Another Council Abandons Selective Licencing Proposals

I normally stay clear of the internal politics of the PRS respecting that we can all work for a common goal, but come at it from a different direction.

However, I have to say that I was shocked Property118 was not assisted or supported in anyway by the big Landlords Associations for our fight alone against the West Brom who directly targeted landlords as a weak group to be unscrupulously picked off.

Fortunately over 2 years and over half a million pounds later (all risked by P118 Action Group members) we successfully stood strong for the biggest single win by landlords for landlords to date.

We need to work together for what Landlords really want and I have not heard one landlord yet say they want Selective Licensing.

It also took a very long time to get the landlord associations to come out against Section 24 and, separately, to support the legal action arguing for a judicial review. So, the biggest single attack on private landlords in history was not immediately or automatically opposed by them.

And that fact they’re in bed with Liverpool City Council re SL.

I’ve steered clear of the RLA and NLA for some time now. I just don’t believe they act in our interests but rather what is ‘diplomatic’ or politically palatable at the time.

Once any organisation becomes massive, it loses some of it’s grassroots drive.

I have long ago given up on landlord associations. They are too busy wearing suits, being important, popular and ineffective with no clear objectives that would benefit us landlords.
Why would they give up their cozy lives, income guaranteed, hob-nobbing it with other impotent people when we landlords are well common.

Just to comment as a Bournemouth Landlord. The local NLA group campaigned hard to overturn this - the NLA meeting that was organised to get the council and affected landlords together was absolutely rammed - standing room only. The council team went away with no illusions as to the depth of feelings. In my opinion, a great success for all concerned, especially the NLA team.

Reply to the comment left by Grumpy Doug at 02/03/2018 - 19:44
NLA reps do not know how many (if any) LLs they represent in any one area…HQ won’t let them have the information. They also won’t take on cases that would then see them have to extend the same service to other areas and cost them (in their eyes) too much.

Reply to the comment left by Dr Rosalind Beck at 02/03/2018 - 14:58Firstly let me State that I absolutely agree with the sentiments echoed by Mark,Neil, Luke and Roz.
Secondly allow me to venture into alien territory. I am going to salute two local authorities. Telford and Bournmouth councils have had real consultations and decided not to proceed with this selective licensing garbage which is as we all know a revenue raising exercise cynically dressed as some scheme to help tenants on benefits. Real hardworking tenants have little interest in council interference in their lives. Moving on to Liverpool city council , Purveyors of the largest licensing scheme in the land. To update Property 118 readers , Their scheme is floundering. No tenants lives improved. Prosecutions stalling, massive data breaches, complaints pouring in to their "have your say" sham process. Reverting back to comments previously posted. The So called Landlord associations have been found badly wanting. I personally have not renewed membership. There is only one show in town with respect to Landlord representation and that is Property 118. The so called landlord associations the NLA and RLA are an utter waste of time. Both organisations give succor to the corrupt Councils and their Licensing Scams.

Like others above, I've given up on the NLA about 3 years ago(having been a member of the RLA before that) as they don't seem to be relevant in many respects to what I'm doing as a small portfolio landlord. When they are needed to oppose obviously poor/bad proposals, they have mostly retracted into their shells. It seems that Proprty 118 here does a much better job in raising awareness.

Reply to the comment left by Larry Sweeney at 02/03/2018 - 21:17Hi Larry
This is off topic but I have just watched recordings of the trilogy about the £1 homes in the Webster Triangle in Liverpool from Channel 4.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-1-houses-britains-cheapest-street/on-demand/63371-001
I was left wondering if Liverpool City Council would be able to organise a convivial evening in a brewery. Bearing in mind the libel laws, what do you think?
When the plumptious mayor was asked why someone had been allocated a house two years earlier that could not be worked on because the council was contractually obliged to demolish it he said he was disappointed as a child when he asked for a Scalextric set and got a water pistol instead. He said credit where it was due and then gave the interviewer a glance to see if he had got away with it,
Only first-time buyers can apply, but they will need access to tens of thousands of pounds as the properties are now unmortgageable ruins. Thieves had removed the lead from the roofs of over 400 houses.
The mayor said “what we we have to make sure of is that developers are not seeeizing this the opportunity for themselves”. Absolutely, developers might rehabilitate them in a matter of weeks.
After more than ten years, 20 (under 5%) of these properties are now being lived in.
Housing shortage? What housing shortage?

Reply to the comment left by Appalled Landlord at 04/03/2018 - 01:47
I found that programme curious and interesting. Even when *giving* away houses (as I’ve hypothesised about before), the vast majority of what can only be described as an underclass cannot raise enough to renovate the properties. Those that have satisfied the council’s baseline criteria and are handed the keys find they don’t have quite enough or that the job was bigger than they thought. A great twist would be to require them to rent the property to a tenant who *wasn’t* able to raise the funds necessary to be given the chance…just for six months to realise the pain when their own time, effort and hard cash is (inevitably) disrespected.

The young couple with £25k to spend discovered they were woefully short, and whilst I appreciate they’re not experts, they should have been able to manage the job with that budget. These tenants-in-needs problem isn’t just an inability to borrow, but an inability to properly manage the project/keep up the long-term maintenance of a house. We need some serious education with a dose of tough-love if they’re ever going to be anything but tenants.

Some people (a vast chunk of my on clientele) are simply not cut out for running a property…just as you or I might flounder of overnight we’re handed the reins to, say, an airline -it’s not within my knowledge, skill set or capabilities! The government need to get their thick heads around that otherwise we’re essentially handing them a burden no matter how additional properties come about.