Should we understand why a property is empty before introducing more damaging legislation?

If you have managed to remove your tenants and put the property on the market for sale and 6 months and 1 day still no buyer could this legislation, if enacted, be beneficial for landlords wanting to exit the PRS?

Compulsory purchase by LA, and would have to be at current market price, = no estate agent fees, no survey by LA buying, no LA search required by the LA purchasing therefore short conveyance time. Just an out of the box thought.

So a council could let your property after 6 months but you couldn’t
That would be more two tier letting

I had a property which was sale agreed within 3 weeks, then my buyer lost his buyer. He found another buyer but we had to wait for an ‘auspicious day’ before they’d exchange and then another 2 weeks before completion to tie in with thei end of their AST.
All in all 14 months

On another property I lost my buyer, got another buyer, then he lost his buyer. Its been 13 months so far and we still haven’t exchanged.
While searches take 6 weeks and the buying process is so flaky with buyers able to send a one liner ‘Ive changed my mind’ after 4 or 5 months of legals, the idea of only allowing 6 months is ridiculous

I’m selling loads for genuine packing up reason.
If I’m giving notice to tenant to sell empty cause tenant not playing ball at all letting buyer Landlords in, then another Landlord buys empty, if it’s only been say 8 months since notifying court wanting possession, new Landlord buyer then can’t rent it out till 12 months are up. The time limit transfers with the house to the new buyer. Bad rules by Govt meaning a tenant waiting can’t go in that house. In case a scrupulous landlord wanted to sell his mate to rent out again.

Reply to the comment left by Judith Wordsworth at 29/09/2026 – 10:02
Hi Judith
As I understand it the Council would not buy but would re-let the property. You would still own it.

One must assume that Councils will foist the absolute worst tenants on their books landlords. The “problem family”, the thoroughly anti-social tenants who disturb the peace and threaten the neighbours, those with CCJs and poor credit history, in other words those whom neither the PRS nor the Housing Association nor the Council with their own property, would accept. Expect your insurance premiums to shoot up and your property to be trashed and for the Council and the Labour Government to shrug their shoulders.

It may even be the case that if the tenants create an unlawful HMO, the Council would prosecute the landlord!

Well, if the council re-lets it, then they need to guarantee repairs, maintenance and the condition of the property being maintained?

What if new regulations w r t say EPC affect the property? An EPC of D now is lettable, but sometime 2030 it won’t be. Who is going to approve and pay for the works needed to upgrade the property to EPC C?

It’s all ridiculous!

Given that it says the ownership stays with the original owner then presumably they remain liable for all repairs and EPC type upgrades – and potentially liable for prosecution if the repairs / upgrades are not done.

Its a great way to increase housing stock for councils with zero cost to the councils (in purchase or maintenance) – plus the councils can fine the owner for breaches – massive wins for the councils / gov – and a good way to bankrupt all those nasty landlords ….

Reply to the comment left by JB at 29/09/2026 – 10:52
The UK has one of the most protracted and slowest conveyancing systems in the world. England places zero penalties on “tyre kicking would be buyers” who can retract from a purchase for ‘No Reason” a year or later after agreeing to the purchase (unlike Scotland). I had this on one property and it cost me £12,000 in mortgage and service charges.

There were lots of improvements the government could have made to help renters and owners. They chose to implement a regressive RRA legislation that appears to benefit nobody.

What gives the government the right to tell you what to do with your own property?? It’s paid for with taxed money, when you sell you will be taxed again, when you die you will be taxed yet again. Any income is taxed with an additional 2% added. If you buy something it’s yours. End of story.
I can understand if you keep it in a state of repair thats dangerous to passers by or something, but this is completely outrageous. Why is no one angry, but just accepting the premise of this? Who the **** are they to take our property?
Labour will be in for another 5 year term as the other parties are quietly imploding and things are just going to get worse. Burnham’s speech today promises all the good stuff and we all know who will be paying for it.
You may laugh, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Labour bring in a “clean air tax” if you go into rural areas (aka a tax to breathe). Soon to be expanded everywhere. Because their whole reason for being is to ruin everything good and to bring everyone down with them. If you have accumulated a little something in your life, they will swoop in and take it from you because- you know- it isn’t “fair”.