Government commits to publish White Paper on reforms to the rental sector

The Renter’s Reform Bill did not feature in the Queen’s Speech yesterday, but the government did announce a range of reforms that will have an impact on the sector.

The government intends to bring forward legislation, but it is not yet clear when that would be.

The decision to publish the White Paper will be largely welcomed by those who were concerned the changes would be rushed through and poorly thought out.

Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, said: “We welcome the government’s commitment to publish a White Paper on reforms to the rental sector and consult widely before introducing a Bill.

“What is proposed amounts to some of the biggest changes in the private rented sector for over 30 years. We urge the Government and all others in the sector to use the time they now have to ensure that the reforms are fair and workable for both tenants and landlords.

“This must include comprehensive grounds upon which landlords can legitimately repossess properties, the development of a new tenant-landlord conciliation service to help sustain tenancies wherever possible and court reform to ensure possession cases are dealt with much quicker than the year or more currently being taken.

“Lifetime deposits for tenants provide an opportunity to reduce the upfront cost of renting, but they need to work for all concerned.

Ben Beadle

“We welcome also the government’s ambitions to drive out bad landlords from the sector without penalising those who do the right thing. We want to root out all those who bring the sector into disrepute.”

The announcement in yesterday’s Queen’s Speech that the government will publish a Renters Reform White Paper in the Autumn demonstrates that ministers are prepared to engage with the industry to understand the impact any substantial legislative changes will have on those involved in the private rented sector, according to Timothy Douglas, policy and campaigns manager at Propertymark.

He commented: “With the focus of the new package on lifetime deposits, landlord redress and greater enforcement, the UK government must look at ensuring that a system that would allow deposits to be passported can only take place if there is a bridging loan, with the UK government as the guarantor, in order to ensure the remaining part of the deposit is covered should the tenant default. Additionally, the UK government must prevent ‘double jeopardy’ and only extend redress membership to properties that are fully managed.

“Propertymark will be engaging with MHCLG and MPs to ensure they fully understand the consequences of any changes. We will also be scrutinising the White Paper and proposed legislation, to ensure the best possible outcome for our members.”


Email the story to a friend


  1. paulgbar666

    What a load of twaddle.   The only thing LL are really concerned with is recovering their properties from feckless rent DEFAULTING tenants.   All other reasons can take longer times.   Providing a feckless rent defaulting tenant may be removed WITHOUT any Court action being required on the 45th day of rent default LL would be content with that.   Longer eviction periods for other reasons would be acceptable for LL providing that as soon as the 1st rent default occurs the 45 day eviction period commences for that rent default.   Of course if the tenant pays off all rent arrears on no later than the 45th day with cleared funds then the 45 day rent default eviction period recommences from the possible next rent default.   The 45 day period includes two monthly rent defaults and a 14 day period of NTQ by the LL which may be issued after the 1st rent default.   Rent default is NOT subjective. Rent arrears either exist or they don’t.   The much derided alleged no fault S21 process was NEVER so.   S21 was mostly used in an attempt to get rid of feckless rent DEFAULTING tenants.   The new bill does nothing to address the issue of LL being prevented from getting rid of feckless rent defaulting tenants by the current and soon to be even more dysfunctional repossession process.   Govt will effectively be facilitating an even more dysfunctional eviction process.   Tenants will be able to rent default with even more impunity than they do now.   Such a situation is simply financially unviable especially for leveraged LL.   Govt simply cannot be allowed to effectively ponce off LL CAPITAL and resources to provide FREE rental accommodation for rent defaulters until a LL eventually  succeeds in achieving repossession.   It renders large portions of the PRS as unviable. The losses that feckless rent defaulters cause LL every year is about £9 billion   It is reckoned that rental income is about £14 billion per year.   Effectively that means that the Treasury is missing out on tax on that non-existent £9 billion in defaulted rent. I’m sure the taxpayer would much prefer that LL paid taxes on received rents!   Therefore the taxpayer would hardly wish to support feckless rent defaulting tenants with an even more dysfunctional eviction process.   With LL being able to quickly get rid of rent DEFAULTING tenants the LL will invariably be able to source new RENT paying tenants. This the Treasury and taxpayer would be highly delighted with and rents received means something to tax!!!!   I reckon the tax take on £9 billion would be something most right thinking people would consider appropriate.   That being the case WHY does the system facilitate such long eviction periods with massive tax losses for the Treasury giving the feckless rent defaulters lifestyles that can’t be afforded by those who pay for services!?   It seems to me that politically the Govt prefers to ponce off LL capital and facilitate the feckless lifestyles of rent defaulters. I’m not sure the vast majority of people would support such a strategy.   But of course by facilitating rent defaulting tenants to ponce off LL capital it prevents the Govt from having to address the issues of tenants not being able to pay rent for whatever reasons. Effectively preventing LL from getting rid of rent defaulting tenants is just kicking the proverbial can down the road.   The big problem for Govt is that many LL have become fed up with being kicked down the road!   They will sell up and mostly leave the PRS.   None of these eventually evicted tenants will become homeowners. LL AREN’T preventing them from buying now!!   Very soon Govt will have real problems as LL diversify away from single household AST lettings. It might take 2 years to get rid of rent defaulting tenants.   Most LL will tend to just sell up not wishing to face 2 year eviction periods   The PRS is in terminal decline for as long as feckless rent defaulting tenants are able to avail themselves of the completely dysfunctional repossession process.   Tenants are in for some very TOUGH times.   Govt deludes itself if it believes tenants will magically become homeowners.   They NEVER will. This bill will be the instrument of destruction of the PRS as it currently is.   Batten down those hatches LL it’s gonna be an extremely rough ride!!        

    1. Rent Rebel

      Look at the ranting cr-p you let Paul Barratt write on these pages, time and time again. My heart goes out to anyone with this nutjob as their landlord. 

      1. paulgbar666

        You clearly don’t understand things from the perspective of the LL.

        You should pay attention to what I state.


        Many LL share my views.

        Consequently there will be effects on the PRS or are you so blinkered!?


        You considering what I state is c### just proves your ignorance.


        I’m certainly glad I have no business dealings with you.


        Perhaps you should go away and carry out some informed research with your possible LL clients.


        If they understand what is going on in the PRS as I do you will find many have reached the same conclusions.


        Watch your business drain away over the coming years as new entrants are deterred and long standing LL desert the. Single household AST sector.

        Revisit this post in 5 years time.

        The PRS WILL have reduced by at least 5%.

        Based on what I now know there is no way I would have bothered investing in BTL.


        Buying outright for cash but definitely NOT BTL!


You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.