Jeremy Corbyn to effectively Confiscate Landlords Properties

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Newsome" at "26/01/2016 - 22:51":

Hi Paul,
Thanks for popping up. In one day the Feudalism has decreased by 100 years, how does that work? Some of your statistics are more than a little iffy. Best check them out or stick with the Anarchists, Lunes and Lefties on HPC.

BTW, Jezzer may have grand plans, but he does have to get elected first, and having a nuclear deterrent that he won't fire seems a tad pointless, then to not put nuclear warheads in is of dubious deterrence. Nor issuing the Police with water pistols in place of tasers.

Now your point is? As you know over half of those renting feel that is the right tenure for them, the mobile, separated, not ready to take the responsibility or cost of buying, etc etc. So a competitive functioning rental market is to everyone's advantage.

As you are such a good orator and organiser, why not organise low cost accomodation to put those providing a decent service put of business? Better still those rogue LL that would never bother to post here. Or the tenants that sublet at extortionate rates, and violate h&s rules?

Perhaps you could fix the problems of tenants trashing decent homes, lying, saying they can and will pay, then stop after the first month and play the system?

Thanks for popping up, but goodbye.

Hi Paul.

Do you mean 'apartheid'?

Hi Chris,
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my 'pop up' as you describe it.
The 'fuedalism' (your words) of 846 years to date of an ancient and archaic ideology which maintains a two-tier society based on property ownership is very much alive both in Ireland and Britain. Who owns half of London and how much does rent cost?

These two are the only remaining E.U. member States still operating and defending this ancient, undemocratic system of peple farming. I know Britain is still a Monarchy and not a Republic (of the people) like Ireland, but when Richard de Clare Strongbow invaded Ireland in 1170 he introduced the British system of absentee landlordism under which Ireland was carved up as lands, Counties and estates gifted to English nobility for favours to the Crown etc. Interestingly the Irish family who first invited Stronbow to Ireland still live in their family Castle and demesne.

Even though Ireland was declared a Republic when the British left circa 1922 the ultra right wing Government which took over in Dublin retained the ancient British Imperial system of absentee landlordism whereby a great many of the old nobility retained their Castles, Demesnes, Town houses, .... and tenants.

You state that "Some of your statistics are more than a little iffy. Best check them out or stick with the Anarchists, Lunes and Lefties on HPC."
Which statistics exactly do you mean Chris? Could you elaborate on what you mean by " more than a little bit iffy."

Where do you get your statistic that "over half of those renting are happy to do so?. I haven't come across this suggestion before. In my 60 years experience the vast, vast majority of renters would rather be paying off an affordable mortgage for a basic home they own themselves rather than chucking their hard earned money into the black hole of dead money rent, at the end of which they own nothing and are still stuck at the bottom of the ladder. For a great many more, students, workers etc., the 'rent a room scheme' is a very useful and affordable short term scheme for casual renting.

When the E.U. Standards of legislated regulation for landlordism are finally enshrined in British and Irish legislation, where landlords have to comply with democratic rules like every other E.U. member State there will be a major exit of amatuer and speculator landlords from the property market who do not want to comyly with regulation. The ensuing mass selling of properties will result in a decline in prices to levels which ordinary workers / former tenants can afford to buy.

Their mortgage repayments will be far less than the unstable rack rents of before. At the end of their working lives those people will have a home they can leave to their children or to sell to pay for their nursing home care in old age.

Instead of using taxpayer's money paying exorbitant rent allowances and supplements to private landlords the Government can instead use that money to build social and affordable housing for ordinary citizens or 'subjects' in Britian's case.

Instead of walking down the shabby 'wasteland' streets where property speculators have bought up every building as 'buy to lets', the new home-owning families will take pride in their own houses and communities. They will spend money they would otherwise have shovelled into the rental black hole on their homes giving a boost to small local businesses and the construction industry.

When the vast majority of people live in their own homes they will not thrash them. If they do, well they'll have to fix them themselves. Sub-letting will be subject to the same legislation as every other kind of letting and will not be worthwhile.

The millions of landlords who currently have their money tied up in unproductive landlordism can instead invest their money in manufacturing, farming, art and a thousand other businesses which badly need investment and funding. It's all good Chris. It just requires a change of perspective ... and modeern E.U. standards of legislated regulation to drag us out of the dark ages.

Regards,
Paul.

Reply to the comment left by "David Oswald" at "28/01/2016 - 11:24":

Hi David,
Yes apartheid is what I mean when I say apartate.
'Apartate' is used frequently in conversation about apartheid.
The suffix '-ate' makes it adjectival whereas 'apartheid' is a noun.
My liking a society based on a two tier property system to South Africa's apartheid which separated people according to color, ethnicity, caste is therefore better described by the adjectival 'apartate' rather than the human related 'apartheid.'
Regards,
Paul.
Paul.

Reply to the comment left by "Ross McColl" at "14/09/2015 - 12:13":

I hope you.re right. But the media has got it wrong too often for me to be complacent. Think, Michael Fish: "there is no chance of a storm..."

Reply to the comment left by "Roman Chelsea" at "28/01/2016 - 16:29":

Paul, stop trying to sound superior (landlords are clever too) Private individuals have been encouraged from Tony Blair onwards to plough tens of thousands of pounds of their own money into buying property to rent out, because the PRS removes the responsibility of housing the population from governments and councils to individuals. Perhaps the country should not allow anyone to own anything? Make car dealers just give vehicles out to anyone wanting one, give clothes away, tell Tesco they can't charge for food because its an essential requirement. Lets make free everything that fits into Maslow's pyramid of needs.
Okay, my rant over. Mr Corbyn will never be PM, but I now have a strategy to sell my properties (one a year, because I have to pay CGT. How's that for a level playing field with owner occupiers?) I am a pensioner and my tenants, who have rented from me for years and have never experienced a rent increase, will be devastated, but at my age I can't afford to wait to have the rug pulled from under me, with no chance of fighting it. I have been lucky with most of my tenants, and they have been lucky with me, because we resect each other. Hey, it was nice while it lasted.

Reply to the comment left by "Roman Chelsea" at "28/01/2016 - 16:29":

Welcome to the 118 History forum.........

Ezekiel 18:2. (New King James Version)

‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
And the children’s teeth are set on edge’
- even 742 or 842 years ago.....

A little more recently though,

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/461439/EHS_Households_2013-14.pdf

Twice as many in work social housing tenants receive HB as in PRS - bottom of p8

53% agree renting best for them p17 of 130 under 'satisfaction'. July, Revised sept 2015

This is up from 52% on p8 of https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/335751/EHS_Households_Report_2012-13.pdf

And 84% of PRS, compared to 81% of social renting were fairly or very satisfied, bin para 2.44. There are so many useful nuggets of info in these reports!

P.s. We must not feed the trolls, however informed comment and argument is helpful and informative. But sadly not the case here.

Reply to the comment left by "Annie Landlord" at "28/01/2016 - 17:32":

Hi Annie,

I hope it is not all over, but I would not contemplate entering the market now, after Alice's overly overt political egotistical machinations to become DC's descendent.

Pumping millions into a dysfunctional housing system has helped improve derelict uninhabitable property to become decent homes. Clearly there are slum landlords as we see getting off far too lightly in Lewisham on the TV. But this I am sure is the minority, and I doubt occurs in this area 150 miles away.

If I have a problem on my house, I have to fix it, or pay someone to.

A tenant called up Tuesday. No hot water in the bath. Within the hour, I called back. Within 24hours I visited, needed special tool, within 24hours all fixed. 60 miles travelling. That will be a total cost to you sir of, £0-00p.

He is on benefit, runs a decent car, plays videos all day, smokes and drinks, has a pretty good life, single but has 2 bedrooms. Has 5 kids, "that he knows of". I don't relish getting money back from the council I pay tax to. But an inherited tenant, there is a big difference between the struggling and the savvy benefit recipients that milk the system. I gave Alice £61k paye yesterday to help out. 50% more than I took home.

I expect generation rent would expect the rent to be 5 Bob a month, me to continue paying the insurance £665 pa, gas test £240 pa, just paid the £144 for the routine electric safety checks, the landlord electricity supply, outside painting ongoing. And so it goes on. I expect GR would like me to pay him £200 a month pocket money as well!

Seems eking out a relatively minute profit from the money invested in providing housing is wrong, where investing the same money in multi million pound second or third homes abroad, and yachts is quite socially acceptable.

I can only conclude that GR come into contact with their landlords, see them having more than they, after years of hard work and taking not inconsiderable risks, are blinded by the green mists of envy.

Think what you wish for. Getting rid of thousands of landlords that have had enough of being mugged by non rent paying tenants will not make one iota of difference to house prices, but force rents up to yuppie levels for top quality apartments flats or houses, and totally unaffordable for many, many others.

Building 400,000 homes a year will be a good start - if we had somewhere to put them. Limiting immigration of 600,000 a year may also be necessary.

GR emailing:-

With 2016 well under way, we are continuing to push the government to refashion the private rented sector as a place they'd be happy for their grandchildren to grow up in.

You can join our call to protect tenants from unfair evictions by signing our petition, which has just passed 1000 signatures.

A poll we commissioned from BMG found this week that one in four of us can expect to lose our home through no fault of our own. Every time we move into a new home, we take a gamble on the landlord, who could raise the rent, sell up, or just decide not to renew after a year. The poll also found public opinion is on our side - 75% of respondents are in favour of limits on rent increases, and two-thirds would support compensation for tenants who are forced to move.

We will be calling on the House of Lords to reform tenancy law as they dissect the Housing Bill over the next couple of months.

If you're in London, please check out our new website votehomes2016.com, where we compare each Mayoral candidate's housing policies. And if you are about this Saturday, there is a protest organised by Kill the Housing Bill starting at the Imperial War Museum at noon.

Best wishes,

The Generation Rent team

Reply to the comment left by "Chris Byways" at "28/01/2016 - 18:59":

I lost my home once, through no fault of my own .... it was called divorce. No financial help from anyone because hey, I was paying a mortgage, not rent, so I must be rich. Picked myself up, dusted myself off, and to do the best for my children, started all over again.