Profile incomplete
9:52 AM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago 52
Text Size
As the Renters (Reform) Bill heads back to Parliament, the proposals have led to criticism from both renter campaign groups and the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA).
MPs will debate the Bill today with 122 pages of nearly 200 amendments to debate and agree on.
But while the NRLA says the Bill is a fair compromise, with the abolition of Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions and new protections for tenants, like a Decent Homes Standard and a property portal.
Landlords would also be banned from discriminating against families or benefit recipients.
That’s not the view of the Renters’ Reform Coalition and Generation Rent – who say the Bill ‘will be a failure’ because the government has made too many concessions to backbench MPs.
The NRLA’s chief executive, Ben Beadle, said: “This Bill delivers a fair deal for tenants and responsible landlords. In the interests of certainty for the sector it is now time to ensure the Bill passes through Parliament.
“For renters, the Bill will abolish section 21 repossessions and fixed term tenancies, introduce a Decent Homes Standard for the sector, a new Ombudsman and Property Portal which landlords will have to join as well as measures to protect families and those in receipt of benefits from discrimination.
“Going forward, it will always be for the courts to decide if landlords have met the threshold to repossess a property based on a series of legitimate reasons.
“This includes tenant anti-social behaviour, serious rent arrears or where a landlord plans to sell a property.”
He adds: “A number of the amendments proposed to the Bill enact recommendations by the cross-party housing select committee.
“Taken together they would ensure a balanced Bill that protects tenants and ensures it is viable for responsible landlords to continuing renting properties out.”
The Renters’ Reform Coalition says that the Bill ‘will be a failure’ in its current form.
The group says that the Bill would need major changes to meet its aims of achieving a ‘better deal for renters’.
A spokesperson said: “We have been clear from the outset that the Renters (Reform) Bill would have no chance of achieving these aims without significant changes.
“Unfortunately, as groups representing and working alongside private tenants in England, our concerns have not been taken seriously.
“It is revealing that ministers have met with lobbyists for landlords and estate agents twice as often as they have met groups representing renters.”
They added: “The result of all the government’s backtracking is that we have now have a bill that abolishes section 21 in name only – there is no guarantee it would ever fully abolish section 21, and even then, the new tenancy system set to replace it will be little better.
“This legislation is intended to give the impression of improving conditions for renters, but in fact it preserves the central power imbalance at the root of why renting in England is in crisis.”
The group says that tenants face insecurity with more than a quarter living in three or more private rented homes in the previous five years.
They also claim that poor conditions ‘are rife’ and that 22% of privately renting households don’t make complaints because they fear eviction.
There are also worries over affordability and ‘record numbers’ are being made homeless.
The coalition says it wants all concessions made to backbench MPs to be reversed, tenants to get four months’ instead of two, not ‘trapping’ tenants into six month tenancies.
They also don’t want the selective licensing burden on landlords to be reviewed and protecting tenant evictions in the first two years of a tenancy.
And give the courts discretion over whether an eviction should take place.
They also want rent rises restricted so there are no Section 21 ‘economic’ evictions, so the rise is not unaffordable to the tenant.
Ben Twomey, the chief executive of Generation Rent, said: “Everyone deserves to feel secure in their own home, which is why the government committed to end section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions over five years ago.
“The Renters (Reform) Bill does not deliver the original promise that landlords will ‘no longer be able to unexpectedly evict families with only 8 weeks’ notice’.
“Renters were promised once-in-a-generation change but if this Bill passes in its current form, we could still be just a couple of months away from homelessness, even if we play by all the rules set by landlords.”
He added: “That’s why as a bare minimum we’re calling on the government to double eviction notice periods to four months, while increasing the time tenants can spend in their home without fear of eviction from six months to two years.”
Previous Article
Renters (Reform) Bill - The key amendments to look out forNext Article
BRP cards to be scrapped?
graham mcauley
11:04 AM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Ben Twomey, the chief executive of Generation Rent, said: “Everyone deserves to feel secure in their own home, which is why the government committed to end section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions over five years ago.
But its not their own home, its mine, they are renting for a period determined by me, they have a choice to accept the time I will allow them to stay or look elsewhere for something more suitable, if you rent a room in a hotel you dont have the right to stay longer than the hotel will allow you accept the terms.
The government are use Shelter and Generation rent to deflect everyone away from their responsibility to house people.
Private landlords should not even be considered, as an alternative to the housing shortage.
They are slowly taking ownership of our properties with regulations as they wont provide enough for people who need it, yet in Cardiff they have quickly built a VILLAGE for people coming in boats, so why did they not do that for the people they are firstly responsible for
Lee Bailey
11:06 AM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Communist UK,
All capital will leave the UK soon enough.
Cider Drinker
12:24 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by graham mcauley at 24/04/2024 - 11:04
It may be your home if it’s your PPR and you are working away for a while.
If your PPI is not the property that you are letting to tenants then it’s not your home. It is your property but it is clearly your tenants’ home.
Notwithstanding the use of correct terminology (home vs property), it is vital that property owners have the final say on who is allowed to use their property.
A tenant should be secure in their own home for as long as they pay rent on time, looks after the property in a tenant like manner, is receptive to regular inspections by the landlord or the landlord’s representative and complies with any other ‘reasonable and lawful’ terms in the tenancy agreement.
This is already the case in most tenancies. Landlords are not landlords if they don’t have tenants.
Landlords shouldn’t be allowed to evict a good tenant just to allow another tenant to take up residency in the same property (except for family but this possibility should be made very clear in the tenancy agreement from the outset).
If selling is not a mandatory ground for possession, landlords will need to stop paying their mortgage and allow the property to be repossessed or there is a significant risk that landlords will revert to other (non legal) means to gain possession.
Cider Drinker
12:30 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
As a direct result of anti-landlord taxation, regulations and sentiment, my children no longer wish to become landlords.
This gives me a bit of a headache. What am I to do with my properties ahead of my death? Without other landlords wishing to buy my property portfolio, I have little choice but to seek possession in order to sell. Other landlords may need to sell up in order to fund their retirement.
My tenants are great people. They all look after their homes reasonably well. I would dearly love my children to take over from me as their landlord. I cannot even try to convince them to do so in the current environment.
If migration was controlled, there’d be a plentiful supply of houses and the PRS would operate more satisfactorily.
Paul Essex
12:34 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
The simplest option is for the NRLA to rename themselves as the SLA as the student landlords seem to be the only people they represent.
How on earth can you welcome things that probably won't work like ASB issues and court reforms without any details or targets.
My current tenants will be the last, with supporters like this who needs enemies.
PH
12:38 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Sheralyne Stamp at 24/04/2024 - 09:56
The reason why I wouldn't subscribe to this shower of *hite !
PH
12:44 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Stella at 24/04/2024 - 10:54
Once I find out that to sell my house I have to go to court to get permission which isn't guaranteed there will be a section 21 delivered promptly. NO-ONE tells me that I can't sell the house that I own outright !
Michael Booth
12:50 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
No goverment has a right to tell you who can and can't live in your property and when you want to reclaim the PRIVATELY OWNED ASSET.
James Adams
12:55 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Stella at 24/04/2024 - 10:54
If all these reforms come in, it will simply be game over for landlords. And so, we sell up, therefore creating an escalation of the renting crisis. A real lack of properties to rent was further exacerbated since the clever section 24 tax reforms, where rents have gone up 15-20% since the phasing period ended in 2021. It will be the same for FHLs.
Cider Drinker
12:57 PM, 24th April 2024, About 3 weeks ago
Just today, the BBC’s Politics Live, reminded us of Michael Gove saying (back in February)…
“…there are a small minority of unscrupulous landlords who use the threat of eviction either to jack up rents or to silence people who are complaining about their homes.”
He went on to say,
“The vast majority do a great job and you need a healthy PRS.”
If the vast majority of landlords are doing a great job, the RRB must surely be a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Labour want the ban to start even if the Courts cannot accommodate it. Why do Labour think it is ok to introduce a Bill that the Courts cannot support in a way that is fair to landlords and tenants?