Shelter has once again upped the ante in Scotland, launching a campaign aimed at nailing reforms in the private rented sector.
The Make Renting Right campaign aims to raise awareness of and build public support for reforming the “out-dated” private tenancy regime.
It wants longer tenancy agreements with tenants being able to stay for as long as they want, and “predictable” rents.
The organisation, which successfully achieved a ban on Scottish letting agent fees charged to tenants and is pressing for the same ban south of the border, is lobbying politicians to sign up to the new campaign.
Shelter’s latest push comes as the Scottish Government has announced it will definitely abolish the “no fault” ground for possession, and is meanwhile consulting on other proposed reforms.
Graeme Brown, director of Shelter Scotland, said: “We want to see a private rented sector in Edinburgh and across Scotland that is fit for families and protects all tenants – a sector that provides long-term homes, not short-term housing.
“Short-term tenancy agreements do not provide the stability and security that the more than 80,000 families with children living in the private rented sector need in order to live a settled life.
“Too often we hear of people being moved on, evicted or rents increased unreasonably, forcing people into the disruptive cycle of having to move house – every six months in some cases – preventing them from ever being able to put down strong roots and being part of a community.
“In the 21st century, we need a private rented sector that is modern, stable, flexible, predictable and fair for those individuals and families that call it home.
“The benefits of reform would not just be felt by tenants, however. Landlords too would see a more constant and predictable income with less downtime between rents and a more stable relationships with their tenants.”
Comments (16)
With the election over possibly the first thing to do is investigate whether Campbell Robb’s connections to Ed Miliband and Martha Mackenzie’s’/ Shelter’s lobbying crossed the line in terms of the charity and lobbying act in the run up to the election.
A little over a month before the election Ms Mackenzie blogged that Shelter had 37 days to win the election! Win the election for who? I couldn’t see a Shelter candidate on the list of results so have to wonder who they were actively campaigning for. I know I don’t really have to ask but maybe the Charities commission should.
Mental ! If I were still a PRS landlord today, I’d be out tomorrow if I thought these lunatics were going to get their way. How much more damage do they want to inflict on the PRS ? As someone says above, Shelter should be lobbying for increased house-building because the way they’re going the existing rental supply will dry up……….then what ?
Sorry, but not will dry up; in London and the Southeast it HAS dried up and is the cause of increasing rents due to competition. Rent control WILL NOT provide the supply of housing needed due to recent increase in population which if the EU gets its way might include a large increase in migrants from the North Africa. This is not about race but ever increase demand on a limited housing supply. Politicians are playing on emotions to get votes, I guess some may compare them to grooming the public to vote for them and give them the power they crave
Why does Shelter not campaign against the Labour party for not building 200000 council houses per year ?
Doesn’t want to bite the hand that feeds … comes to mind.
There is a lot of back history between Cambpell Rob and Ed Milliband if you go back to 2006 Robb was effectively the underling to the minister of the third sector – Ed Miliband. If anything so cosy as this whole affair went on in business it would be regardsed as corruption.
Shame Shelter don’t put their money where their mouths are and start building homes instead of overpaying their executive staff. Why do they believe they should control other peoples investments? If they were to build for all their clients then the rented sector would be a better place where the vast majority of private rented tenants who are happy with their landlords and those in need of better accommodation can get it from Shelter. Manipulating statistics, which shelter seem to be renowned for, is unhelpful. It is time the extremist from both sides disappear. The fact is the lack of housing caused by unlimited increases in demand, much from eastern Europe, has caused the situation. It is the politicians who have caused the problem trying to control the market is not the answer PROVIDE THE SUPPLY OF HOUSING AND RENTS WILL DROP.
The challenge for both Shelter and landlords is to deliver PRS improvement in real terms. The problem with the current SG proposals is that they represent a simplistic landlord – tenant tug of war which fuels political ideology. Robbing Peter to pay Paul does nothing to increase property supply or drive investment into sectors of the market where it is urgently required. If the SG are serious about improving the PRS in Scotland they need to stay on the drawing board until they get it right (and it is certainly not right yet), recognise that one size does not fit all, stop using terms like “unscrupulous landlords” and start thinking outside the box.
Here’s the rub.
Shelter can clearly see that no government is actually going to address the cause of the housing problem, supply. That they then choose to attempt to wreck what the rest of us are left with because of that issue is beyond me.
We have landlords that work abroad for a few years or in a different part of the country say on an 18mth contract we let their house for them, when they need to come back we give the tenants notice. Are Shelter saying that the owners wont beable to come back to their own homes and tenants can really stay there as long as they want too?
Can they not see that this will decrease the housing stock available to rent out?
Labour want rent controls – so market forces wont apply. A landlord will be forced to let a property at perhaps below its true value. A little like a reverse of the huge and expensive Milk and Butter mountains we had in the past but with housing in short supply and cheep. How is this an incentive for a landlord to rent out their property?
Seriously – have they let out the inmates from an asylum as they appear to work for Shelter and have infected Labour with some form of stupid.
I wonder if he can explain how? we all want something, we all know there are problems to be addressed but the bit Shelter don’t seem to understand is that in the same way as they chose to use charity donations to lobby government and pay some not small salaries to executives instead of practical provision projects, landlords can chose not to spend money on helping the housing crisis either.
Unlike government PRS landlords are investing their own money and as such have no obligation to house anyone let alone on the somewhat hypocritical terms of a lobby group.
Oh Robert, you poor thing. There you are – just trying to make some money for yourself and look after no. 1, when these do-gooders like Shelter just keep getting in your way. My heart goes out to you.
Rent Rebel
We want the same thing im sure – more properties for tenants to rent at affordable prices. We also would like long term tenants. How to achieve this is by making landlords want to let out their homes, make it attractive to them, increase the supply of houses and rent prices will be in proportion to the demand. Not the opposite but driving landlords away from letting their homes.
Care to explain? I am not making any money from PRS and have just helped young tenants into their first property away from home at 35 on terms even Shelter would be hard pressed to campaign for.
If you read my back catalogue of posts (about 7 years worth) I am the one pointing out that HMRC are failing to collect tax due on PRS about £1.25 billion annually is not being collect because of incompetence and civil service mis-management. I was the one who lobbied Tony Blair to protect all tenant deposits and corrected fundamental mistakes in the 2007 deposit legislation. I am the one campaigning to change the way the benefits assisted tenants can have a secure tenancy in the face of a benefits system that is archaic and un-workable. I am the one who has devised a system that will encourage investment to create an additional 100,000 tenancies into the PRS. I am the one who has self funded his own lobbying of government to improve the lot of tenants in the face of party political point scoring that is damaging any chance of progress. If you had spent just 5 minutes working out who I am and what I have done you will find that I have put 21years work into making the PRS better than it was and have had a more positive practical influence over the sector than government, ARLA,RICS NALS or Shelter put together
Instead of being a wronged keyboard warrior have the fortitude to post under your own real name as I do and put in as much consistent effort as I do. I don’t deserve your knee jerk un-researched anger and certainly don’t need your sarcastic sympathy.
Shelter are not do gooders they are extremely well paid self serving political lobbyists who manipulate statistics in the most shocking and appalling way to meet their own political agenda.The fact that that Shelter have managed to get on the wrong side of me is an almighty achievement but not in any way that is good or positive.
Robert – for those like me (and the current Housing Minister) who are fairly unknowledgable in relation to the rental market and its governance maybe you need to seek a position where your depth of experience can be put to best use for the good of the industry and its’ customers…
Fully agree with your observations on Shelter, Robert.