Why Scottish pensioners who move to park homes need greater protection to avoid being ripped off

These motions are usually non-party political, but relate to something which has come up in the course of constituency surgery work. They allow matters to be raised, MSPs from across the political spectrum to contribute and make points, and always provide for a Scottish Government minister to respond.

I had one such opportunity with a Members’ debate about better protection for park home residents. Park homes are a growing component of the housing market in Scotland, with an estimated 100 park home residential sites where a total of more than 8,000 people live.

Scenic rural areas

A park home is what is effectively classed as a temporary structure or what might be better known as a chalet or lodge, where the owner of the property pays a ground rent to lease the land on which the structure sits. These properties are, however, far from insubstantial structures – the average cost of such homes varies between £90,000 and £250,000, and they provide a high standard of comfortable accommodation with all the amenities of a more permanent building.

Park homes tend to be situated in scenic rural areas, often with an attractive outlook, and have become a popular option for retirees or those looking to downsize, be part of a community of like-minded individuals, reduce maintenance and heating costs, and not have to worry about maintaining a large garden.

We are seeing more and more of these lodge developments springing up, and their existence allows larger family homes to come on the market and be available for those who need the additional space.

Unfortunately, there are a number of issues that have arisen impacting purchasers of park homes, which has led me to the conclusion that the laws around the purchase and occupancy of these properties are in need of update and review. We have cases of disputes between park home purchasers and site owners going unresolved, with residents feeling threated and intimidated by some developers.

Unlike the purchase of a permanent residence, the acquisition of a park home does not involve a formal conveyance and, accordingly, many purchasers do not involve solicitors, even when they are parting with substantial sums of cash, a situation which can leave them vulnerable.

‘Dream home’ turns sour

At present the purchaser of a park home has the right to be given a “written statement” which is a contract between the site owner and the resident, and is enforceable in law by both parties. It will set out details of the location and size of the pitch on which the home sits, the pitch fee, which typically rises each year in accordance with the retail price index, and the rules of the park. Despite this requirement, in practice too many park home owners are not given a written statement or its terms are not met by the site owner.

One of the most concerning situations I have come across relates to the park home development at Bendochy, just outside Blairgowrie in Perthshire. In March 2022, Heritage Park Estates Ltd was given planning consent for 43 lodges and ten glamping pods on a former poultry farm development, with the planning consent making it clear that the units would be used “for holiday accommodation only”.

In August 2023, the Advertising Standards Authority ruled that the site owners had misled the public into believing the homes were permanent residences, and a number had purchased them on that basis.

Roy and Susan Robertson are a couple in precisely that situation. They sold their family home to purchase a park home at Bendochy Park, believing this would become somewhere they could spend their retirement.

The properties were advertised under the strap line “your dream home built your way”, and a prominent bullet point in the sales material stated the park was “open 365 days a year” and made reference to the units being “homes”.

Potentially homeless

It was only after they parted with their funds did the Robertsons realise, too late, that the planning permission for the property restricted it to holiday use. They, along with a number of other residents, have now been served with planning enforcement notices which require them to find a permanent residence elsewhere, failing which they face eviction.

As might be imagined, this is an extremely distressing situation for those affected, leaving them having to apply to the local council for accommodation elsewhere and be treated as potentially homeless.

There are other concerns which have been raised with me affecting park home residents. Typically, utility costs are paid centrally by the site owner and billed back to tenants, giving rise to concerns about additional charges and profiteering.

In some cases, residents who wish to alter or extend their homes, or carry out landscaping work such as installing decking or patios, are only permitted to have this done by the authorised contractor of the site owner, at inflated cost.

Where a park owner wishes to sell their property, typically 10 per cent of the sale price is taken by the site owner as a fee. And residents who are elderly, or have a disability, are not eligible for local authority grants for improvements and adaptations, because park homes are not treated as a permanent residence.

I have been working closely with SCOPHRA – the Scottish Confederation of Park Home Residents Association – to highlight the concerns of their members, and draw them to ministers’ attention. I hope that this Members’ debate will see a recognition by the Scottish Government of the need for the law in this area to be improved, to protect some of the most vulnerable in our society.

Murdo Fraser is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Mid-Scotland and Fife