ARLA report – Huge blow for tenants

Well if the media did not portray all landlords as scumbags there might not exist such a problem for tenants. A problem compounded by the vicious treatment meted out to our sort by HMCR. I left the UK about ten years ago for personal reasons and latterly for the purpose of reducing my CGT liability. The UK is not run for people like myself and therefore do my utmost to pay as little tax to HMCR as is legally possible. As any tax I do pay goes to support the welfare in many cases of people directly opposed to my own welfare.

I agree with "....it’s important that the Government works to make the private rented sector attractive to landlords again, rather than introducing complex legislation that ultimately squeezes the sector and leaves tenants worse off.”

The regulatory framework needs to favour good landlords and good tenants.

That doesn't just mean the regulatory framework for tax; it means that just as private tenants should not be at risk of being the victims of unscrupulous landlords, private landlords should also not become the victims of unscrupulous tenants, left-wing councils, left-wing charities, or courts with a bias when they've done nothing wrong.

I've just left the below text elsewhere which applies to this too. The Govt and Councils and ever changing Housing Minister's keep getting it wrong. 7 year old kids could get it right.

All these new rules are only making it worse for the next HB vulnerable tenants down the line. I'm biggest HB Landlord in Nottingham and I get on great with my tenants, some who's been with me 20+ years. But they can't move any more as no Landlord will take them anywhere cause of all the new rules. I can no longer swap them into my other houses without them going with a letting agent, as too many rules and paperwork nowadays, little which helps the tenant, but just burden and mountains of paperwork

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 27/02/2020 - 15:15
Thanks for the voice of experience of the tenants-on-benefits-sector.

The problem is that you need to be an expert to manage HB tenants. Even if you are prepared to go to the effort involved, the changes in regulation over the last decade mean that as a landlord you:
- face more costs in terms of work
- face more risk
- may face increased insurance costs
- may face increasing letting agent costs

You aren't allowed to charge for this stuff anymore, your deposit has been reduced, some councils are already proposing reducing it further and as a landlord you have less control over your deposit than you did. This all further increases your risk.

In any business sector where you face increase risk and cost you need to increase the return to cover that. As a responsible landlord operating legally your *only* recourse is to raise the rent. So it follows if tenants on benefits are higher risk that you need to dysproportionately raise the cost of rents to them - unless your rich of course, which most landlords aren't. Most are either heavily in debt or just hold 1-2 properties (which they could more easily let out as holiday lets).

One of the unintended consequences of allowing left-wing entities to attack the private rented sector is higher rents because it indirectly increases cost and risk, and higher rents because it indirectly reduces the available supply of housing as this report shows.

It's not as though various governments have not been warned about the 'unintended consequences'. Policy wonks need to be careful who they listen to and governments need to be careful of who they give money to.

"Policy "wonks need to be careful who they listen to and governments need to be careful of who they give money to."
OMG - do you really expect that level of intelligence and sophistication from this Government?

Reply to the comment left by Whiteskifreak Surrey at 27/02/2020 - 16:22
One of my best ever tenants was a single mum on benefits. The laws that made me decide that she had to pay me directly were introduced by labour governments. She was a good tenant from my point of view and we treated her well and fairly even though I insisted on direct payment.

Some of the laws that have made tenants on benefits unattractive to the agents I use now have also been introduced by labour governments.

No government has a monopoly on common sense. The majority of landlords only have a small portfolio of properties and aren't rich. I'm not rich either. But some of the rich people I know who own several properties let them and then decided it wasn't worth the hassle and just used them for their own personal use for a number of years before selling them.

Pursuing a strategy that effectively applies sanctions to the majority of good landlords whilst not tackling the small proportion that abuse their tenants' rights has unintended consequences. Hopefully reports like this one will help both the current government and the opposition parties to understand the consequences of their actions.

Reply to the comment left by JJ at 27/02/2020 - 15:28
That's my problem, I'm not raising the rent too much to existing tenants. Any new ones are paying a fortune. All cause of Council and Govt interference.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 28/02/2020 - 15:28
I think that what you are doing is 100% right although I think you might need good records to demonstrate you are not discriminating unlawfully (different government legislation).

If anybody could approve that you were discriminating then my guess is you'd need to be raising the rent to all of them.

Reply to the comment left by JJ at 28/02/2020 - 16:07
I don't care who comes after me.
I've had it before with Council officials when I'm charging one sister lower than the other cause one sister is struggling more.
My answer is: I am human. And if I can't recognise that this one can't really afford that rent, then are u telling me I can't look after her? To keep her in the house and not homeless? It's called being individual and learning and knowing each person. Unlike some big council. I'm the loser , I can charge what I like.