Committee publication · Correspondence · 17 June 2026

Letter from The Property Institute to the Chair dated 3 June 2026 concerning recommendations on the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill

From: Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Inquiry: Pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill

Summary

The Property Institute's Chief Executive welcomes most recommendations in the Housing Committee's report on the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, particularly support for commonhold, property manager regulation, and Lord Best's independent regulator model. However, he seeks clarification on paragraph 118, which appears to reject mandatory qualifications delivered by professional bodies like TPI, while simultaneously endorsing Lord Best's model that places such qualifications centrally. He argues mandatory qualifications are essential for safety and proposes separating standard-setting from enforcement.

Key findings

TPI welcomes the Committee's support for commonhold, property manager regulation, and an independent regulator (Lord Best's model), which centres mandatory qualifications alongside a Code of Practice and licensing regime.
TPI seeks clarification on the apparent tension between paragraph 118 (rejecting mandatory qualifications by designated professional bodies) and the Committee's broader endorsement of Lord Best's model, which mandates qualifications.
TPI proposes a model separating qualification-setting and delivery by professional bodies (like TPI and RICS) from enforcement by an independent statutory regulator, drawing on how legal and accountancy professions resolve potential conflicts of interest.
TPI argues mandatory qualifications are essential for safety in multi-occupancy buildings, citing tragedies from incompetent management and noting mandatory qualifications already apply to social housing sector property managers.
TPI stresses urgent clarification is needed by managing agents deciding whether to enrol staff on qualification courses ahead of legislation, and states that achieving a fully qualified profession will take several years.

Tone

Procedural

Topics

housing-regulationleasehold-reformproperty-managementprofessional-standardsconsumer-protection

Key actors

The Property Institute, Andrew V Bulmer, Florence Eshalomi MP, Lord Best, Minister Pennycook, RICS, OFQUAL

Notable line

“Competent, qualified property managers are essential to the safety of people living in multi-occupancy buildings; incompetent ones are, demonstrably, a danger to life and property.”

Key Quotes

“We read the recommendation as supporting nationally recognised mandatory qualifications and CPD delivered by bodies such as TPI and other OFQUAL-regulated providers, while reserving enforcement for an independent statutory regulator rather than the DPBs themselves.”
— Andrew V Bulmer · interpreting the apparent tension in paragraph 118

“Competent, qualified property managers are essential to the safety of people living in multi-occupancy buildings; incompetent ones are, demonstrably, a danger to life and property.”
— Andrew V Bulmer · on the importance of mandatory qualifications

“We believe that model could work robustly and at lower cost to leaseholders, and if that is the path Government chooses to follow, we would step up to it.”
— Andrew V Bulmer · on the alternative of empowering DPBs to enforce regulatory standards

“That said, our consistent position remains that "Best is Best," delivered in full, and we welcome the Committee's call for exactly that.”
— Andrew V Bulmer · on Lord Best's independent regulator model

View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗