Profile incomplete
9:52 AM, 24th April 2024, About 2 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?
Carchester
9:41 AM, 27th April 2024, About 2 weeks ago
Slightly off core argument here but I cannot for the life of me understand why the RR Bill does not contain any provision to compel rogue tenants to comply with a court order to VACATE a property that cannot be labelled " their home" when the Order is effective.
All this headline grabbing nonsense from MPs and others of influence is galling when the core values of democracy are being swept away. The Socialist /Communist doctrine of Marx is well to the fore here in the UK.
This creature Beadle and his cohorts in Shelter, Generation Rent et al need to be despatched and despatched NOW.
Carchester.
GlanACC
9:45 AM, 27th April 2024, About 2 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Carchester at 27/04/2024 - 09:41
They do have to comply with a court order to vacate BUT if (when) they don't you still have to book in the bailiffs to chuck them out. How else would you do it 'send the boys round' which I think is reasonable. The issue is with the method of removal.
TJP
11:41 AM, 28th April 2024, About 2 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Dennis Forrest at 24/04/2024 - 10:09The Conservatives have become socialist while pretending to be capitalist, Labour are, of course, died-in-the-wool socialists and the judiciary are socialists pretending to be unbiased. Not a good time to be a landlord.
Paul
9:57 AM, 29th April 2024, About A week ago
Reply to the comment left by Sheralyne Stamp at 24/04/2024 - 09:56
A tad hash. Unfortunately NRLA cannot force the government to do anything, but can attempt, as best they can to direct them. The owner is also a landlord, no way can you think he wants these changes ? In 35 years of landlording I've had to do one section 8. The rest of the issues I have handled without court intervention.
Chris Brown
15:24 PM, 29th April 2024, About A week ago
To whom do I complain, and get action from, to stop the false representations by the NRLA insinuating that they represent a majority of landlords in the UK?
They certainly don't represent me.
Nor do many politicians, it seems.
Section 21 has been the safety valve that has allowed us certainty of riddance of bad eggs, and the secure ownership and return of our property.
Tenants have the license to occupy the property under two basic conditions; that they pay the rent and behave reasonably;y without damage to the property or gross inconvenience to others. It is this latter bit that is lost.
Perhaps it is time to sue the government at TORT for failure to provide efficient means of redress both for tenants and landlords.
Sally Robinson
15:30 PM, 29th April 2024, About A week ago
Reply to the comment left by Chris Brown at 29/04/2024 - 15:24
Nice one Mr Brown.
Chris Brown
13:29 PM, 2nd May 2024, About A week ago
Why is such sloppy language allowed? While a rented property may well be someone's, even some family's home, it is not their own - it belongs to the Landlord, and is occupied under the terms of the lease!
We have to challenge this misuse of language at every turn.
If governments didn't interefer so much I'm sure there would have evolve long term tenancy agreemenets that gave improved security to both parties.
In 1970 I was advised to become a landlord by my Building Society manager, but declined as there was no guarantee that I would ever get the property back if the tenant didn't want to leave.
It was the introduction of the AST, supported by the incluson of Section 21, that encouraged people to buy and improve property and make it available for rent.
So as a late middle aged penniless post marriage tenant I was encouraged in 1998 to buy the rotting flat I lived in, and the block, from my landlord and restore the building (re-roof, get rid of dry-rot, install fire alarms, remove multiple layers of cheap wall paper and rotting carpets, turn 'loosely arranged' flats into self-contained flats, improve insulation etc. And repeat the process on three more buildings.
So I take it as a serious affront that I am now to lose control, and possibly be told to sell to hapless and clueless tenants at a discount. Fat chance.
So who will I vote for? Is there anyone left who supports free enterprise and property ownership by the general public, and not just the billionaires and their offshore trust funds?
Christine Lifton
20:11 PM, 3rd May 2024, About 6 days ago
Between property letting agents and one tenant leaving my property I
Uninhabitable the agent insisting on refunding said tenants deposit they felt was important to keep their reputation up. Oh not forgetting Mr S who I inherited after another agent sold out to his organisation and then allowed a tenant in without rental protection knowing she couldn’t pay the rent owing me thousands £’s the latest with another is the final straw no matter what a tenant does despite a genuine appeal the deposit people always favour the tenant so once my tenant has been to court for eviction at 77 having been a first class LL I gave notice to the agent I am selling up despite how good a LL is attending to issues straight away the harder you get kicked. I grew up in rented accommodation which no one maintained so the government is certainly going to regret this by targeting more good & honest LL’s instead of looking after billion £ investors himing ground rents which is more important although it impoverishes many elderly in sheltered accommodation units additionally with increasing costs of rents + management fees how many are being priced out of this market ? Where are they going to rent, some are allegedly making a lot of profit from putting up asylum seekers my friend lost her 3 bed Maisonette they rented which holds quite few persons it’s alleged. We have discharged armed forces living rough dose governments or civil service personnel have discognative issues when time served are of no importance no fixed abode no benefits can’t apply for a job shouldn’t we stand as Independents next ellection ?
Chris Brown
9:53 AM, 4th May 2024, About 5 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Sally Robinson at 29/04/2024 - 15:30
Thank you Sally.
Elena Sh
14:37 PM, 7th May 2024, About 2 days ago
The PRS sector is OVER REGULATED because this government is obsessed with creations of funny regulations of how to milk Landlords for illegal immigrants and weapons for wars.
Why not make the life simple for all people and let them freely move whenever and wherever they want.
Market competition will create its own rules ...NLRA became just the next money targeting scam...