Government look to throw landlords under the bus with 3 year tenancies

Government look to throw landlords under the bus with 3 year tenancies

9:15 AM, 2nd July 2018, About 5 years ago 97

Text Size

The government has released to the BBC and other selected journalists that it intends to hold a consultation considering making the shortest term tenancy in England 3 years with a 6 month break clause for tenants.

The consultation is due to start this week and run until 26th August.

Communities Secretary, James Brokenshire, said to the BBC: “It is deeply unfair when renters are forced to uproot their lives or find new schools for their children at short notice due to the terms of their rental contract.

“Being able to call your rental property your home is vital to putting down roots and building stronger communities.”

He then told the Mail that under the proposed reforms, tenants would be able to leave before the end of the minimum term, but would have greater protection if they wanted to stay for an extended period.

By the Governments very own figures the average tenancy length is over 4 years so why take away nearly all flexibility? Only normally the worse tenants are served a section 21 by landlords. Do politicians still want the Private sector to house the tenants that the state can’t accommodate?

John Healey, Shadow Housing Secretary said: “Any fresh help for renters is welcome but this latest promise is meaningless if landlords can still force tenants out by hiking up the rent.”

Healey also added that Labour plans for the PRS included controls on rents, an end to no fault evictions (ie. section 21) and even more protection against substandard properties.

As easily predicted Shelter waded in with Polly Neate saying: “This is an important step forward. Losing a tenancy is the main driver of homelessness and also causes huge instability for renting families so everyone who rents will be very pleased to see a move towards longer tenancies, but if the government really wants to stand up and provide stability for renters, they can and should go beyond three years to provide real protection from eviction, and the huge upheaval of having to move home, jobs and schools.

“The government needs to bring forward new legislation quickly with tens of thousands of families already homeless and many more at risk of the same fate, we simply cannot wait.”

Share This Article


Appalled Landlord

0:09 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Kate Mellor at 07/07/2018 - 18:33Hi Kate
As the holder of an Economics degree I think that on the one hand yours is a good idea but on the other hand it may be too restrictive, ceteris paribus and, of course, mutatis mutandis.
However, I think a training course of Economics should be mandatory for all MPs.
I did not take much interest in politics until George Hasbeen’s speech on 8 July 2015, but from what I have seen of politicians since then I have come to the conclusion that candidates for Parliament should be subject to an Intelligence Test. An Integrity Test would be even better but that would cut down the numbers drastically.

Chris @ Possession Friend

8:17 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Ian Cognito at 07/07/2018 - 11:53
Ahh Ian,
You've hit the nail on the head - Fault ! and proving such against a Tenant is both expensive, time-consuming and difficult in the current legal system, that's why Landlords use Section 21.
Of course ALL Landlords want a long term tenant, and ALL Landlords want a tenant in their property for three or ideally, more years, " AS LONG AS THEY'RE LOOKING AFTER THE PROPERTY " as I said above, proving that isn't easy. That's why the Gov's figures [ EHS ] show current average tenancies are 4.3 Years !! - its societies shite that L.A's don't have the houses or will to accommodate that the PRS gets stuck with picking up the pieces and there are increasing numbers of landlords withdrawing from this market.
If I was a cynic, I'd suggest that this might be a factor in the Gov't proposal ? ( aside from outrageous Vote - snivelling )
Out of interest Ian, do you provide tenancies to Housing benefit or U.C tenants ?

terry sullivan

8:19 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Ian Cognito at 07/07/2018 - 13:57
how does an AT arise

terry sullivan

8:21 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Old Mrs Landlord at 07/07/2018 - 23:17
r u sure about that?

Ian Cognito

10:05 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 08/07/2018 - 08:17
No, Chris, I don't let to tenants on benefit.

11:01 AM, 8th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Ian Cognito at 08/07/2018 - 10:05
I cannot imagine any sane person letting to UC tenants, just a death wish.

Old Mrs Landlord

4:57 AM, 9th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by terry sullivan at 08/07/2018 - 08:21
My post stated the basis of this assertion. If you do not wish to wade through the definitive Act of Parliament you can check it on the less reliable but easily accessible Wikipedia entry.

Ian Narbeth

19:07 PM, 9th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Several points to make:
1. I am happy to have long term tenants. Most professional landlords are. People renting out their homes temporarily may not be happy with 3 year fixed terms but that is not the professional landlord's concern.
2. Parliament will need to deal with restrictions imposed by mortgage companies and in leases. Landlords should lobby for that.
3. Tenants with break clauses are likely to mess up. Serving break notices is technical and easy to get wrong. Unless the law prescribes very simple provisions, many tenants will screw up their break notices and the AST will continue. That is going to hurt tenants if they have moved out and taken on new property. It still leaves a messy situation for the landlord because if the AST continues, the landlord cannot re-let the property.
4. Double rent should be payable if a tenant fails to leave after serving a break notice unless the landlord agrees to waive the break.
5. Landlords should seek a quid pro quo for longer tenancies such as an easier system for getting defaulting tenants out. At the very least if a tenant is say 2 or 3 months in arrears of rent the landlord should be able to serve the equivalent of a s21 notice whereby mandatory possession is granted.
6. Landlords need to ram home to MPs that we are involuntary creditors. No other business is required to continue to offer thousands of pounds of credit to defaulting customers.


19:47 PM, 10th July 2018, About 5 years ago

I read a lot of the replies - this is what will happen. You as a landlord will have an open ended tenancy whereby the landlord cannot evict a tenant unless there are material breaches and the tenant can leave after 28 days notice. Have a look at chilly Venezuela also known as Scotland.

Chris @ Possession Friend

20:04 PM, 10th July 2018, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 09/07/2018 - 19:07
So, in negotiation for having to give a 3 year fixed term ( That's just the Landlord being constrained, NOT the Tenant ! )
The landlord suggested 'bargain' would be to Allow an extra Months rent before seeking Possession [ its Only Two months at the moment ]
Sounds like the Governments Brexit strategy, give up everything for nothing !

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now