6:25 AM, 2nd May 2025, About 2 weeks ago 42
Text Size
It’s bizarre, isn’t it? Landlords, already battered by a barrage of legislative changes and economic pressures, are now being asked by the Labour government to offer their properties to asylum seekers.
The National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) has voiced strong opposition, saying the government needs to support us if they want more homes to become available.
For landlords, the Home Office request feels like a bitter irony – a government that has systematically squeezed the PRS now seeks its help to address a problem of its own making.
Britain’s housing crisis is no secret. With rents rocketing and house prices soaring to over eight times the average salary, young and working-age Britons are struggling to afford homes.
The tax burden, the highest since World War II, weighs heavily on these same citizens, who see their contributions funnelled into government-supported housing for asylum seekers.
Around 99% of migrants arriving via small boats claim asylum, gaining access to accommodation, healthcare, education and a weekly allowance of around £50.
While this might be less contentious if housing were abundant, the reality is different: every property allocated to an asylum seeker is one less for a British family priced out of the market.
For landlords, the government’s appeal to house asylum seekers – facilitated through contractors like Serco – comes against a backdrop of relentless policy changes.
The loss of Section 24 means landlords can no longer fully deduct interest on buy to let (BTL) mortgages, slashing profitability.
The abolition of Section 21 will make evictions a costly, drawn-out process, leaving landlords vulnerable to months of lost rent.
The end of Assured Shorthold Tenancies, with their six-month minimum, allows tenants to leave early, further destabilising income streams.
Add to this the Renters’ Rights Bill (RRB) and the looming EPC C standard, which applies only to the PRS and not to social or council housing. These measures feel like targeted attacks, designed to force landlords to sell up.
Why, then, would landlords volunteer to house asylum seekers?
Many of us feel betrayed, having worked hard to build property portfolios only to face what could be seen as punitive legislation.
The NRLA’s frustration echoes a broader sentiment: the government cannot expect cooperation from a sector it has consistently undermined and belittled us (even when they say ‘not all landlords’ are bad…).
The housing of asylum seekers also raises questions about fairness.
Right to Rent checks, a legal obligation for PRS landlords in England, obviously won’t need to be applied when government contractors are involved.
I imagine that some of the new rules under RRB won’t be enforced either.
This double standard will fuel resentment, as most landlords face strict compliance burdens while others will appear to be exempt.
Meanwhile, the government’s reliance on private rentals to house asylum seekers – often at a cost of £145 per night for hotel accommodations when properties aren’t available – highlights its failure to address the root causes of migration and housing shortages.
Tenants, too, are caught in the crossfire. The government’s push to regulate the PRS, cheered on by groups like Shelter and Acorn, has led to an exodus of landlords.
As properties are sold, rental stock dwindles, leaving tenants scrambling for homes.
The irony is that the very policies meant to protect renters may be pricing them out of the market or, worse, making them homeless.
When tenants finally realise that government actions have reduced their housing options, the relentless narrative blaming ‘greedy landlords’ may lose its shine.
The social contract – where citizens contribute through taxes in exchange for support, especially in later life – is slowly fraying.
Landlords, like other taxpayers, see their tax contributions being used to outbid them in their own market, as the government secures private rentals for asylum seekers.
This will breed resentment, not just among landlords but among young Britons who feel their sacrifices are unrewarded. I’m already seeing this on my social media feeds.
The migration debate, already heated, is ignited further by the optics of newcomers receiving homes while locals languish on waiting lists.
For landlords, the decision to house asylum seekers is understandably fraught.
On the one hand, guaranteed rental income from (lucrative) government contracts could be appealing.
On the other, the risks – potential property damage, bureaucratic hurdles and a public backlash – loom large. Just read the experiences of other landlords.
Many landlords I know are simply unwilling to engage with a government they feel has declared war on their livelihoods.
The solution lies not in cajoling landlords but in addressing the housing crisis and migration policy holistically – and honestly.
Building more homes, streamlining asylum processes and restoring fairness in the PRS would do more to ease tensions than appeals to a beleaguered sector.
Until then, landlords will remain sceptical, and the divide between government and the PRS will only widen. This will not, I predict, end well.
Until next time,
The Landlord Crusader
Disgrunteld Landlady
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up12:48 PM, 7th May 2025, About A week ago
Reply to the comment left by Billy Gunn at 02/05/2025 - 22:04
50 k a year, how many beds is your property and baths.
Disgrunteld Landlady
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up12:51 PM, 7th May 2025, About A week ago
Reply to the comment left by Disillusioned landlord at 03/05/2025 - 10:20
Lol - you make good points. The reason they choose UK is because UK is a soft touch on the one hand and on the other hand the UK has also actively funded and taken part in "wars" in many of these countries where the people are coming from.
Wentworth Properties UK
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up9:17 AM, 12th May 2025, About 4 days ago
It's definitely an interesting balancing act for Labour when it comes to the issue of landlords, especially in the context of asylum seekers. On one hand, they’ve been vocal about the challenges of the private rental market and often highlight the need for affordable housing solutions. On the other hand, the sheer scale of the housing crisis — made even more pressing by rising numbers of asylum seekers and other groups in need of housing — means the government can’t afford to ignore landlords entirely.
Wentworth Properties UK
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up9:18 AM, 12th May 2025, About 4 days ago
The reality is that many landlords play a key role in providing accommodation in the short term, especially when the public sector and social housing can’t keep up with demand. The question is whether they can find a way to incentivize landlords to offer affordable housing without compromising the rights of renters or creating an even more divided housing market.
Gromit
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up10:23 AM, 12th May 2025, About 4 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Wentworth Properties UK at 12/05/2025 - 09:17
The Government (inc Tories) want to eliminate private Landlords and replace them with big corporate landlords like Blackrock.
This why they are creating the conditions we're Landlords are looking to exit and for the Government (via their proxy Serco) to takeover their properties. (it would surprise me if there wasn't some kind of buy out clause after the 5yrs are up, leveraged by e.g. repayment of any capital expenditure, etc.)
Stella
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up10:53 AM, 12th May 2025, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Wentworth Properties UK at 12/05/2025 - 09:17
If the government are beginning to realise that they cannot ignore Landlords entirely and that they need them to solve the housing crisis they have a very odd way of showing it.
Beaver
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up11:12 AM, 12th May 2025, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Wentworth Properties UK at 12/05/2025 - 09:18
This is absolutely right: I have in the past rented to people for six months where their homes have been flooded for example. As I understand the situation though the proposed Renters Reform Bill would not permit me to do this if it went ahead in its present form.
My current agreement with my mortgage provider and my insurers would not permit me to house asylum seekers. I don't have any knowledge of the Serco contract and whether it is equivalent to an AST or a periodic tenancy. However, in the past I have rented out to a large incorporated body under a license to occupy and although initially when I read the contract it appeared to be more onerous than an AST it actually turned out to be an excellent arrangement and my initial misgivings were misplaced.
Although my previous experience using a license to occupy was excellent, I have no knowledge of the details of the Serco contract and I have never had any dealings with them. But I don't house benefits tenants any more and it is entirely possible that a contract with Serco is a better deal than housing social housing tenants.
I also don't know whether the Serco contract to house asylum seekers would permit me to allow them to use a band D property for longer occupancy than currently proposed by the government under its proposals to implement the move to EPC C+ in the PRS sector.
A safe band D property with a modern condensing gas boiler is a lot better than a tent.
Beaver
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up11:27 AM, 12th May 2025, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Stella at 12/05/2025 - 10:53
They do have an odd way of showing it. The i paper just reported that Rachel Reeves' latest changes proposing to cut the available discount on the right-to-buy council properties (therefore triggering an increase in people wanting to do it now) are set to wipe out 18,500 council homes:
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/right-to-buy-surge-18500-council-homes-3686871#:~:text=The%20Government%20said%20the%20move,sold%20off%20in%202025%2F26.
The more they meddle in the market the more damage they do and by structuring their policies, including their proposals in the Right to Rent Bill, to penalise landlords the more damage they actually do to private tenants, social housing tenants and student accommodation.
Gromit
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up12:39 PM, 12th May 2025, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 12/05/2025 - 11:27
The Government (including the previous several Tory governments) wasn't to destroy the PRS replacing it with big corporate Landlords like Blackrock (why do you think Larry Fink was in No. 10 a few months ago?).
Any problems that tenants may have is just collateral damage.
Beaver
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments and posts!
Sign Up12:47 PM, 12th May 2025, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 12/05/2025 - 12:39
There is a lot of collateral damage for tenants. This is particularly the case in the "red wall" areas where the government investment in Serco will dramatically increase the competition for available accommodation and damage the interests of people already looking for an alternative to labour.