As a result of rapid developments in online communication in recent years, advertising to consumers has never been so simple. Anyone with access to the internet can browse and purchase a variety of goods and services with ease. This is especially prevalent in the evolution of the housing market. Landlords can now offer their property online, extending beyond advertising solely through letting agencies, using websites such as Gumtree and Craigslist. This allows potential tenants to find accommodation from a local to an international scale with ease. However, this accessibility, alongside the anonymity attributed to the internet, has allowed for property to be rented with malicious intentions. Specifically, rogue “landlords” have begun seeking potential tenants to provide sexual favours in exchange for free or heavily reduced rent.
Whilst such a potentially exploitative and dangerous practice would raise eyebrows as to why this type of activity had not been brought to light sooner, this appears to be one of the primary issues surrounding “sex for rent” practices. Plainly, there has been very little, albeit growing, awareness of the practice within the mainstream media and minimal government response.
News outlets such as the Guardian and the BBC began to report on the existence of these “sex for rent” arrangements around April 2017. Surprisingly, however, the issue was raised in as early as 2015 by housing and homelessness charities such as Shelter. These early articles emphasise not only the exploitative conditions created by rogue landlords, but also how these practices seek to target the most vulnerable in society, many of whom are faced with the growth of unaffordable housing. There is also a large risk of such arrangement being attractive to the growing homeless population in the UK, seeming a positive route to consider in comparison to the alternative of living on the streets.
Four years on since the first articles were initially published, no impactful action has been taken so far by Government in challenging the issue or seeking to implement legislative intervention. This is not for lack of trying however; politicians such as MP Wera Hobhouse called for legislation to be passed in Parliament this year to prevent websites hosting potentially exploitive advertisements. First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has also expressed her concerns with the practice as well as an ambition to bring it to an end.
Without government action, the number of vulnerable people affected by “sex for rent” arrangements are likely to rise. As a Shelter-commissioned YouGov survey indicates, around 250,000 women in the UK have been offered free or reduced rent in exchange for sexual favours in the last five years, a figure which is already alarmingly high. Regrettably, this number only seems to be growing as time goes on as 140,000 women have been offered sex in exchange for rent in this past year alone. The government has recognised a link between vulnerability and homelessness and exploitation in a 2014 Report on tackling modern slavery. No legislative steps have been taken to tackle the “sex for rent” issue which could be seen to fall under this larger problem.
The growth of revealing sexual abuse scandals across modern industries and the prosecution of those responsible, as seen with the MeToo movement, raises questions. Specifically, why has more not been done to prevent practices such as “sex for rent” which are just as relevant and distressing for those involved as such public scandals portrayed by the media? A potential answer to a lack of legislative intervention may be found in the uncertainty of the issue’s illegality.
As there is no monetary exchange between the parties, the practice of soliciting “sex for rent” arrangements is a legally grey area as it is not considered to amount to any crime which has already been established in current legislation. It is a modern issue which has taken off as a result of the internet and legislation is yet to align the law to reflect the situation.
Some refer to the practice of “sex for rent” as being exploitative, however others form the view that such an arrangement is a free agreement between two consenting adults who are fully aware of the nature of the agreement which they are voluntarily entering into. When problems arise, it is therefore difficult for police to take action as an offence hasn’t actually been committed. There is a further imbalance of the positions of the parties to such an arrangement as it is rare that the “landlords” in these instances will be registered. This results in the “tenants” having no rights in relation to Scottish tenancy laws and so have a weak position in terms of eviction and other matters regulated by statute for legally recognised tenancies.
On reflection, the issue of “sex for rent”, despite becoming an ever more prevalent problem, is an under reported one. Given the potential danger of exploitation, regulation of these arrangements is necessary. Although the government has begun to recognise that there is a problem in this area, little has been done in terms of implementing legislation to resolve the issue. Continued neglection of the growing problem in today’s society, will only leave those most vulnerable further at risk of being targeted by those advertising such arrangements. Although posed with the argument that “sex for rent” agreements are lawful between two consenting adults, the law must ensure protection of vulnerable people who are, sadly, most likely to enter into these agreements in times of desperation. On this note, reform in the law is required to both recognise and regulate “sex for rent” arrangements.
By Jasper Gilmore and Sophie Reid-Kay, The Aberdeen Law Project