Tenants prefer long-term rentals over short-term lets

I have a Nigerian friend, she is aghast at monthly tenancies with all the uncertainty that brings, back home, annual in advance is apparently the norm. Why are we so f’ing stupid in this country?

We are a small player (14 properties) but we can confirm that every one of our Tenants is currently on 3+ year fixed rate AST’s and they don’t want to be switched to this periodic nonsense. Who is going to challenge the legality of this when the Government overnight terminate all of our existing “Legal Agreements” and force to issue periodic agreements on all our Tenants who actually want the stability and certainty we currently offer. Rental rates will explode as will non payment and homelessness once we get to annual reviews and cost of living + inflation based rises on an annual basis.

well tenants need to get angry and contact their MP’s then about this! Landlords can only react to what the governments mandate and what the law says. Its not as if they listen to us is it – they want to eradicate us all.

To be honest it would be a very stupid LL these days who offered anything over a 6 month rolling periodic given the way things are as it is.

You sound like an angry person and exactly the type of LL that the RRB is designed to root out.
We are not stupid but we offer all our Tenants the peace of mind and the security of long term Tenancies at fixed rates as we have done our sums and know how to get a ROI of +10% whilst providing safe, comfortable and affordable housing for our Tenants
People like you with your attitude are exactly the types of LL’s that Generation Rent and Shelter are using as examples to encourage the Government to go even further – So who’s the stupid one?

To be fair, tenants are only concerned because they don’t understand the implications of the change. Scrapping fixed term tenancies and replacing with the proposals in the RRB means that tenancies will be for life. Its up to the tenant when they end it because s21 will also be scrapped.

Reply to the comment left by MPD at 19/05/2025 – 12:59
I assume you are replying to my comment? Angry LL – no, realist yes.

By way of further explanation – given the rising risk for any LL to be held over a barrel by ANY tenant (no matter how much you reference them beforehand), the fact that it is taking extended periods to gain full possession, rising costs, time and stress if you need to, and the ever present threat of property damage far exceeding the deposit, then I was suggesting that for a LL to be tied into a longer than 6 months AST is surely something of a rarity these days anyway.

Personally because of the amount of people desperate for accommodation I see it as much more risky to for a LL to offer a long term AST than the tenant demanding one with the idea that this is somehow more secure. (irrespective that the RRB is looking to cull this option going forward at some point)

If the proverbial hits the fan within the first 6 months? At least the LL can serve notice at the first possible opportunity. Things do happen! Why knowingly put yourself in the position of legally tying your own hands?

What’s the worst that can happens if the AST rolls into a periodic after the first 6 months and the tenant still wants to remain there? Nothing. The tenants remain for a long as they want until they give notice. There is no impact at all – their tenancy remains secure and they can decide to still leave at anytime themselves.

A fixed rent rate may also come back to bite you in the bum. The government changes its mind like the wind and Councils are now on the hunt for blood and cash. More changes to tax are inevitable as it national selective licencing and EPC updates too. The RRB itself comes with unknow costs. The cost of letting will increase overall. Insurance costs will increase, as will maintenance and supplies. Are you really willing to subside the tenant? Are you a charity or are you running a business?

Rents rise like everything else and small increments help a tenant budget. You are leading tenants into a false sense of security if you shield them from the market reality. By all means be a good LL and keep the rent under market rate if you want to/decide to, but remember at some point you may have to sell – and then if the rent is way behind market rates, where is your tenant going to go when everywhere else is at market rate? You could be in for a long possession wait and a costly one at that….

Being fair to your tenants does not mean cossetting them from the rental reality at your own financial detriment/risk.

I suggest lot of landlords that have already sold may have been of a similar opinion to yours, seeing themselves as morally right by helping their tenants, but now they face the prospect of the uncertainty the ‘new look’ PRS and all that the RRB heralds and are getting out.

The RRB is purposely making the PRS more ‘business like’. It looks to bear down on the private LL by its clauses – those same landlords that have been providing many tenants many happy years of accommodation by way of mutual understanding in addition to formal AST’s. This option will be removed.

This is welcomed by the government and Shelter et al who even want legislation to go further…as you can see yourself are aware.

The reality will be that by default the relationship between LL and T will irrevocably change – into a 100% business orientated one where there will be no ability for LL’s to offer good tenants anything like further stability of tenure (as an example as used here) even if both parties request this. Rules and laws and no deviation is accepted. It really is black and white and if a LL steps over the mark, heavy penalties will ensue.

Reply to the comment left by DPT at 19/05/2025 – 13:18
Not quite legally correct, but yes it certainly feels this way. The PRS morphs into Government mandated social housing providers…

Reply to the comment left by moneymanager at 19/05/2025 – 10:41
Long term tenancies could very easily be offered…as long as the flip side of possession is also clearly gained when needed without delay.

Any further clarity on the Nigerian rules regarding a LL gaining possession against the myriad of hoops a LL needs to go through in the UK to do the same?

I suggest a more government hands off/LL hands on approach is the order of the day????

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 19/05/2025 – 18:49
Which part is not legally correct?

Reply to the comment left by DPT at 20/05/2025 – 10:02
tenancies for life – there is always going to be some level of ability to evict. Not quite government appropriation of private property just yet…..