Labour Brings in excellent Renter's Rights - long overdue.

bump - am very excited by this, as it affects some young people I know as late as their early 30's who just cannot get out of the rent sector, and have suffered as a result.

Ds and DiL were lucky - in their early 40's, they were able to get jobs and get on the housing ladder just in time.

I agree, Wyllow. My children (early 30s) have managed to buy houses, but only recently, because of high rents to pay someone else's mortgage or give them what is effectively free money. When my daughter's partner gave notice to his landlord it terminated the contract, and the LL told the other tenant that the rent would 'have to' rise as a result, making it unaffordable for him. There is currently a thread on MN about someone evicting a family who has been there for seven years and been good tenants, as the LL's student niece wants to move in. The family has children at school who may have to be disrupted, and presumably the adults work a commutable distance from the property, so the stress and disruption must be awful for them, but they have no comeback and a student doesn't like the accommodation available in her price range and her aunt is willing to turn their lives upside down to keep her happy.

There are many such stories. Now that secure tenancies are rare (since the sale of council houses) vulnerable people are open to exploitation, and there will always be those ready to exploit. Decent landlords needn't be worried, as the new rules are to protect tenants from the bad ones.

Good to hear some positive news.

I’m very glad. I’m aware some single property landlords might not like this and might sell their rented properties, but those large landlords, some of which are very good, some of whom are extremely poor, will just have to out on their big pants and suck it up.

Whilst working, when working alongside family workers and also with recently released prisoners, some of the rentals properties were utterly dire and beyond belief in terms of cost, especially HMOs.

I personally know families who lives were literally torn apart due to “no fault evictions” and I’m glad to see the back of them.

If the legislation results in LLs who don't want to treat tenants fairly selling up, then that's good news. If their houses are bought by LLs who do want to play fairly, tenants will benefit, and if they are bought by people who want to live in them, then that's good news too.

I'm not sure what 'market rate' means in this context. If it means the maximum people will pay, then I think that needs regulation too, as accommodation is a necessity, and people will do without all sorts of other things in order to have it. Basic security shouldn't depend on the market.

Hmmm.

Just look, for a moment, how GB news has presented this good news.

www.gbnews.com/money/landlord-tenants-renters-rights-act

" ‘I’m forced to sell my property as the reforms are highly damaging': Landlord warns tenants will pay the price".

Surprised? No.

Nope. Not a bit surprised.

Many landlords are saying that they are going to selltheir proeprties. One had seven that they had put on the market. All the tenants having vacated before the new Act came in.

There are lots of stories of people desperately hunting accommodation and unable to find it. It is said that in the future the rented sector will be dominated by big property companies. Will this necessarily be a good thing?

Will this actbe good for some tenants but disastrou for many others and make it moredifficult for our children and grandchildren to find rented property?

As usual, Labour has not thought this through.
If most of the 3million private landlords decide to throw in the towel, then these tenants will lose their homes and that will cause a shortage of properties and even higher rents. How does that benefit anybody?

I am considering what to do about a small property we rent out. My friend has 2 rental properties and she is the same. I have a very good tenant - a single professional female with no kids and no pets. I already have too much stress in my life with an ill husband and son otherwise I might have sold it earlier.

We have been really lucky with carefully vetted tenants who appreciate the fact that they are getting a pristine property at an affordable rent in a nice location. However, many LLs end up with tenants who don’t pay, who live like pigs and wreck the place and annoy the neighbours. It will now take much longer to get rid of them so who does that help either? Certainly not the LL and neighbours.

Nothing new about providing tenants with an information sheet either. It was the case that all tenants had to be given a Tenants Rights booklet for many years. My tenants always received one from us and signed to say they had received it. My tenant has been in 2 years and never had a rent increase. The previous tenants were in 13 years and only ever had one increase. Not all LLs are money grabbers and appreciate good tenants.

What Labour should have done is got on and built more social housing. This is just a daft idea. I will be interested to see what other LLs on here think.

How will it leadto a shortage of properties? The properties will still exist even if they are sold. They are not going tobe demolished

.Oh dear. It seems that whatever the Labour Party does there I are posters who are determined to dismiss the idea as no good .
Wonder why the Conservative party didn't build thousands of properties for social housing in their 14 year spell.

Well all the landlords whilst having their mortgage paid for them by renting the property will now be in for a nice little nest egg from an asset that has increased in value most years.

The extra property for sale may well help to reduce property prices and so help first time buyers.

Win win all around I think.

The downside will possibly be less property to rent. So it is now up to Labour to ensure councils have the ability to build more social housing.

Around 12,000new social/council housing was built during Labour’s first year, some of this was funded by the outgoing government, it’s nowhere near enough but still more than has been built in the few years.

Yes we need more, I doubt any of us thought many LL’s would like the reviews, there are dreadful tenants and dreadful LLs around.

I guess the difference is when tenants were given “no fault evictions” they were often made homeless, the LLs still had somewhere secure to live.

I cannot think of anything worse than having to privately rent, I’m afraid those I know have had terrible experiences.

Decent tenants are in the minority, but I do feel for small, 1 or 2 property owners when they have their property wrecked by disgraceful tenants, who then also don’t pay their rent. Don’t most LLs now take out substantial insurance and damage deposit to help mitigate against additional costs?

Sorry, rushing fingers, I mean, “decent tenants are in the majority

Whitewavemark2

Well all the landlords whilst having their mortgage paid for them by renting the property will now be in for a nice little nest egg from an asset that has increased in value most years.

The extra property for sale may well help to reduce property prices and so help first time buyers.

Win win all around I think.

The downside will possibly be less property to rent. So it is now up to Labour to ensure councils have the ability to build more social housing.

Hmmmm LL’s just don’t see it that way! If you speak to them they all seem to see their tenants as liabilities and not paying their mortgages!

What I really hated was when “buy to let” mortgages were readily available, properties bought up and then some let out via the council, often to benefit claimants (nothing wrong with being on benefits) so effectively the state, via housing benefit, was paying the bulk of the mortgage.

I am sorry, landlords but I don’t see the problem with the Act. It is no fault evictions that are being tackled, often used by landlords to evict a tenant and re let at a higher price. Those tenants with arrears, causing anti social behaviour and other valid reasons can still be evicted. Tenants can also be evicted if landlord wishes to live in the property or to sell it.

Nandalot

I am sorry, landlords but I don’t see the problem with the Act. It is no fault evictions that are being tackled, often used by landlords to evict a tenant and re let at a higher price. Those tenants with arrears, causing anti social behaviour and other valid reasons can still be evicted. Tenants can also be evicted if landlord wishes to live in the property or to sell it.

Exactly!

"Don’t most LLs now take out substantial insurance and damage deposit to help mitigate against additional costs?"

Yes, loads of options for Landlords - basic google brought them all up.

Any developments near here must include social housing, usually managed by a recognised company. Anyone I know who has one is relieved to be in a situation with fair rents and security.

Doodledog

If the legislation results in LLs who don't want to treat tenants fairly selling up, then that's good news. If their houses are bought by LLs who do want to play fairly, tenants will benefit, and if they are bought by people who want to live in them, then that's good news too.

I'm not sure what 'market rate' means in this context. If it means the maximum people will pay, then I think that needs regulation too, as accommodation is a necessity, and people will do without all sorts of other things in order to have it. Basic security shouldn't depend on the market.

‘Market rate’ in the area where we have our sole rental has absolutely soared during the past couple of years, and TBH in most cases I’m sure it’s just down to greed - because they can - and there will still be those prepared to pay - because suitable properties are not ten a penny and they have no choice.

Not so long ago £1600-1800 pcm was about the going rate for a nice 2 bed property - lately £2200 is not unusual and yesterday dh emailed me a ‘newly available’ he’d just found - for £2500!

But why would 'most of the 3 million private landlords throw in the towel' unless they were going to be impacted by the new legislation, which they won't be if they are behaving decently.

It's only the ones who are doing things such as increasing rents illegally and/or evicting people in order to get more money who will notice the change, isn't it?

I agree that there should be more social housing built, but it should come with no right to buy.

35% of landlords have sold up. Big corporations are buying up rental properties. What could possibly go wrong ....?

DollyRocker

35% of landlords have sold up. Big corporations are buying up rental properties. What could possibly go wrong ....?

May we have some backing and further information on this?
Sold up since when? Examples of corporations buying up, for given the cost of rents, its still a very good earner for a small or medium investor who makes money this way.

Ie my previous flat was bought up by a couple who had got money from an inheritance, and it was their nest egg. That wasn't so long ago, and it's common. Buy to rent.

DollyRocker

35% of landlords have sold up. Big corporations are buying up rental properties. What could possibly go wrong ....?

Why do you think they sold?

And would big corporations be buying the houses if they felt that adhering to the new legislation would affect their profits? Surely that fact alone shows that all that will happen is that sharp practice will be curtailed.