This blog is the full (unedited) piece, written by George Dunn, TFA Chief Executive, for The Methodist Recorder, published on 31 May 2024.
The Bible contains lots of good advice and practical help in how we should manage our relationships. Whether that is between masters and slaves (today’s employers and employees) parents and children, husbands and wives and as between our peers, it seems like we need reminded of what good practice looks like in our day-to-day relationships. One of the most potent examples of this is when Jesus teaches us to “turn the other cheek” or to walk two miles with someone who forces us to walk 1 mile and even to give our coat to someone who sues us for our shirt!
In our daily engagement with the tenant farmers we represent within the TFA, stories of strained relationships as between landlords and tenants, and more usually between landlords’ agents and tenants, abound. It is often the case that contractual and relationship barriers get in the way of the development of resilient businesses or in forwarding plans which would improve environmental outcomes from tenanted holdings or even just to ensure that the farmhouse is a happy place for family.
A recent survey carried out by the TFA underlined the size of the problem that exists within the landlord tenant sector within agriculture. We found that 30% of respondents to the survey felt bullied or harassed by their landlords and 37% felt bullied or harassed by their landlords’ agents. 70% of respondents reported that they did not even have regular meetings with their landlords which is no basis upon which to build a positive, collegiate, collaborative relationship.
It was exceptionally good news therefore that the industry has come together to produce a Government backed code of practice for advising on conduct within the landlord tenant sector of agriculture. Whilst it is a shame in this day and age that we need a Code of Practice which tells people how to behave, it is clear that we need clarity around the rules of conduct. For too long tenants have felt marginalised and mistreated and this Code of Practice is a major step forward for the sector. Whilst no one is naïve enough to think that, in itself, the Code of Practice will resolve all the current problems within the sector, it will provide an important touch point for people to call out and deal with poor practice.
The central theme of the new Code of Practice is about encouraging collaboration. This was the buzzword used throughout the report of the Rock Review commissioned by DEFRA in 2022 to look into the landlord tenant system in agriculture. Recognising that there are various industry codes of practice, guidance and standards already in existence, the new code does not seek to duplicate what is already available. It is a document that can sit on farmers’ kitchen tables and can be referred to during discussions between landlords and tenants including rent reviews.
It is now really important that the professional bodies which regulate land agents and other advisers in the let sector make the Code of Practice part of their regulatory functions so that professionals can be truly held to account for their actions. In addition, we need to see the code referred to in tenancy agreements, letters of instruction and in other important agreements. It is time to change the culture within the landlord tenant sector and, the new code of practice should help that to come to fruition.
It is particularly important to ensure that landlords’ agents are respectful of place and people especially when they are holding meetings within the farm kitchens of tenant farmers where the words that they use will reverberate around that special place for weeks, months and years after any engagement takes place.
The code of practice emphasises the need for matters to be discussed in good time, so that people are not rushed into making decisions. Equally, in holding sensitive discussions, it will be necessary to choose the time to have those conversations, carefully avoiding busy times of the year or periods of particular emotional stress for farmers and their families.
There needs to be a recognition of the shared rights and responsibilities of all parties. These must be respected by all those who are taking part in negotiations and discussions in respect of tenanted agricultural holdings. Landlords and landlords’ representatives need to be more openhanded, available to meet and reasonable in their approach. Fairness and mutual respect must be the hallmarks of these relationships going forward. One practical way forward is for landlords and their representatives to develop a programme of “non-agenda visits” with their tenant farmers where relationships can be built, and trust developed over time. Inevitably, during these meetings individual issues will be raised and discussed, hopefully in a calmer and more collegiate manner than has been the case up to now..
A huge problem is that the existing mechanisms available to challenge poor conduct displayed by advisers working in the sector are far from ideal. In that most of the concerns being expressed are about individuals not directly contracted by the potential complainant, the systems for raising concerns have not adequately considered how to accommodate those. Many firms are reluctant to consider complaints from individuals who are “third parties” to their contractual relationships. Even where third-party complaints are possible, it is not easy for individuals to access the complaint handling processes of the firms employing the individuals who are to be subject to a complaint. It has been the case that third-party complainants have been given fairly short shrift when they are able to make a complaint. One TFA member who reported their experience said that, despite the poor practice displayed by an agent, the firm employing him merely said, in response to the complaint, that the agent was “only doing their job” in representing the landlord. The individual received no information about how the complaint could be escalated either within the firm or to the professional body representing the agent, the RICS.
There is also a tendency within the procedures employed by firms to review complaints against its staff and partners for firms to be protective of their own. This is both understandable and inevitable. A reference to an external body such as a Tenant Farming Commissioner could assist in resolving this conflict of interest. This was another recommendation from the Rock Review and it is certainly something that the government should be looking to implement for the benefit of the whole of the sector. Over 90% of respondents to the TFAs survey agreed that such a body would be helpful in managing relationships going forward.
It will be important for any Commissioner to be seen as accessible to both landlords and tenants rather than acting as a body which is representative of one over the other. In that way, it will guard against potential unintended consequences. Inevitably, it is likely that it will be responding to more issues raised by tenants than landlords, at least at first, but it must seek to take an even-handed approach in keeping with the principles that will be set out in the forthcoming code of practice. Making arbitration and other dispute resolution facilities already in use operate in a more accessible and cost-effective way will also be helpful for both sides in the sector.
