with weaker profiles Procedure o Linked to request of evictions due to rent arrears o Guarantee actual execution of repayment plan imposed by the Justice of the Peace o cover the difference between the imposed and the actual reimbursement, if the tenant fails to comply to the plan o Voluntary basis: initiative needed by the landlord o Important additional requirements: housing quality standards, due dates, max. coverage (€2,700)

Fund to Prevent Evictions An effective policy instrument to prevent evictions? o Started on January 1th 2014 o Only 330 landlords applied (245 effectively affiliated) – initial target of 18,000 o Only to 2 landlords notified the fund about an eviction procedure (1 refused) Possible explanations o Court of Auditors: ‘Absence of a communication campaign’ o Landlords’ organizations: ‘too complicated, lots of due dates, multiple administrative steps’ o Other recommendations: tenants are protected differently + better to intervene at an earlier stage

Conclusion Weakening PRS, further stressed by the crisis Growing concensus concerning the need for a supply and demand-side PRS policy Security of tenure and prevention of evictions can be of the essence in those policies Striking increase of evictions: existing preventive instruments seem to be insufficient Main issues in the short term: data on evictions, an earlier intervention, development of good practices, fine-tune with the profile of tenants and landlords, enhance communication

Questions?