Will Tenants Lose Out due to Proposed Rental Change?

Will Tenants Lose Out due to Proposed Rental Change?

8:47 AM, 10th December 2021, About A year ago 13

Text Size

In a recent letter to all MP’s, landlords have pointed out the potential unintended consequences of a proposed change to the law intended to ‘enhance the rights of those who rent‘.

Tenants’ groups have been lobbying Government for some time to get the Section 21 ‘no fault’ eviction notice revoked, claiming it is unfair to tenants’ security of tenure. After this sustained pressure, Government have indicated they will acquiesce to this demand, trailing a new White Paper, and Bill due next Spring where, among other matters, they propose to remove the Section 21.

On behalf of landlords, iHowz Landlords’ Association have told MP’s that it was the introduction of the Section 21 in 1985 that aided a doubling of tenants in the Private Rented Sector over the past 35 years. Government, Councils and Housing Associations have been happy to allow this trend – even though it has been their responsibility to house tenants, especially socially disadvantaged tenants – leaving private landlords to house people, at the landlords’ risk.

iHowz go on to say that if the Section 21 is removed, only tenants with impeccable references will be offered accommodation, and there is a real danger of many not being able to find a home, especially socially disadvantaged, and vulnerable tenants. The social system would not be able cope with this and would risk being overwhelmed. Consequently, this proposed change will impact the very people it proposes to protect – tenants.

Recognising that the existing notice period is unfair to longer term tenants, iHowz propose a sliding scale of notice periods – whereby the Section 21 would be a 2 month notice for new tenancies (as at present) but would increase to become a 6 month notice where a tenant had been in occupation for more than 4 years.

Additionally, iHowz are also proposing that tenancies of more than 2 years would attract the ability to have the last two months of the tenancy rent-free where a landlord regains possession using Section 21, thus allowing the tenant to save funds for a potential new tenancy, or even to buy.

Both these proposals taken together would result in far more security of tenure for longer term tenancies, and the landlord would be safe in the knowledge that they were guaranteed to get back the properties they own.

Share This Article



12:28 PM, 11th December 2021, About A year ago

"Second, in the event a landlord chooses to use a section 21 eviction (a no-fault eviction) to make the process fairer by covering the tenant's costs, and allowing a longer period of notice."


Ann Shaw

12:59 PM, 11th December 2021, About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by iHowz Landlord Association at 11/12/2021 - 12:23
iHowz 'Landlord Association', if you posted your s21 manifesto on the basis to gather more support from Landlords - I am afraid you will be sadly disappointed - Your rhetoric is akin to that of Shelter's diabolic diatribe. A cacophony of more 'Landlord bashing'. You lost me on the fifth, sixth, and seventh para - I will not be joining your 'Landlord Association' nor, commenting any further on your thread.


12:00 PM, 21st December 2021, About A year ago

Interesting and sounds sensible however the if the tenant wants then a section 21 notice is needed to unblock the system.
However the cause of this problem is population increase circa 15% in the 20 year and some post WW2 Labour removal of 1707 sensible sound laws, including terraces adding a mansard roof or two to resolve increased housing needs easily.
Also the extra layers of issues because of the removal of the option for the local authority to pay landlords directly on behalf of tenants which gave peace of mind, solid council professional understanding ability, reliablilty of rent to Landlords (hence lower rent acceptance),

Also lost was the lost opportunity of the half below ground basements seen in South Kensington which are marginal for developers to dig out (the old ones dug out the clay and turned that into bricks) yet provided small cheap local accommodation saving low paid worker travel times.

Yes disabled customers have difficulty getting down or up to them BUT the trade off is more cheap affordable accommodation and maybe a hotel sledge to move the disabled up and down. (perhaps funding or a requirement for them to have one in a hall cupboard might solve that or have them included with the disabled travellers car/carer if needed).
The basement dig with the clay soil spoils was also used for raising the height of the road was efficient and yet this baby was thrown out with the bath water.
Lets encourage and allow this old innovation or require it please. The terraces can have level door access alternating with the other design. Private house builders alternated designs along a row for interest and attractiveness.
A Basement studio flat on a 4 storey house adds about 12%+ accommodation of a type that is really needed. All this for some wise package and guidance on new buildings and some raised steps to the front door or ramp and then residents also get the railings that protect ground floor windows from attack by burglars. Basements would specifically not be allowed for the disabled which is a bit like saying fifth floor flats with only stairs also not being suitable.

The Council would reassess after an accident and move the now disabled tenant out or put in a Stannah stairlift. APPG the Department Might ask Stannah to do a cost +10% profit project on making an exterior basement Stannah stairlift prototypes. (Churchill did the same type of contract deal for the cheap development of tanks in WW1)
The APPG on Housing please help.

Also would the tenants groups and Shelter etc practice around a table war gaming the actions and reactions of the participating parties and then their fourther reactions for disabled, poor tenants, illegal migrants, students, richer tenants, home buyers, lawyers, council housing officers to go through these scenarios and then change roles like Greek Onassis used to do. With another scenario a year on. Also remember University shoving up rents to pay themselves more and the likely underreporting of RPI inflation due to missing online digital products and a persistent government statistical effort to lower reported inflation figures eg. by shrinkflation (can tuna increase in quality?), laptops doubling in power halving in price yet do the same things (excel and word) as 20 years ago. To thus increase reported growth in GDP.
The local security guard says in the last 6 years his spending power is down despite doing the same job and income.
Thank you all.
Gavin FL Palmer

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now