SNP plan to give tenants first refusal on homes sparks backlash

I am reluctant to say ‘I told you so’ but for over a year the Person of the People has been saying the government was using the previously reformed 1977 Rent Act and associated legislation as their playbook when political cover permitted… and anticipating that property representative bodies would take robust activity to thwart the attack of successive governments… all they did was cosy up to housing ministers while the businesses of the people they were supposed to represent were dismantled… worse still they were turned into unpaid housing officers through confiscatory taxes and regulations and eye watering fines… the next stage, which has already started, is to regulate rents to what the government deems are affordable and social levels… the mechanism has been in place for many years for developers under s106 agreements… it started at what government deemed to be affordable levels (already confiscatory) and as soon as government had the political cover they moved it to social rents which meant the developer and landowner lost even more hard earned value… the mechanism and civil servants are already in place… affordable and social rents will crush rents and capital values will follow when the right of first refusal triggers on sale, transferring the property to the tenant who will resell without any restrictions… a capital gains tax and stamp duty double whammy for the government… thank your existing annual fee property representative bodies for this… union members don’t pay as much but their union representatives win inflation busting pay rises and benefits… experienced drivers of the automated London tube system earn £80,000 per annum plus massive pensions without any capital or occupational risk… how many average buy-to-lets would it take to generate that net, and how big would the capital and interest risk run to… it’d run in to the millions and when rent regulation and the right of first refusal hit the tide will go out and we’ll see how many are swimming without any swimming trunks or costumes…

Reply to the comment left by Person Of The People at 13/04/2026 – 23:18
Scotland has a sealed bids system outlined here:

https://www.homethink.co.uk/guides/buying-property-scotland

“Scottish property pricing works differently from England. Properties are typically marketed at a ‘offers over’ price, which is the minimum the seller will accept. In a competitive market, the final sale price can be 10–20% above the ‘offers over’ figure. Some properties are marketed at ‘offers around’ (inviting offers near the stated price) or ‘fixed price’ (first acceptable offer wins).

When a property attracts strong interest, the seller’s solicitor sets a ‘closing date’ — a deadline by which all interested parties must submit sealed bids. Each buyer submits their best and final offer in writing, without knowing what anyone else has bid. The seller then chooses the best offer, which isn’t always the highest — they may prefer a cash buyer or one without a chain.”

The blog claims “…This sealed-bid system eliminates gazumping entirely. ”

So as long as the tenant has access to a sealed-bids system and is able to put an offer in, but the vendor is not obliged to accept that offer, then the system would remain fair to landlord [vendor], tenant, and any other potential buyer such as a first-time buyer trying to get on the housing ladder and prepared to buy an ex-rental property.

I am sure if any renters had the required deposit to buy a house, (unless they have really bad credit history and cant get a mortgage,) they would be buying already not renting so seems a pointless statement

Reply to the comment left by graham mcauley at 18/04/2026 – 11:04
My previous tenant could have obtained a mortgage which would be much lower than her rent. She pulled out when she realised she would also have to pay the service charge, ground rent, insurance, repairs and maintenance. All the things a landlord has to pay for!

Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 18/04/2026 – 11:33
In the area in which I live a 3 bed semi-detached rents out for about £2,500 PCM. A social housing tenant pays the council about £830 PCM for a comparable council house. And even though the tenant is paying about 1/3 of market rent the tenant still has the right under right to buy to buy the council house at an enormous after-tax discount. It’s completely nuts.

The idea that a tenant shouldn’t be locked out of bidding for a house at a time when the landlord is choosing to sell isn’t a bad one as long as it’s at market rent, at the time of the landlord’s choosing and via a system that is fair…sealed bids for example. And if the tenant has the same access to the sealed bids system, or auction, at the same time as anybody else then that’s fair.

But timing is as important as anything else. If a landlord is forced to sell at a time when property prices are declining, or when the landlord would face a much higher capital gains tax bill, then the landlord is penalised very heavily for investing. Residential property landlords are already penalised more heavily in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK, income is also already taxed at a higher rate in Scotland, and that will have the effect of driving investment out of housing. That isn’t necessarily a problem for the SNP if they can make their electorate believe that they are dependent upon the SNP, but it is a problem for any Scottish citizen who genuinely wants freedom.

Reply to the comment left by John Bentley at 13/04/2026 – 16:39
I watched a bit of the Senedd (Wales) debate on TV last night, before it became intolerable. The Green Party representative was going on about rent controls.

The Office of National Statistics has just put out some figures saying that the majority (90%) of new build properties never reach the market for houseowners to buy. i.e. only 10% of new builds do reach the open market. There are regional variations with only 2% of new builds reaching the market in London. Instead, new-build properties are allocated to affordable housing or shared ownership schemes, developer direct sales, and build-to-rent.

What the Green party fails to understand is that there is a lack of competition in the rental market and part of the reason for that lack of competition is actually government policy attacking small private sector landlords, favouring larger incorporated investors in housing, and favouring build-to-rent. Social housing providers and government funding for social housing is also competing for the available new housing stock, which is limited, partly because of lack of affordable investment. Part of what makes investment unaffordable is the tax system, unless you trade as an incorporated body.

The market favours the big, incorporated investors not being penalised by the tax system and the organisations most able to maximise rents, with the competition provided by small, non-incorporated landlords being driven out.

The Green Party fails to acknowledge that wherever rent controls have been applied they have made the situation worse. By distorting the market and interfering with it governments drive out competition, hold down supply in relation to demand, and make the situation worse for ordinary rank-and-file renters. The Green Party is now a radical, left-wing party.

The trouble is that there needs to be a party out there that understands sustainability, both in the sense of pursuing policies that favour energy-security, and also make these measures sustainable via the tax system. That’s not the Green Party any more is it?