Shelter says social housing is the only long term solution to homelessness

"...........extortionate and rising rents"
Well Polly Neate why don't you have a long hard look in a mirror as to why rents are extortionate and rising?
Could it possibly be anything to do with Shelter campaigning and lobbying Government to increase Landlords costs & taxes? And you are still campaigning to increase Landlords costs still further!!!
Who do do you think ultimately has to pay these increased costs & taxes? Resign now if you don't know the answer to this. Now please tell me again whose sude you are on?

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 29/10/2021 - 09:44
Ha Ha Brilliant Luke-Crack on and build it then - provide some actual shelter...

Shelter ain't getting the Govt on repeating non stop record to build more houses. They could though work with us to sort UC out & stop this Licensing which is making so many Benefit tenants homeless & increasing rents for the rest.

Reply to the comment left by Ofer Moses at 29/10/2021 - 16:26
I've done about 9 Section 21 evictions over 24 years & all been for rent, damage, Govt & Council interference on UC & Licensing.

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 30/10/2021 - 07:57
Shelter are helping us remaining Landlords charge what we like with their constant attacking & failure to work Landlords, they pack up, us that can afford to remain then have a massive demand.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 30/10/2021 - 12:03
So there you have it.
Section 21 is not to the detriment of decent tenants, it provides protection for landlords against tenants in breach of contract.
I do not believe that Section 21 has been abused by landlords to the extent that it should be abolished.
As I have previously stated, there is clearly a vendetta against private landlords and the PRS.
Because of relative few rogue landlords, the PRS is being demonised.
Hopefully this government will see the real value the PRS provides society and responds fairly and reasonably.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 30/10/2021 - 12:03
It's arguable if Shelter help tenants, however they certainly are not intent on understanding Landlords in the PRS.
I would suggest that landlords in the PRS do not generally charge whatever they want.
They are generally aligned to market rents (and advise from letting agents), Further, I for one, apply a minimal increase, if any at all to longer term tenants.
Shelter are arguing for tenants to pay whatever they can afford, regardless of their landlords position or desire.

Reply to the comment left by Ofer Moses at 30/10/2021 - 14:44
Yes I don't think Landlords should charge what they want, some are though. In fact many are. Many of mine are paying £200 below market rent. But I don't blame Landlords for charging what they like when new tenants come in, that they have no loyalty to as we just don't know where the next attack/charge is going to come from & we may need funds to pay for it.
Look at last week, Green Party wants to charge ALL Landlords a 1% Tax on the value of their every house, approx £1700 each Landlord's house just like that. We all know that could be £1700 less to spend on new kitchen, bathroom etc. Or some Landlords maybe now not have the £1700 they NEED for replacement boiler.

Yes same here, some of mine have never had rent increase, trying to wait till Benefit Levels catch up. Except when Selective Licensing came in. I ain't paying for it on houses I don't want. Another charge on a punitive retrospective action that Shelter supported.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 30/10/2021 - 12:03
Thanks Mick, I can see the headlines now - one of Nottingham's biggest landlords admits he serves section 21 notices because of government and council interference and licensing - none of which are tenants' fault, let alone a breach of their tenancy agreements. We can hardly claim that we never evict a good tenant now, can we? If I write to my MP and say we only evict in cases of damage or arrears she's just going to reply "that's a lie - and Mick Roberts says so."

You've made it more likely section 21 gets abolished. Why should the government make it easy for us to react to their policies? They're going to abolish it so we can't do anything when they do something we disagree with, and you just helped them.

When it gets repealed we should call it "Mick's Law."

Reply to the comment left by Leics Landlord at 30/10/2021 - 16:21
Served, not Serves. Last one 2018 cause of Licensing.
U r correct one one point. Govt interference bought the Benefit Cap in. My tenant was on BBC1 Panorama. Even they attributed no blame to me whatsoever. And we know how Anti Landlord they are. Within one day this girls HB had been reduced to zero. Who's paying her rent? Not her fault correct, but not mine either. Govt's fault for bringing cruel retrospective laws in. Retrospective remember. We had no problem till Govt bought that rule in on approx 90,000 families I believe in the UK.
My local Nottingham Homeless said the Benefit Cap was their biggest problem for evictions at the time.
So not paying rent is not breaching tenancy? Aah right. Don't u just love people who assume. This is where the problem lies within Shelter, assuming, not asking. I accept humble pie.

Another Section 21:
So when tenant has smashed house up, many on here would evict. I didn't. HOWEVER if u was from Nottingham & saw how they steamrolled Licensing in with the conditions & the threat of inspections at the time, I & many Landlords crapped ourselves that Licensing was going to inspect all these houses, the ones where tenant damaged, Licensing was going to make us pay 10k each house to repair tenants damage only for tenant to do it again. Again many in fact most Landlords wun't allow that or take that risk.
So are u right in a way, this eviction not this tenants fault? Or maybe not cause she should have been evicted before as she HAD breached her tenancy for damage. But I only served Section 21 once I knew Licensing would inspect, not before.

And you've just said it in your MP comment. She wun't say that either as many local MP's know me, the local MP contacts me often & we discuss UC issues as he loves ammunition (not as much ad I'd like mind u), & he KNOWS I get on with my tenants & he got involved with me trying to sell about 30 of my houses to the Council cause I don't want em any more as he knows I WON'T issue Section 21 to tenants that have done nothing wrong & it's been their homes for 24 years.
And I have ONLY evicted cause of damage or arrears, however I waited unlike many. I waited until no choice cause of Govt & Council interference. Please feel free to say u misinterpreted me. I ain't got 500 people waiting for my houses for nothing. Same tenants in many houses for over 20 years. I must be doing some'at right. However admittedly last few years, they now can't move through choice.

You're welcome.

Micks Law. I like it. If it was correct. Gees some people when they take things wrong & read what they want to read.

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function

I'll still be your mate though, we all get things wrong sometimes.

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 30/10/2021 - 07:57
Shelter have been describing PRS rents as "extortionate" for at least the past ten years. However their description of the rise in rents has moved on from merely "rocketing" to "skyrocketing"! These emotive kneejerk phrases are wheeled out in every media interview regardless of the policy being discussed. You might hope for a more considered approach (not to mention a wider vocabulary) from educated people in a government-funded housing 'charity' than the relentless Private Landlords bad/Social Landlords good narrative but you'd be disappointed. However, I do agree that we need more social housing, if only to reduce the constant accusation that landlords who house benefit tenants are sponging off taxpayers.