Profile incomplete
0:04 AM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago 50
Text Size
A Conservative commentator says that the Renters (Reform) Bill can best be described as a ‘wholesale and fundamental invasion’ into the principle of private property.
Tim Briggs goes on to say that the Bill ‘will demonise landlords – and bankrupt councils’.
Writing on Conservative Woman, he says that the Bill ‘insinuates that all tenants are victims, and all landlords are villains’.
He adds: “It forces the cold, dead hand of the State into the mostly harmonious mutual dependency of landlords and their 4.6 million tenants, infantilising the parties into dumb, bad-faith spectators in their own private relationship.”
He goes on to praise a group of Tory MPs as a ‘white knights’ who are trying rebalance ‘the relationship between oppressor landlords and oppressed tenants’.
Mr Briggs adds: “Astonishing that only one landlord representative was asked to give evidence to the Bill’s scrutiny committee, while handfuls of left-wing tenant groups were invited.
“In National Residential Landlord Association (NRLA) webinars and podcasts before Christmas, I criticised the Bill as one of the worst pieces of housing legislation, with no redeeming features.
“Landlords seeking to increase rent will require government involvement. Landlords must accept tenants with pets in any property.”
Mr Briggs points out that the abolition of Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions will hurt the supply of rented homes since ‘landlords cannot get back their properties without the tenant agreeing to leave’.
He says: “What is difficult to understand is that the Government must know that this Renters (Reform) Bill is the disease of which it purports to be the cure because, like all bad law, it makes a bad situation for tenants worse.
“The Government hints that it knows this, yet it still wants to proceed, apparently having abandoned making good law that benefits everyone for the appearance of helping different interest groups.”
He also raises issues with the government believing that a landlord’s property belongs to a tenant – and ignoring the rule of law when doing so.
Mr Briggs says the Bill should be scrapped and writes: “Landlords are leaving the private rented sector in droves.
“If Section 21 notices are abolished, I do not think it is controversial for me to suggest that more landlords will sell up, increasing rents for the rented properties left behind. “Meanwhile left-wing politicians tout the idea of rent levels controlled by politicians, which has never worked anywhere in the world, would make a bad situation worse, and always has to be abandoned.
“This is why abolishing Section 21 Notices will also bankrupt local authorities.
“For the last decade, there are a number of exponential costs that local authorities have been struggling to get under control.
“If Section 21 Notices are abolished, landlords have another option – to lease a property to a company that allows the property to be used for temporary accommodation by the council.”
And that, he says, will see councils having to rent properties at a higher cost to house homeless families because there are no homes to rent – leading to a huge bill for taxpayers.
Stella
14:00 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Golfman at 14/03/2024 - 12:01
I agree with everything you say.
I am also a member of the NRLA and I am puzzled as to why the members were not asked for their opinions before they became involved in any discussion with the government about a bill with such far reaching consequences.
I dont think the government are bothered about making things worse for renters or landlords which this bill will inevitably do.
Their sights are set on their own futures, getting rid of buy to let and facilitating the takeover by Build to rent.
Beaver
14:39 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Robert at 14/03/2024 - 13:43
I agree that it is happening; we are seeing a rise in incorporated landlords.
I don't have the data but I think that large incorporated landlords will charge higher rents. And the drive for incorporation will reduce competition in the marketplace provided by the small players.
The bill will drive rents up.
Rerktyne
15:23 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Everything would be sorted if they just built more homes.
Beaver
16:01 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Rerktyne at 14/03/2024 - 15:23
They won't be able to build more homes if they attack the 2.8+ million non-incorporated private landlords in the way that they are planning to do. This is because landlords will stop renting their properties out if they can't get them back and lenders won't lend to landlords if they know that their investment is at risk. This will increase competition for the dwindling supply of stock.
Angela Rayner recently came under fire because of the revelations that she and her former husband bought their former council houses then she sold hers after 5 years at a profit, presumably tax free. She is reported to have said that there's nothing wrong with the sale of council houses if the money is used to invest in more social housing. But the money isn't used to invest in more social housing. The houses are sold at a massive discount and the tax revenues go into general taxation to pay for benefits of one kind or another; but not houses.
If the government attacks the PRS it won't have the money either to pay for the houses or to pay for the escalating rents (including housing benefit) that it will be driving upwards. We are seeing a growth in incorporated landlords but they are going to capitalise from the failure of government to provide social housing. In my view driving the non-incorporated landlords out will reduce competition and drive rents up.
Cider Drinker
16:18 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Bobby Ridgewell at 14/03/2024 - 12:34
I have 4 rental properties. Not one suffers from damp or has mice. Maybe it’s a Bristol thing?
Cider Drinker
16:18 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Rerktyne at 14/03/2024 - 15:23
Everything would be sorted if they stopped mass immigration.
Rerktyne
16:39 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 14/03/2024 - 16:01
Fully agree! The root cause of the housing crisis is the usual one: you have people with no empathy who convince themselves that they know “the street”! They know nothing! You might as well describe a wine to them and let them believe they know what it tastes like when they don’t even drink the stuff!
And yet they speak with authority: all - knowing! Just like Thatcher got it wrong when she tried to create a new house owning class of little Tories. Many just took the profit and buggered off to Benidorm! They didn’t even spend it over here!
Lately you had those who “knew” that Brexit would honey up GB! Overnight! Meanwhile Scottish langoustines rotted in their boxes while the customs queues were bloated!
It’s called “idiots!”
LaLo
17:49 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
I’ve heard - read somewhere that LLs can get their property back if they wish to sell by using section 8. If a tenant won’t leave then it goes to court which takes time which would be the same if a tenant won’t leave when using section 21 so is it that much different??
Stella
18:27 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by LaLo at 14/03/2024 - 17:49
It has not been confirmed yet whether it is going to be a mandatory ground or a discretionary ground that we can get our property back if we want to sell.
This is what the NRLA said recently in reply to a question.
Mike Thomas
22:38 PM, 14th March 2024, About 2 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Cider Drinker at 14/03/2024 - 11:51
If landlords are driven out, then rents will rise to the point where only the well paid tenants can afford them, and the poorest tenants will end up in temporary accomodation, and this is what will bankrupt the councils. We've already seen how landlords get stitched up when they rent to rent, so a few will do it, but most will just sell up