Mass sell-off if government do not get landlord support?

by Property 118

13:17 PM, 19th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Mass sell-off if government do not get landlord support?

Make Text Bigger
Mass sell-off if government do not get landlord support?

Government Ministers need to ensure that plans to reform the rights of landlords to re-possess rented housing have their support otherwise there could be a mass sell-off of properties.

With the demand for rental housing outstripping supply, the Residential Landlords Association is warning that the proposals in the Queen’s Speech to end Section 21 re-possessions need to be replaced by a system that ensures landlords have the confidence that they can swiftly and effectively re-possess properties in legitimate circumstances. Without such confidence the supply crisis in the market will only worsen, making it harder for prospective tenants to find a place to live.

The RLA has long called for the new framework to provide clear and comprehensive grounds upon which landlords can re-possess properties in cases such as anti-social behaviour and tenant rent arrears with guarantees about the timeframes involved for each and measures to prevent abuses by problem tenants. The Government needs also to develop a dedicated housing court to ensure that there is easily accessible and swift justice available where there are conflicts between landlords and tenants.

David Smith, Policy Director for the RLA, said:

“We accept the need to protect tenants from abuse but it is crucial that plans to reform the way re-possessions can take place are got right if the Government is to avoid a rental housing crisis. Unless the new system is fair to good landlords as well as tenants, those same landlords who we need to support simply will not have the confidence to provide the rented homes that are needed to meet the demand.”



Comments

paul robinson

8:00 AM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Scrapping section!

The student and young professional shared HMO rental market needs fixed term tenancies and the vehicle of section 21 to accommodate this, plus give sufficient swift support to deal with antisocial behaviour and other matters if occurring in a HMO. Otherwise the other decent tenants would be continued to be affected and ultimately their safe enjoyment compromised by their antisocial housemate, leading to all sort of other issues.

Fixed term tenancies and the great benefit they bring to all parties in shared HMO are too long to list here, but fundamentally provide good quality accommodation to young professionals at a competitive price point, allowing them to save and getting on the property ladder themselves.

The government need look at the very different rental demographic, all across the UK and not as they have done with the tenant fee ban, role out “one size fits all” changes.

The proposed changes will again have a detrimental effect on decent tenants in fairly managed shared HMO’s and completely go against the governments goal of providing good quality shared and safe rental accommodation as a fair price!

The recent S21 consultation completely ignored the HMO shared rental sub market and the Ministry of Housing actually advised that it was more targeted at "single household rentals" and HMO shared rental Landlords would be best to use the "other" box to feed back their response.  

In the following government document, there were an estimated 497,000 HMOs in England and Wales at the end of March 2018. ‪http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00708/SN00708.pdf‬   How is it possible that this ½ a million rentals have not been recognised, or their landlords even encouraged to reply to the consultation?

This is fundamentally a flawed consultation and strongly suspect that the HMO shared rental students and young professional market will not be excluded from the abolition of S21.

Despite the consultation now closed as it a change to primary legislation, would require a vote in parliment.

Would still encourage all landlords to email their MP & the Housing Minister Robert Jenrick robert.jenrick.mp@parliament.uk

Also copy in;-

TenancyReform@communities.gov.uk
Eleanor.Millington@communities.gov.uk
john.healey.mp@parliament.uk
james.hall@parliament.uk
john.stewart@rla.org.uk
Policy@landlords.org.uk

SM

8:48 AM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by paul robinson at 20/12/2019 - 08:00Hi Paul, I agree with virtually everything you say. However I would suggest that the need for section 21 applies to the market as a whole not just "student and young professional shared HMO rental market". We target young city works in London, providing 1 bed flats. Without section 21 I fail to see how I can protect neighbouring flats from anti social behaviour. The 2 months notice that section 21 requires is long enough for a single person to find alternative accommodation and longer than any normal person should be expected to tollerate anti social behaviour. I have already written to my MP requesting a meeting to discuss the issue and wil be writing to the others that you have mentioned.

paul robinson

8:58 AM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by SM at 20/12/2019 - 08:48
Hi SM, so yours also sound like HMO flat? Unless they are purpose built and outside the HMO regs.

In a sensible world were government actually understand properly the effects of legislative changes to the PRS one would hope that HMO are going to be excluded from S21 scrapping, maybe the reason why the consultation document completely ignored them.

I fear tho the government will just bulldoze through a one size fits all changes.

Scotland have no exclusions for student HMO so it has caused major issues up there

Gromit

10:14 AM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by SM at 20/12/2019 - 08:48
Can I encourage every reader to have a face-to-face with their MP, but understand the process - you'll need to be persistent.
1st meeting your MP will sympathsise and try to put you off. Persuing the issue further, on your insistence they'll write to the relevant Minister who will take 6 weeks to respond with a "stock" answer. This is just another tactic to hope you'll drop it. Sumarise the salient points before the meeting and give it to your MP, in form that he/she can just drop into the letter to the Minister.

You need a second appointment (I'm awaiting the date for mine) to push it more and show you aren't going to drop it. Expectmore delaying/put off tactics.

Make sure you get copied in on all correspondence.

paul robinson

10:38 AM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 20/12/2019 - 10:14
I would agree, best way to go and see your MP! It’s a hard work getting sensible replies to emails etc.

moneymanager

12:02 PM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

"In a sensible world where government actually understand properly the effects of legislative changes"

You are making the assumption that they don't, even if they are not the primary instigator, the "mass self off" of not so much "the PRS" as the privately HELD INTEREST in the PRS conforms perfectly with the corporatisation of housing, governments have "previous" with ownership depriving actions (Executive Order 6102 FDR), I'd better stop or I'll sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Gromit

17:39 PM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by paul robinson at 20/12/2019 - 08:58
Can you direct us to some documented evidence of these problems? It would be useful to stick under the nose of my MP.

paul robinson

17:52 PM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 20/12/2019 - 12:02
Oh yes, I’d agree it’s their end game

SM

18:24 PM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 20/12/2019 - 10:14
Hi Gromit, thank you for your reply. I won't go into to much detail but I am seeking my third meeting with my MP at present. Your analysis of the procrastination I've whitnessed is very accurate. They must have a manual that they all work from. I agree with your point that an Email isn't enough, we all have to go in and state our case.

Gromit

18:33 PM, 20th December 2019
About 2 months ago

Reply to the comment left by SM at 20/12/2019 - 18:24
They do work on an attrition basis. It usually takes 6 weeks to get an appointment then 6 weeks for the reply, so it's a 3 month cycle.

With Sec.21 I didn't get the response until after the consultation closed!!

1 2

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

Advance Payments - Kicking the can down the street

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