What steps are the RLA taking to help Southwest [HMO] LL v Water Co v DDJ & AST?

Other

Posting by Southwest Landlord about the Courts' judgement on his liability for water bills when he is not the occupier, seems devoid of support from the RLA and lacking expressions of 'white heat' anger from other Landlords. This is disappointing as this problem has far reaching, negative consequences for all HMO or non HMO. Is this issue too meaty for the RLA to take on?
Seems a worthy issue to bring to the Government as a prime example of arbitary or rough justice for Landlords. Tenants are protected by the OFT'S UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS, along with the dense weight of other legislation. The scales are tipped against landlords because of the 'master and servant' idiom. When push comes to shove;
LANDLORDS ARE SUPPOSED TO find THEIR PROTECTION IN A WELL SCRIPTED, INCLUSIVE AND BALANCED AST. We are,...arn't we? Gulp!!

Does no one else fear for future Court actions brought against the Landlord relying on a bona fide AST to protect business interests, yet then sees the compelling legal document just swept aside? Is no one out there worried that the Power and Utility companies may now jump on the bandwaggon and sue the non resident landlord for tenant's unpaid bills, because this judgement has set the precedent for this to happen.

If well crafted AST's are not worth a dime at Court for a Landlord and only protect a tenant ;...... then it's a head's up, ears pinned back, for EVERYONE reading this!!!
Dave.