General Election 8th June – Who on earth do landlords vote for?

Reply to the comment left by "Sarah Quinlan" at "20/04/2017 - 17:12":

Really excellent letter, Sarah, which I think others should emulate and send to their MPs. You made some great arguments.

Would there be any chance of you getting to see her as well as face-to-face works really well?

Reply to the comment left by "Luke P" at "20/04/2017 - 16:52":

If the do not vote tory campaign some here are advocating were to succeed. I really dread living with the consequences. A labour government, a coalition government, nightmare. Campaign against section 24, yes, but persuading, tenants etc not to vote tory is a very big gamble, if the wrong government was formed I am sure not just landlords would live to regret it.

Reply to the comment left by "Luke P" at "20/04/2017 - 16:52":

Yes it's different but has the same result, no vote counted, so it's pointless, and helps the left get in and ruin us. What was it Corbyn wanted? right to buy extended to the private sector!

Reply to the comment left by "Colin Dartnell" at "20/04/2017 - 19:11":

Just don't settle for the orchestrators of s.24. Scare stories of Corbyn extending RTB are just that…the banks wield a lot more power than we do and wouldn't allow it (especially as it would doubtless leave many LLs in negative equity, which means the banks have a problem).

But I do agree the current Labour crop would be no good for the PRS.

After all the broken promises of the Tories, we will still vote them back in!! Most of the landlords voted for them and we have been totally S***ED. We deserve another good roasting because we will not change.
Good Luck.

Reply to the comment left by "Ricky jones" at "20/04/2017 - 19:57":

Exactly. I don't wanna hear a single other whine about s.24 or any other BTL destructive policies from those that blindly plough on and vote Conservative…again.

All we've done is moan and pontificate over what could be if we had the power/could change the direction. And now we can (or at least have an impact).

We clearly deserve all that is coming to us.

Hey come on guys. Strategy is what we need. We need to use our leverage and get the Tories in the marginal seats sweating. We need to get promises off them in writing if they want our vote. The Tories are expected to win by a landslide so I see it more as targeting vulnerable individual ones like Barwell and seeing if their anxiety at the prospect of losing their seat is enough for them to do the right thing.

Reply to the comment left by "Dr Rosalind Beck" at "20/04/2017 - 20:29":

I'm speaking with Ray Finch (MEP) tomorrow who is UKIP's Housing Spokesman…will see if they're willing to get their act together re the PRS.

Reply to the comment left by "Luke P" at "20/04/2017 - 20:36":

That's great, Luke. I am aware of two other landlords discussing things within UKIP over the next week as well, so fingers crossed. I think if UKIP can come up with a great housing policy then they will be streets ahead of the others. Please give him the link to my report here, if you get the chance:

https://www.property118.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/6G0YKMd1Wf.pdf

That will fill him in on s24 and hopefully convince him that UKIP need a pro-PRS policy which supports landlords and tenants. He will be aware that Osborne was pursuing some obsession about home ownership being the only acceptable tenure, but it would be worth pointing out that s24 is likely to thwart progress in home ownership anyway because higher rents mean it's harder to save deposits - whilst also causing terrible financial suffering to many as rents have to dramatically increase and as properties have to be sold because of the potentially infinite effective tax rates.

Barwell has shifted this emphasis, as you will know, so that the 'rented sector' is now supposed to matter, but only if it is being handled by the big business friends and donors of the Conservatives. Both he and the rest of the UKIP leadership might enjoy exposing what can only be seen as a conflict of interest at best and corruption at worst.

On a more general level, I think it should be stressed to UKIP that they need to base their housing policy on impartial evidence. Hopefully the forthcoming review by Julie Rugg and David Rhodes will offer a good foundation for that, but in the meantime it might be good to point him to their earlier report from 2008 in which they stated it was important to incentivise the private rented sector (and not decimate it as the Tories are trying to do). It is here:

https://www.york.ac.uk/media/chp/documents/2008/prsreviewweb.pdf

UKIP could get some real credibility if it based its policies on solid evidence-based research and if it pointed out that that was what it was doing. It could really stand out as the pro-PRS party and point out it was not going for soundbites and populism but intelligent policy making to solve the housing crisis and look after the tenants most likely to suffer from s24, namely the low paid and/or those on benefits. UKIP could say they are helping those who aren't managing and who will be floundering because of Government policy rather than those who are just about managing.

Anyway, good luck with your meeting and well done for getting it.

Reply to the comment left by "LS " at "20/04/2017 - 18:33":

Ls, I agree it is a big gamble for us to vote anyone other than Tory. I was a life long Tory. It's a game of poker and they raised the stakes first by calling our bluff. They gambled that although we hate them for s24 we're still going to vote for them because the alternative is worse. If this is the case we are beaten already, and we have no levarage at all. We just need to chuck our hand in whilst meekly protesting about their unsporting behaviour. But I'm angry and I say lets match their bet, and raise the stakes and bat it back to them and see what they do.

I don't fully understand the reluctance for moderate right wing voters to switch their vote to the only moderate right wing party that's left.