Housing Ombudsman Service revealed

The government has announced this week a few more details on the new landlord ombudsman which will be delivered by the ongoing Housing Ombudsman Service which currently runs for tenants in the social housing sector to keep consistency within the housing sector.

Compensation figures have also been detailed which will be binding and awarded to anything up to £25,000. Tenants will still be able to pursue a claim through the courts if they wish.

No start date of exact rules have been detailed however Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, a minister in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said

We will give landlords sufficient notice and clear guidance before any future requirement to join the scheme comes into force. The expectation is that, ultimately, a single organisation will administer redress across both private and social rented sectors.

Heatwave could impact landlords under new laws

Landlords could now be fined up to £7000 under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) for rental properties that overheat and cause a health risk.

Whilst installing air conditioning or fans is not a legal requirement, failure to maintain normal ventilation, such as broken extractor fans, windows that are stuck or do not open correctly and impact air flow would be a breach.  This could incur a fine from the council of up to £7000 per hazard.

There is no legal maximum indoor temperature for rental properties, but if overheating causes a health risk then landlords need to act.

Jack Malnick, co-founder of Landlord Resource said

It’s not a question of a set temperature to breach, but whether the overheating is severe enough to become a health and safety hazard or make the property unfit.

Landlords need to stay on top of repairs raised by their tenants; ignoring a ventilation issue could land you with a high fine.

Disability discrimination may catch you out

An interesting article this week we felt is worth mentioning.  With Section21 no longer an option, landlords now have to rely on rent arrears or anti-social behaviour possession claims.  However, be warned that tenants can raise a counterclaim against these, citing disability discrimination.

Under the Equality Act 2010 tenants could argue that the reason they fell into rent arrears was due to their disability. The court must then take this into consideration and look to see if there were any steps the landlord could have taken to mitigate their arrears, taking into account their disability.

A case relevant to this is Radcliffe and Paterson, where the landlords sought possession after £8000 rent arrears. However, the judge ruled in favour of the tenant and, amongst other payments, awarded £2000 in favour of the tenant for disability discrimination and claimed that the possession order was unreasonable based on medical evidence of Miss Paterson’s health conditions.

It should be noted that disability compensation has been significantly revised from April 2025, and can range in the lower bands from £1,200 to £12,100.  More serious cases can be awarded anything up to £60,700 based on the standard Vento guidelines now used.

High percentage of tenants unaware of rental reforms

According to new research carried out by TDS Charitable Foundation, 69% of tenants are unaware of the changes that have come into force following the Renters’ Right Act. More concerning is that these are the groups that are considered to be the most vulnerable, on lower incomes and those renting student accommodation or bedsits.

• 47% of students were unaware of the Act
• 78% of tenants are unaware of the new tribunal to challenge rent increases
• 14% of tenants aware of pet reform rules and seeking permission

The TDS Charitable Foundation spokesperson, Dr Jennifer Harris, said

Government, landlords, letting agents, advice services and sector organisations all have a role to play in ensuring renters understand their rights, know how to enforce them and can fully benefit from the protections the Act is designed to provide.

Snippets

Selective Licensing call – NRLA hits back at MPs
Landlords lose long legal battle over HMOs
How to speed up the new eviction process
Government defends court readiness amid warnings over Renters’ Rights Act strain

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week

Calls grow to end insured protection deposit scheme

Generation Rent has this week launched a petition calling for the end of insured protection deposit schemes in which the landlord or agent holds the tenant’s deposit.

As opposed to a custodial deposit scheme, where the deposit is held by a scheme provider.

This follows on from last week, when Matthew Pennycook, Housing Minister said that the insured scheme is more open to fraud and gives advantage to the landlord. Generation Rent claim that this enables a landlord to exaggerate a claim and put more pressure onto a tenant to accept any claim damage.

They also claim that in 2019 custodial deposits were 32% more likely to be disputed than deposits that are in an insured scheme.

Eddie Hooker, Chief Executive of MyDeposits says

No impact assessment, consultation paper or research has been published by the government to  demonstrating its that insured schemes present a materially greater fraud risk than custodial schemes.

An insured scheme is subject to statutory safeguards.

Strangely, many landlords have told me that they use an insured scheme as it allows them to refund the deposit money to tenants quicker than it takes to get the money paid out from custodial schemes.  Have Generation Rent taken this into account, I wonder?

Councils can’t enforce blanket HMO license conditions, says Upper Tribunal

The Portsmouth & District Private Landlords Association (PDPLA) have won a significant victory over Portsmouth Council over the conditions they have been imposing on landlords in HMO licenses, which have resulted in many small HMO landlords selling up.

The decision confirms that Councils cannot, through license conditions:

• prescribe  the detailed content of tenancy agreements
• make it an offence to provide documents unless the request is made via a 235 notice
• require landlords to provide tenants’ personal information to the Council
• apply discretionary licence conditions on a blanket basis across all HMOs – ‘standard’ conditions must be supported by property-specific reasoning

Landlord Simon Fletcher, who took the case to tribunal,  said:

We hope this decision will be noted across the country as a large number of councils impose conditions on a blanket policy basis without proper justification.

This is too little too late to make any real difference to the overall PRS landlord exodus; but we hope that it will prove useful in helping to ensure responsible and experienced landlords remaining in the sector are not overly burdened by over-zealous councils.

PRS Database fees to fund enforcement – claim

Matthew Pennycook, the Housing Minister, has this week stated that in order to continue to help support councils in carrying out enforcement in addition to providing £41.12 million to local housing authorities for financial help to undertake enforcement, the government’s long-term objective is to have a sustainable fund for enforcement ‘based on future Private Rented Sector Database fee revenues’.

This could mean that fees from the new PRS Database may fund future council enforcement as they continue to give more powers to local councils. Fees for the new database have yet to be announced.

Snippets

Quiet enjoyment vs essential access: Striking the right
Landlord fined after repeatedly ignoring improvement notices
Latest licensing costs for landlords revealed
Fraudsters target homes in title hijack attempts
Government claims tribunal rent system protects tenants from arrears
Govt warns landlords and agents against Right to Rent discrimination

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week

Namely, the 6th Edition of Diane Austin’s massive Housing Law Casebook.

This, I think, can safely be described as a ‘tome’ (defined by my Google AI as a ‘large, heavy or scholarly book’). I just measured its thickness, which is 2 ¼ inches, nearly 6 cm. So a hefty volume indeed, as befits an area of law where regulation has increased massively over the years.

One of the reasons it is so large is that it covers not only tenancies under the Housing Act 1988 (which will now be assured periodic tenancies) but also Rent Act protected tenancies and long leases, as well as social housing, public law and housing, plus a large section on homelessness.

That’s a big area of law. So a very useful book for practitioners.

The book is written from the perspective of a tenants’ adviser and so will be particularly useful for solicitors and others advising tenants.

However, the law is the law whoever you are advising, so this book will be equally useful for landlord advisers, even though it is not specifically aimed at you. After all, understanding the arguments that will be advanced on behalf of tenants is one of the best ways to advise landlords!

This book will also be particularly useful for Local Authority staff, who will have a tough job enforcing the new laws introduced by the Renters Rights Act, given their new legal obligations. Having such a comprehensive reference work readily available is likely to prove extremely useful.

I would suggest that all Local Authority housing departments should have a copy on their shelves (a steal at £85 for the print version or £115 for the print + eBook.bundle). Which is considerably cheaper than getting advice from solicitors or barristers.

Although this is a large and scholarly book, it is also user-friendly, with case law helpfully highlighted on a light grey background and lots of summaries and bulleted lists, making it easy to navigate.

Ms Austin is to be congratulated on bringing out such a helpful and authoritative book so soon after the introduction of the new Renters Rights Act rules.

Find it in the LAG shop or on Amazon, where you can also get a Kindle edition for £80.75.

PS. I also really like the fact that the cover picture has a cat in the window.  Maybe reflecting tenants’ enhanced right to keep pets?

Fines increase this week – don’t get caught out

This week saw fines increased to £7000 if landlords do not fix any of 21 listed hazards that are found to be ‘serious’.

These can be anything from damp and mould, fire or electrical hazard, unsafe living conditions. 10% of landlords are thought to have at least one of these health and safety hazards at a serious level.

Councils can now force landlords to carry out repairs, even do emergency works themselves and charge all costs back to the landlord.

The government is also updating the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) which has not been amended in over twenty years, and the new updates came into force on Tuesday, 23rd June.

This will make things ‘simpler to identify dangerous risks and take action,’ said Housing Secretary Steve Reed.

Note that we are running a training webinar on the new HHSRS rules for Landlord Law members on 8 July.

Landlords’ EPC upgrade works will require funding

Pegasus Insight has now identified that 60% of all landlords have at least one property that is below the EPC C rating, and it will cost £11,713 per property to reach the EPC C by 2030. Landlords are now starting to look at how they are going to fund these improvements rather than if.

Two thirds of landlords are looking to use savings whilst one on four are hoping that the government will provide grants or support, the rest will probably have to borrow or release equity.

Interestingly, 44% of tenants now look at a property’s EPC rating when looking for a rental home.

You can read more here.

Warning Renters Rights Act disadvantages some tenants

There has been a claim that taking rent in advance, which is now banned under the Renters Rights Act, disadvantages some tenants who may fall short in passing the affordability checks.

Allison Thompson of Leaders letting agency states that previously there was no limit on how much rent a landlord could accept in advance to secure a property but now this is not longer an option. This could impact self employed tenants, those on zero hours contracts and those who’s work is not consistent like musicians.

She adds that landlords ‘are more likely to choose a candidate who easily passes all affordability tests’ and that tenants should not over stretch themselves financially.

Are you a landlord in Wales?

Many landlords are approaching the Rent Smart Wales renewal milestone.  If so, make sure you renew promptly as otherwise you risk a fine.

You can check your renewal date by logging into your Rent Smart Wales account, where expiry dates are displayed on the dashboard.

Legal warning over high temperatures in rented properties

With the high temperatures comes a warning that excessive heat can be a hazard under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System.  A property can be considered unsafe if it is dangerously overheated, creating a health risk.

Landlords are not required specifically to install air con, but they do have to ensure that their properties are safe.

So landlords, if you get a complaint from your tenants about excessive heat, you should take it seriously, or you could find yourself being fined up to £7.000.

Snippets

HMO planning refusals soar as councils tighten controls
Tenants want professional landlords – but not corporate ones
Ombudsman supports landlord in rent-to-rent dispute with agency
Landlords face higher tribunal costs as rent rise appeals become free
Ministers consider fresh crackdown on short-term lets

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week

Fuel Poverty call for targeted Warm Homes support

The Fuel Poverty committee has called on the government to support lower-income landlords with extra support from £5 billion Warm Homes Fund managed by the Government.

It claims that lower-income landlords could struggle more to improve the energy rating on their properties by the cut-off date of 2030, which will impact fuel-poor tenants. They want the government to produce incentives that are targeted to specific landlords.

They say

Targeting lower-income landlords will enable retrofit work to be completed that may not otherwise have been possible.

There is also concern that, without a targeted approach to support upgrade work, many of the rented homes will not be upgraded, which will severely impact the supply of rental properties on the market.

Non compliant landlord added to Rogue Landlord Database

A rogue landlord who failed to deal with serious safety hazards and had no relevant licenses has been fined £13,936.  The council state that they will now follow up getting him added to the Rogue Landlord Database.

The database is used to record landlords and property agents who have committed serious housing offences, and as the landlord did not attend the hearing, he was convicted in his absence.

Christian Hogg, Cabinet Member for Regulatory Services, added that they ‘will take appropriate action under the range of powers available to them’.

Government hints at re-hauling deposit schemes

The government has hinted that it is considering removing the option of insured deposit schemes (where the landlord or agent holds the funds subject to statutory safeguards) as this gives an  ‘inherent power in balance’ according to Matthew Pennycook, Housing Minister. He also claims that it is easier for fraud leaving the tenant exposed.

Custodial schemes (where the deposit is held by the scheme provider) could be the only way forward, according to Eddie Hooker, CEO of MyDeposits, he says

The wider question is whether the government believes the benefits of a single custodial approach outweigh the loss of choice currently available to landlords and agents. For now, the minister’s answer should be seen as a signal rather than a decision.

He adds that this is a clear indication of what the government could be considering next regarding the ‘future of tenancy deposit protection’.

An interesting post from landlord advisor Julie Ford says that there are problems with the insured model as

• Agents can use the money to  bankroll their business
• If they then collapse the deposit money is often missing (meaning landlords have to refund the deposit scheme if they pay out to tenants), and
• There is no standardisation for adjudications

Concluding

The government is right to explore reform but the real opportunity isn’t just in who holds the money.

It’s in ensuring the system that governs it is genuinely fair, consistent, and fit for purpose.

Snippets

Quarter of tenants served eviction notice ahead of new rules
Large social landlords must publish electrical safety checks data
Pet rentals carrying a premiums up to £1,300
Landlords face £40,000 fines for misuse of possession grounds
Agents call for tax breaks to help landlords meet EPC targets
Labour reveals revolutionary changes to buying, selling and agents
The Guardian: Giles Peaker obituary

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week

Someone, maybe but not necessarily a letting agent, takes over control of the property by signing up as your tenant, paying you a guaranteed monthly rent. Whether or not the property is tenanted.

What could be easier or more convenient?

Unfortunately, as is often the case, the easy answer is not necessarily the best one.

In fact, rent-to-rent can be extremely risky.  Things have been made even worse (for property owners) by the Renters’ Rights Act.

The situation pre Renters Rights Act

Rent-to-rent has always had the potential to be problematic. For example, in the video here, recorded in 2018, solicitor David Smith points out that:

• The property owner has little say in what goes on in their property – effectively, they have lost control
• Some people offering this service don’t really know what they are doing or
• They may even be actual rogues or criminals
• If you are asked to sign an agreement provided by them, it could be very prejudicial to you
• You don’t have the various protections that you have when using an agent. For example, the consumer rights rules will not apply, and you may not be able to use the agent redress scheme (as they are not acting as your agent).

The situation post Renters Rights Act

‘Rent to rent’ arrangements have been targeted by the government when drafting the Renters Rights Act, as this arrangement has, in the past, often been used by crooks and criminals.

For example, a criminal property owner will rent to a limited company with no assets. In the past, this would mean that even if tenants obtained a financial award against the landlord (for example, a Rent Repayment Order), they would not be able to recover any money.

Because the property owner (who has the assets) is not their landlord.

This was the decision in the important case of Rakusen v. Jepson.

However, the Renters Rights Act has changed this, and now tenants CAN bring a claim against property owners. For example, this could be

• If their landlord has failed to obtain an HMO license (rent-to-rent is frequently used in an HMO context)
• If the property is in poor condition, or
• Occupiers have been unlawfully evicted or
• Been subject to harassment

So now, property owners in a rent-to-rent situation

• can be fined by their Local Authority for breaches and offences, AND
• Ordered to pay Rent Repayment Orders made in the First Tier Tribunal

Even if the problem is not caused by the property owner.  They are still potentially liable.

This can be very expensive.  Say the property is an HMO and your tenant (the occupier’s landlord) fails to obtain an HMO license.  You can be fined by the Council, AND your tenants can claim against you for a rent repayment order for up to 2 years’ worth of rent!

Then, if the intermediate tenant walks away or becomes insolvent, the property owner may suddenly find themselves dealing directly with the occupiers.

Recovering possession may be far more difficult than you might expect, particularly now that Section 21 has been abolished.

If you decide to proceed with a rent-to-rent arrangement

My advice is ALWAYS to obtain legal advice from a specialist solicitor first. For example, one of the panel solicitors on our telephone advice service.

You may be safe entering into a rent-to-rent arrangement with a reputable organisation such as a Local Authority, University or College. Or maybe a housing charity.

However, don’t count on it.

I have had landlords tell me about horrendous experiences they have had with one of these organisations. So always get advice first, particularly on any form of tenancy agreement which the rent to renter is asking you to sign.

And finally

My advice, though, if you want to carry on being a landlord without the hassle, is that you are far better off using a reputable letting agent.

Mind you, not all letting agents are good either, but there are some fantastic agents around. You just need to search for them.

You will also be much safer using an agent, as they should all now be signed up with an Ombudsman service. And so long as you are not acting through a limited company, you will have the benefit of the consumer protection legislation.

Apparently, initially, the landlord told the tenant that she must not make any pet requests, saying “one-bedroom flats are too small for pets”

Something plainly untrue – many years ago, I kept my cat in a studio flat without problems.

Unlawful conditions for keeping a cat

The landlord’s agents (who should have known better) then apparently granted permission, but on condition that

• She took out pet damage insurance and
• Agreed to have the property professionally cleaned using the landlord’s chosen contractor at the end of the tenancy.

Both of these are clearly in breach of the Tenant Fees Act.

The insurance condition

When the Renters Rights bill was going through Parliament, it initially included an exception to the Tenant Fees Act that would have allowed landlords to require tenants to pay for pet damage insurance.

However, this was dropped when the government was informed, during the bill’s passage through Parliament, that no such insurance currently existed.

So landlords will now have to look to their own insurance to cover damage. They can’t require tenants to pay for this.

The end-of-tenancy cleaning condition

This is clearly in breach of the Tenant Fees Act, which limits the fees that landlords can charge their tenants.

A standard charge for end-of-tenancy cleaning is not one of the charges permitted under the Act.  I am surprised that the agents were unaware of this.

However, there is a way around this. Although landlords cannot impose a set charge, they can charge for cleaning if the property can be proved to be dirtier than it was at the start of the tenancy.

In order to be able to claim this, the landlord will need a detailed inventory agreed by the tenant at the start of the tenancy, which clearly states that the property has been professionally cleaned.

Retaining the receipt for this work is also advisable.

Then, when the tenant vacates, if a detailed check of the property shows that it is in a dirtier condition than it was when the tenant moved in, this may justify the landlord charging the tenant for the reasonable costs of a professional clean.

The fair wear and tear exception to landlords’ claims for damage does not normally apply to claims for cleaning.

So it is not right to say that landlords cannot charge tenants for professional cleaning at the end of the tenancy. However, in order to claim it, they need to prove that they are entitled to it.

And finally

This all goes to show that the Renters Rights Act and the Tenants Fees Act do not prevent landlords from making valid claims, for example, regarding pet damage.

Although blanket bans and automatic cleaning charges are no longer allowable, landlords can claim compensation if they are able to prove that they have suffered genuine loss.

However, to do this, they need a properly drafted tenancy agreement, a detailed inventory, and documentary evidence of detailed check-in and check-out inspections of the property at the start and end of the tenancy.

See this post, which has further guidance for landlords.

Government rejects additional HMO legislation

Housing Minister, Matthew Pennycook has stated that councils have ‘sufficient tools to manage HMOs on a local level’ following a petition from one MP asking for additional legislation to prevent the loss of family homes to HMO dwellings.

The petitioners claim that a rise in HMO properties is having a detrimental affect on their communities with parking issues, anti-social behaviour and extra demand on local services.

Matthew Pennycook said that councils can limit HMO numbers through Article 4 Directions which would entail planning permission and that residents should raise their concerns directly with their local planning authority.

Guidance on lets with pets

Dogs Trust has issued some helpful guidance for landlords when considering tenants that have pets now that they cannot unreasonably be refused a pet following the Renters’ Right Act.

They say that the primary concern is that the pets needs are met, such as sufficient exercise space, place for its bed and food. Use of baby gates and barriers for it to have its own space. They also add

The number of dogs in a property may be relevant to welfare, but cases where a person owns multiple animals should be considered on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the property layout, the owner’s experience, and the individual needs of the dog being rehomed.

You can read more here.

Interestingly, there is a report of Advocats helping a tenant challenge her landlords who was only minded to allow a pet if she took out pet insurance and have the property professionally cleaned with the landlord’s chosen contractor when she vacated.

Jen Berezai of Advocat helped the tenant draft a response pointing out that these conditions did not comply with the new rules on pets under the Renters Rights Act.  After which permission was granted.

Warning to landlords renting to friends or family

A survey by Hiscox found that almost 2/3 of landlords have rented to someone that they knew but 18% of those did so informally.  Thankfully that is a minority but it is still a large number of landlords.

Renting to family and friends is still renting, and renting is now even more bound by rules and regulations.  Failing to comply can result in big problem and fines.   When I did eviction work, several of my cases involved situations where an informal let to a friend or relative had gone wrong.

Hiscox has made the following very sensible recommendations when renting to someone you know:

• Always use a written tenancy agreement.  Not only is it important to have a document setting out your agreement, but you can now be fined if you don’t.
• Always conduct safety checks. For example, gas and electricity.
• Do right-to-rent checks.  The fines are so horrendous if the Home Office find that your tenant does not have a right to rent, that you really do not want to risk this.
• Protect the deposit.  If relations break down, not only will you be unable to evict them if you don’t, but they will be able to claim the penalty.
• Carry out an inventory.  The fact that they are a friend or relative does not mean that there will be no arguments about damage when they leave!
• Check your insurance and comply with any conditions they impose.  Otherwise, your insurer may be able to refuse claims.

My advice would be to think very carefully before you rent to family or friends.

Snippets

Planning rules changes for HMOs set to be approved
Agents warned that Renters Rights Act will create more tenant complaints
Landlord rental income surges by £16,000 to a record high
London council bans three rogue landlords
Why do so many landlords distrust agents?

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week

A rise in Guarantor demand

A higher proportion of tenants, one in two, are now more likely to fail the affordability checks now that the Renters Right Act is law. This is also because large amounts of rent in advance can no longer be accepted.

The average monthly rent now sits at £1438 and a tenant would need to be earning £43,140 to pass the affordability checks.

Average earnings falls below this amount at £41,859. Out of the 288 local authorities 19.8% of tenants are probably going need a guarantor.

Sam Reynolds of Zero Deposits said

We expect guarantors to become an increasingly common requirement for renters who fall outside standard affordability criteria, particularly younger tenants, overseas applicants, self-employed workers, and those moving to high-cost rental areas.

You can read more here.

Landlords falling short of compliance – claim

A survey by Rushbrook & Rathbone claims that only 32% of tenants are confident that their landlord or letting agent is fully compliant post Renters Right Act. Out of 1,105 tenants that they surveyed 42% say that there are some compliance standards that are not met by their landlords and 26% have no idea if their letting agent or landlord is compliant with the new Act.

40% of these tenants think that their homes meet the correct standard  and 91% have not noticed any significant changes or improvements since the Act came into force.

Roma Sharma of Rushbrook & Rathbone said

For property managers, this is a clear moment of accountability. Those who fail to communicate transparently and act decisively risk falling short of both their legal obligations and tenant expectations.

Social Housing Landlords told to tackle excessive heat

All social housing landlords have to adhere to Awaab’s Law, and now the government are bringing in phase two which will include dealing with excess heat and excess cold. Research from the English Housing Survey found that in 2024 10.6% of social housing reported at least part of their home were ‘uncomfortably hot’.

Matthew Pennycook, The Housing Minister said the next phase of Awaab’s Law which comes into force in June will provide councils with a more intuitive way of assessing hazards such as excess heat in properties.

This comes as a case thought to be the first of its kind, where residents are claiming that their homes are ‘not fit for purpose, with indoor temperatures reaching 43 degrees celsius in the summer’ and are taking action against their housing association for excessive heat under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018.

You can read more here, but the chief executive of PA Housing said that the building meets relevant planning and building regulations at the time.

As our climate is changing, is this the first of more claims under excessive heat.

Another rogue landlord hit with huge penalty

We read this week that another landlord has been hit with a huge £17,500 civil penalty fine following enforcement action from South Gloucestershire Council. The landlord ignored previous notices to improve category 1 hazards within the property such as electrical hazards, structural issues and health and safety hazards.

The council said

Landlords have a legal duty to ensure their properties are safe, and where they fail to do so, we will not hesitate to use the full range of enforcement powers available to us, particularly where there is a history of non-compliance and tenants’ health and wellbeing are at risk.

Snippets

Housing Ombudsman warns social landlords over window disrepair
Landlord crackdown must be funded by fines, warns council
Letting agents engaging in ‘illegal and shoddy practices’
A place where everyone has somewhere of their own, to thrive and feel safe – this will be my politics of home: Keir Starmer
EPC deadline at risk without greater landlord support, warns NRLA
Government rejects plea to curb HMO conversions
City has hundreds of unused student rooms

See also our Quick News Updates on Landlord Law

Newsround will be back again next week