Is government policy hurting the vulnerable and driving landlords out of the market?

Good article, Paul. We need better policy. Lobby groups fall into polemical silos; landlord organisations like NRLA versus tenant lobby groups with either one or other holding sway and somewhat deaf to the perpective of the other. In fact, as Paul has highlighted, the interests are not polemical. There needs to be a private rental sector think tank to advise government that is not polemical but consists of both tenants and landlords and considers and researches policy initiatives that work. There is funding out there to do this - we just need the core group to get this going.

Legislation and tax changes combined with an increase in demand for rented accommodation is limiting supply, pushing up rents, and providing disincentives to let to vulnerable tenants who are less and less likely to be able to secure housing in the private sector. This will lead to increased homelessness, and a bigger burden on the state in terms housing benefit and temporary accommodation. The situation is catastrophic for all renters and particularly the most vulnerable.

That's me:
There are a large number of landlords who overlook lack of bond, damage, behaviour, and freely offer emotional and monetary support to these vulnerable tenants.

And yes too many retrospective changes after we've already committed.

what is completely overlooked is not even the numbers of LL selling up (however the numbers are disputed), the number of empty properties (just empty or purposely left so) or the proposed tenant biased legislation...the reality there is absolutely NO reason for any existing LL to purchase more accommodation or any encouragement for any new LL to enter the PRS and supply anthign either.

With more wanting accommodation and nothing new even being provided it's akin to leaving the plug on the side of the bath off and still running the taps to fill it.

No future for potential renters and a bleak look ahead for those that have somewhere now, but may not have very shortly....

The PRS is being shafted from the government from all angles, and ultimately the dire consequence lands in the tenants lap.

When there is a large range of cheap empty houses for sale, yet no houses available for private rental the government should wake up and smell the coffee.

The thing is 'cheap' houses are no longer once SDLT is now taken into consideration and the increased costs of labour and supplies etc. Working that into an investment proposal and less than X% yield is simply not enticing when you factor in what the level of rent you can realistically achieve.

Job security for many tenants is now a worry (NIC fiasco c/o of the budget) so do you want to be left with someone who can't pay the rent? Extended possession tenant rights, increased court costs etc. How do you put a price on this additional yet very possible 'risk' to factor that into the overall investment calculations?

Properties with tenant in situ are more common that was...that I assume will only increase if LL find it financially tough. Again, who is going to want to step into their shoes?

All of the above comments are important and true but until we get the message out, to policy makers the same nonesensical policy decisions will continue to be made. There is no point in us talking to each other. We need to talk to decision makers and get the message out with the slick comms skills of Shelter and Generation Rent. We need an effective policy lobby group - that balances tenant and landlord rights.