Fergus Wilson’s response to BBC Panorama

by Readers Question

8:45 AM, 21st March 2019
About 8 months ago

Fergus Wilson’s response to BBC Panorama

Make Text Bigger
Fergus Wilson’s response to BBC Panorama

The Remit of the Programme was:

What happens to the Tenants when the Landlord Retires or Dies!

Why are Private Sector Landlords (PSL) leaving in droves, because of the punitive tax regime!

Unfortunately Panorama sacrificed an informative explanation of the reasons for the PSL exit in favour of two “non stories” from tenants and thereby bringing Panorama into disrepute.

Why were these none stories? Firstly Mr and Mrs Holmes had been to court and the Council had withdrawn its case! The Council was perfectly entitled to withdraw the Case!

Contrary to what Richard Bilton said there was no prosecution for No Heating! The prosecution was for no hot water. The next tenant moved in and found a working immersion heater. Mrs Holmes had failed to turn it on! Yet Panorama ran its left wing piece instead of explaining the reasons for landlords exiting the Sector!

The second couple were equally at sea and had no case! Their shopping list of faults were all non-faults, but that is not why I gave a Section 21. It is because the tenant said that he was upset at a £50 a month increase and did not want future increases which were inevitable! It is far better to deal with the situation immediately rather than have a repeat next year.

I noted one tenant had to pay £2,600. Well that is a surprise! Cheaper to pay £50 a month for six months! The house has been re-let at £50 more!

If the function of Panorama is an educational one then the programme failed miserably to deliver the message of why PSLs are so annoyed with HM Government Tax Regime that they are pulling out of the Sector. The Government is most un-businesslike  in its methods. If a business has a shortage then it gives incentives, not disincentives which is what the Government is doing at the moment!

That in simple English is tax breaks. I suggest that Capital Gains Tax is reduced to ten percent! The Revenue will suffer a heart attack, but tenants will have a Roof over their Heads!

There should be Full Tax Relief on Mortgage Payments at the top rate!

Again, HM Government has to decide whether it wants tenants to be housed or not!

Fergus Wilson



Comments

Ali Asgur

22:11 PM, 24th March 2019
About 8 months ago

I used to watch Panorama fairly regularly until a few years ago where that covered a topic I was familiar with. The propaganda was really appalling and the presentation and editing deliberately done to present the subjects in the worst possible light.

Dennis Leverett

22:37 PM, 24th March 2019
About 8 months ago

38 Degrees are now caning us Landlords based on "facts" from the BBC, The Guardian, The Sun and Shelter with reference to DHSS discrimination. https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/5509?bucket=email-blast-20_3_2019_50kt&utm_campaign=20_3_2019_50kt&utm_medium=blast&utm_source=email Here we go again. I've told David Innes what I think of him and his usual lack of proper research but doubt I will get a reply. My response to Michael Holmes was sarcasm in case you hadn't realised.

Claire Smith

10:08 AM, 25th March 2019
About 8 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Dennis Leverett at 24/03/2019 - 22:37
I also received the request to sign this petition. I have (politely!) explained why I feel unable to do so. Can I encourage other landlords to join us in explaining why tenants in receipt of benefits are less and less likely to be able to find homes in the PRS. I will point out that we have, in the past, had a tenant on benefits. We do not advertise 'no DSS' but do credit checks on every applicant and consider each application carefully.

Dr Rosalind Beck

10:18 AM, 25th March 2019
About 8 months ago

I wonder if they will also object to asking for a working guarantor - as that is the obvious insurance landlords have when taking those on benefits. I assume in that case we will be accused of discrimination against unemployed guarantors. It's a farcical interference in our businesses by people who don't want to understand or acknowledge the complexity of the sector.

Luke P

10:26 AM, 25th March 2019
About 8 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Dr Rosalind Beck at 25/03/2019 - 10:18
I have been insisting on homeowner guarantors since 2006 and virtually single-handedly started the now prevalent trend in my local area. I remember (joking) about there one day being a ban on taking them, not necessarily because tenants didn't have anyone, but because many (certainly in my town) have been lumbered with their darling relatives' arrears/clean-up bill and refuse to ever do it again. In an insular place like Grimsby, it doesn't take long before most tenants have run their guarantors 'through the system' and are left stuck. It's not my problem, although if the Government believe they can legislate their way out of the situation and force LLs to take on the riskiest tenants with no security, then they're sorely mistaken. I literally may as well pack up business and find other work.

Trevor Cooper

10:48 AM, 25th March 2019
About 8 months ago

lets not also forget that the government has made it more difficult for riskier tenants now the maximum deposit you can accept is 5 weeks. I have on several occasions accepted tenants with CCJ's with a 6-month deposit, which gives the tenant a chance to build a good payment history whilst having the deposit protected. We won't be able to offer this any more after June...

1 2 3

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

OR

BECOME A MEMBER

New Welsh holding deposit requirements 13th December

The Landlords Union

Become a Member, it's FREE

Our mission is to facilitate the sharing of best practice amongst UK landlords, tenants and letting agents

Learn More