The Queen’s Speech this morning confirmed that the Government will bring forward “new measures to protect tenants”.
While the speech itself did not go into any details, the ensuing small print confirms that a new Renters Reform Bill will be introduced to protect tenants, and this will remove Section 21 from the Housing Act while “strengthening the rights of landlords who need to gain possession of their property when they have a valid reason to do so”.
The new Bill will also introduce a new lifetime deposit “so that tenants don’t need to save for a new deposit every time they move house”.
There will also be a consultation on “First Homes” – making houses available at a discount “of at least 30%” to local people and key workers.
David Cox, CEO of ARLA Propertymark, said: “In the absence of any meaningful plan to boost the level of social housing in this country, the announcement confirming the abolition of Section 21 in today’s Queens speech is another attack against the landlords who actually house the nation.
“If Section 21 is scrapped, Section 8 must be reformed and a new specialist housing tribunal created.
“Without this, supply will almost certainly fall which will have the consequential effect of raising rents and will further discourage new landlords from investing in the sector.
“ARLA Propertymark will be engaging with the Government to ensure they fully understand the consequences of any changes, and we will be scrutinising the legislation, to ensure landlords have the ability to regain their properties if needed.”
Anyone choosing to make an income from being a landlord must accept the fact they take on a responsibility to provide a tenant with a home. The abolition of the right of landlords to evict tenants from their homes without reason is essential.
What ARLA are claiming is an attack against landlords is nothing more than affording tenants a basic right which they should have had from the start (and would enjoy in most other European countries comparable to the UK). No-one has said that a landlord should not be able to gain possession of their property if they have a genuine reason to do so.
As a landlord and former owner of a multiple branch letting agency business (sold last year) I have seen my fair share of abuses of S.21s. Landlords who don’t believe that tenants have the basic right to live in their home for as long as they want to should leave the industry (they should never have been in it) and make room for responsible landlords who can offer the sustainable PRS we so badly need.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
So you consider it acceptable to con people into investing on the basis of tenancies being AST’s with major liabilities and then abolishing the protection upon which investment was made. Assured tenancies already existed if that is what tenants needed but investors decided that was not the market to invest in. Landlords have been conned no doubt why the tories call themselves CONservatives. I understand the reasoning but many LL’s may withdraw which does not help good tenants and supports many suspect tenants that cause problems for their neighbour. I consider the government are misguided.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Who was “conned” becoming a BTL landlord? Good grief. BTLers have had the playing field tilted in their favour for decades. These measures will only redress the balance a small amount.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Don’t talk wet!
Other countries fully expect tenants to put in kitchens/bathrooms etc. Apples and oranges springs to mind!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
….And maybe tenants in the UK would do the same if they had the same security in their tenancies.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Responsible and reliable tenants usually do not have to fear S21 as landlords invest for the income stream. They don’t want their tenants to leave if they are good tenants. Those that need to sell will still be able to achieve it if the policy is to be believed (which I don’t). So the majority of tenants victim (as it is percieved by the looney left and so called charities) of S21 will be predominantly non payers, antisocial, troublesome or bad eggs. A number of good and excellent landlords are leaving the market because of these ill concieved nut case political decisions. Decent tenants will be the loser once again with less choice of property and probably higher rents due to relative scarcity this policy will produce.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
EVERY tenant fears S.21s. It’s ridiculous to even suggest otherwise. To have the constant threat that you could be thrown out of your home for any reason is just ridiculous. The fact that some landlords can’t see that is why the government need to abolish them.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Why not go one further making homeownership the only method of housing oneself and just abolish renting altogether…that way there would be no problem with renting. Or do you only want to rent in a world where everything is in your favour (even if the existence of your rented property was based on certain factors that led to the LL making a conscious choice with all the information as it was to invest by buying it and offer it to the open market)?
Even if you can change the rules to ‘trap’ the current crop of LLs, they will eventually exit/stop offering the property for rent/even go bankrupt if those rules are too onerous (‘Booo!’ to the nasty LLs and ‘Yay!’ for the poor tenants, right?’)
You can’t make yourself thinner by feeding the rest of the world up to be fat…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The LAndlord should have an easy way to gain possession back, if needed. I have a tenant who has constantly been in arrears and caused problems, and they were served notice giving them until the end of July to leave. The Landlord kindly gave one extra month on the basis that they were struggling to find anywhere, so they should have left by end of August. We started Court possession proceedings when they did not vacate, and the bailiffs have been booked for the end of JANUARY! There are still rent arrears, and it has taken 5 MONTHS for the Landlord to get his own property back? That is unacceptable.
Before S21 is abolished, which it unfortunately will be, S8 must be tightened with a dedicated Court for Housing if the Government want to keep private Landlords in the housing sector.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Landlords provide a service but what the majority fail to grasp is that they are able to withdraw that service.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
And those that withdraw that service on the basis of the abolition of S.21 notices will make room for responsible landlords willing to invest for the long term – Great!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not with stamp duty rates as they are and huge tax implications for new landlords.
All it does is limits the housing supply for the rental market and then pushes rents up again for tenants.
Just as the tenant fee ban did.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I’m not aware of any evidence the tenant fee ban increased rents. There will always be landlords willing to invest in property – institutional landlords for example.
What the cleaning up of the industry is doing (in measures such as the abolition of S.21) is ensuring that landlords are responsible and tenants are not vulnerable to abuses of power. If you think you should be able to evict a tenant without any reason (which is what a S.21 notice allowed) you shouldn’t be a landlord.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
We should also ensure that tenants are responsible and landlords are not vulnerable to unreasonable and unnecessary abuses of the rules. If you think you shouldn’t be evicted when, say, the LL wants to sell (which is what a S.21 notice would be used for) and just because of, say, a minor paperwork error that you can convince a Judge that whilst you were served with an EPC the LL cannot, now -five years down the line- prove that that it was served should allow a tenancy to continue almost indefinitely, you shouldn’t be a tenant.
As a sidenote, you shouldn’t forget that the LL’s bricks and mortar house is their property (in the literal sense) and no different from the clothes on your back (that you own and pay for)…be careful what you wish for because ANY infringement on ANY person’s personal property rights and their ability to dispose of it as/when they please is a very dangerous path to tread.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
A somewhat odd set of comments from thepiper777. Sounds more like something a member of a left wing council might write rather than ” a landlord and former owner of a multiple branch letting agency business “
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
michael138 Indeed and, ‘as a landlord and former owner of a multiple branch letting agency business (sold last year) I have seen my fair share of abuses of S.21s’ perhaps thepiper777 was the abuser?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
There’s no way you’d be in this industry, handling volume, without seeing the impending problems S.21 removal will create. You could only believe otherwise if you were completely outside, viewing it all theoretically. I call BS.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Unless you are a politician!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Or work for Shelter, it’s a crazy move, just means that landlords will tighten up on the scrutiny of potential tenants and the poor will suffer more.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It makes me laugh that when you don’t agree with the comment you accuse the person of lying… I can’t prove who I am, nor say anything more than I’m not lying and have no reason to, but ask yourself would someone working for Shelter, or a politician lie about being a landlord to make a comment about their beliefs? I doubt it.
Try to come up with a sensible argument… this sort of response is just desperate.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The Government’s consultation on abolishing section 21 did not even mention HMOs! Over two million people live in them. They present particular problems if a house mate causes problems. Without s21 it may be impossible to get rid of a trouble-maker and the other innocent tenants may leave. One size does not fit all.
What do I say to the young female who is intimidated by a drunken bloke who pays his rent on time?
“Wait until he assaults you and then you can go to the police and then maybe, just maybe, I can serve a s8 notice for anti-social behaviour and then, provided he doesn’t hoodwink the judge with a spurious defence, I may be able to get him out. Give me 12 or 18 months, 24 months tops and I’ll get it sorted.”
Politicians do not understand what they are doing.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You’re right. And, if we are honest, in some market places it’s HMO renters that are probably the worst for this. Low income students or DSS, drinking and partying like it’s 1999, trashing the place, making other innocent tenants there who actually want to study or who just can’t afford their own flat or house lives hell.
I have a client who has had so many troubles because one or two of his 4 or 5 tenants in one property have caused problems. Ultimately, he lost the 3 good tenants, and had to put up with the two that remained not paying their rent, being antisocial and bringing putting people off the house when there were viewings so they could live there as long as they like.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Its not the landlords place to act as judge and jury. Agreed, sensible measures should be put in place so that problem tenants can be removed but S.21s are not the answer nor is this a viable argument for keeping them.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Why not be the Judge & Jury? Why do you think it should be different? Granted, over a period of time, the rights of the LL to his/her provate property have been eroded…but only because you changed the slowly rules. You can’t now make the Judge/Jury statement like it’s a known scientific fact.
It’s the lack of consistently applied logic across different issues that gets me.
Why not change the rules to make Tesco allow poor folk to take home their food shopping with nothing more than a promise to pay at a later date, but they can’t do anything about it unless the amount owing is a certain amount (several month’s worth of food)? Or to continue the analogy more directly…Tesco decide to close a poorly performing store (or face financial problems), but aren’t allowed to because it will leave the people in the locale with less places/nowhere to shop through no fault of their own. Seems silly now, doesn’t it?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
That’s the end to Housing Benefit tenants.
Still trying to work out how a lifetime deposit works when a claim is made by the first landlord and the next landlord wants protection!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
My guess is that the deposit will be automatically transferred to the new LL, with a decision to be made about any deduction re the original tenancy made at a later date. There will then be some kind of ‘Order’ placed on the tenant to pay the necessary. Just like other debts…you’re not guaranteed it and it’s effectively down to you to chase. How else *could* it work??
What. A. Load. Of. Nonsense.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Constantly meddling to try to ‘protect tenants’ but it only makes things worse.
More landlords will sell up, leaving a shortage of available housing on the rental market which then leads to further increased rents.
The tenant fee ban pushed up rents and then this will do the same.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Where’s the evidnce that rents have gone up disproportionately since the tenant fee ban?
If landlords leave the market in droves house prices would go dowm so returns would go up if rents stayed stable encouraging new landlords to enter the market (or existing to stay). This argunment is nonsensical.
The “I’m just trying to protect the tenants” argument is laughable, especially when followed by “to keep absolute control over them”. You can’t actually believe this?!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register