10:03 AM, 12th May 2025, About 9 months ago 5
Text Size
Categories:
Labour peers will be forced to sit late into Wednesday night to push the Renters’ Rights Bill through the committee stage, according to The Telegraph.
The final two committee stage debates are scheduled for this week, with one taking place today (Monday 12 May) and the other on Wednesday.
The Conservative Party has criticised Labour for failing to properly scrutinise the bill and accused them of using “bully-boy tactics to ram the bill through Parliament.”
According to The Telegraph, a memo from Labour whips accidentally left on a printer in the House of Lords and seen by the paper urged Labour peers: “Your presence is required. Colleagues are needed to ensure committee stage finishes.”
A Labour source told The Telegraph the whip had been put in place “because of the procedural shenanigans and games from a handful of Conservative peers over the past few months.”
The source added the whip was “merely indicating to our own colleagues how we plan to keep the legislative plan on track”.
However, the Conservative party have slammed Labour for failing to scrutinise the Renters’ Rights Bill and warns the Bill will make things worse for tenants.
Paul Holmes, a shadow housing minister, told The Telegraph: “Labour clearly can’t handle the heat of proper scrutiny and are resorting to bully-boy tactics to ram through their bills through Parliament.
“The Renters’ Rights Bill is a half-baked plan that will reduce the supply of rental homes, push up the cost of renting and make things worse for tenants.
“It’s deeply flawed and, judging by Labour trying to rush it past Parliament, even they know it is ripe to unravel.”
Baroness Eaton, a backbench Conservative peer, argued that debating key issues such as the new Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) targets for landlords should not be rushed.
Energy and Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband has previously proposed that all privately rented properties must meet EPC C standards by 2030.
Baroness Eaton told The Telegraph: “We have serious concerns about the impact the Renters’ Rights Bill will have on the supply of residential homes in our rental market.
“It would be unacceptable to debate crucial issues such as EPC ratings in the private rented sector and local housing authorities’ investigatory powers cursorily, late at night, simply to fulfil the Prime Minister’s desire to go ‘faster and further’. It is our duty to scrutinise this Bill thoroughly.”
However, Labour has rejected the accusations of failing to scrutinise the Renters’ Rights Bill.
A Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesman told The Telegraph: “We completely reject these claims, this Bill has been subject to Parliamentary scrutiny since September, and has been in the Lords for more than four months. It is not unusual for debates on a Bill to run later so that it can progress.
“We are getting on with these reforms so they can benefit renters across the country – creating a fairer housing market, strengthening tenant rights by abolishing Section no fault 21 evictions, challenging excessive rent hikes, and ending unfair bidding wars.”
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Previous Article
Britain's most expensive rent postcode isn't in LondonNext Article
Remortgage to invest?
Freda Blogs
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 751
11:36 AM, 12th May 2025, About 9 months ago
And there we have it, in their own words – it’s all about making life ‘better for renters’.
No interest in landlords’ views or sensible amendments. Therefore the government should not be surprised as more landlords exit the market and even fewer homes will be available for tenants to rent.
What a massive own goal, borne out of stupidity and arrogance, in a futile attempt to score political points and modify tenant groups, and not listening to LLs, the actual property/service providers.
Beaver
Read Full Bio
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 1963
16:30 PM, 12th May 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Freda Blogs at 12/05/2025 – 11:36
Baroness Eaton is right.
Gordon Brown’s and George Osborne’s governments already penalised small portfolio landlords such that we’ve seen a move to properties owned in limited companies, something that there is a thread on here:
https://www.property118.com/landlords-professionalise-with-increasing-use-of-limited-companies/
Limited companies have an advantage because they can still offset their finance costs against rents whilst small landlords aren’t able to do so. So what we are now seeing in the PRS is a growing trend towards larger, incorporated landlords.
Historically, small portfolio, unincorporated landlords used to hold rents down a bit to minimise the risk of void periods and encourage long-term tenancies. Now that’s a stupid thing to do because if you don’t increase rents when you can you might not be able to do it later; and by stopping landlords from taking offers higher than the advertised rent the RRB also encourages landlords to advertise properties at the maximum possible value rather than to hold them down a bit. Larger, incorporated landlords also know how to maximise rents and the effect of driving small portfolio landlords out of the market reduces competition and the supply of rental properties, especially at the lower end of the scale.
In its present form, what the RRB will do, like rent controls or the prospect of rent controls, is to drive up rents for renters even further.
Rod
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since August 2021 - Comments: 305 - Articles: 1
16:57 PM, 14th May 2025, About 9 months ago
I would be very surprised if the courts support the government’s proposal that properties must only be rented for the advertised rent or a lower one.
I’m sure some of you must be better trained in the law than me but my understanding is that an advertised price for a good or service forms part of the invitation to treat and the contractual stage begins when a prospective tenant offers, with acceptance given by the landlord (after checks and referencing) and becomes binding once consideration is paid by the tenant.
Just one more thing to clog up the courts due to this rushed and poorly considered hatchet job called the RRB
Beaver
Read Full Bio
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 1963
17:05 PM, 14th May 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Rod at 14/05/2025 – 16:57
Whether the courts accept it or not (I suspect that it’s unenforceable…where would the evidence come from?)… the effect of it would be that landlords would only ever advertise properties for the highest possible rent.
Even for labour it is an outrageously stupid proposal.
The_Maluka
Read Full Bio
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since May 2015 - Comments: 2147 - Articles: 1
17:20 PM, 14th May 2025, About 9 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 14/05/2025 – 17:05
Is it even more stupid than the procedure for rent increases? The whole act is ill-conceived and will result in tears for the tenants.