Renters’ Rights Act aims to support landlords dealing with anti-social behaviour

Does he do other standup comedy?

In my area, on St Patricks day there was some street disorder (drunken revelry by students at the local university).
A local MP said in a TV interview it was LANDLORDS REPONSIBILITY to control the students that they rent to.
What planet do these politicians live on?
I wrote to her, saying politicians in her own party, had systematically neutered landlords to the point where we would have to stand and watch tenants smash up our furniture, in front of us, because if we raised a hand to stop them, we would be charged with assault.
Our “leaders” are simpletons (thats putting it kindly).

Sarah Jones MP, Minister of State at the Home Office and… former head of campaigns at Shelter… who’d have thought? It really is a cosy relationship between shelter and LabLibCon. No wonder landlords don’t stand a chance.

Obtaining eviction under 7A is likely to be nigh on impossible in the vast majority of cases, and 14 will be at the discretion of the left-leaning judges, who don’t want to exacerbate the rental crisis. The real problem will be timescales.

I had arrears and truly awful ASB including a subsequent prison sentence. I went with arrears because the Police refused to support my case with evidence, and it still took 15 months… with no rent and ongoing ASB.

Note the weasel words”better to sort without eviction”.

Let me translate – you will get all the way to court after huge stresses and costs, the tenants will say “sorry judge we won’t do again” and the case will be dismissed.

So says a bod from Planet Zod.

Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 30/10/2025 – 10:39
The real trouble with the Renters Rights Bill is that it now makes some home-grown tenants too high risk to take a chance on housing….antisocial behaviour, on benefits etc. In some cases now it is more profitable to house asylum seekers, as the Telegraph just reported.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/companies-asylum-housing-hotels-record-profits-8lchlcp5q

In fact, the government will give asylum seekers up to £3,000 to leave voluntarily.

https://www.gov.uk/return-home-voluntarily/who

And this policy means that the asylum seeker is given £3,000 to pass on to the people-smugglers to bring him (mostly him) straight back in.

The RRB was originally supposed to be a Rental Reform Bill, with reciprocal rights and responsibilities for both landlords and tenants. Labour got hold of it and turned it into a Renters Rights Bill…so it started out as a reasonable idea but then became a stick to beat landlords with. The REAL problem with that it is that it is less risky to take money from Mears, Clearspring or Serco to house asylum seekers than to house many tenants who were born here but live on the margins of society.

Over the last couple of days we’ve seen reports in the media about housing migrants on military sites. That makes you wonder where the military personnel are going to end up living. Mears is one of the companies that houses military personnel. I’ve rented to the MoD in the past and they were a great tenant.

But the courts are a mess and since the introduction of the Renters Rights Bill in its final form any landlord now has to advertise property at the maximum possible rent and still has to be more careful than ever before over who they take a risk on housing: Because that risk goes up with the introduction of the RRB and for some landlords it’s going to be less risky to house asylum seekers. That’s a really stupid thing to do and something that is like to lead to social division.

Twenty years ago I used to take benefits tenants. I’d happily enter into a contract with Mears to house military personnel, if my lender and insurer permitted me to do it: But given the state of the courts and the Renters Rights Bill, there is no way that I’m ever going to house a tenant on benefits.

The antisocial tenants will have grown old, outliving the landlord before any court date materializes..

Reply to the comment left by Jack Jennings at 01/11/2025 – 01:11
Mine wouldn’t have lasted long if I hadn’t managed to evict him. His neighbours said it would be unfortunate if he had an accident in town one night!

You people are right its all at the expense of landlord. Oh its great landlords can evict bad tenants but no ok to make the cuprits pay for it and that be the labour law i think?.we campaigned for months if they are removing section21 then make tenant pay for damage but no chance may be these law makers can house them in thier properties. The so called shelter saying its a good thing for landlords to evict anti social tenants ,, we think she should wait to put them in shelter housing brcause no one else would want them . We think landlords should form a group where they can take the law makers to court and sue them for damages if the tenants cannot pay be the right thing to do Brothers.
Joe