Labour: Landlords can’t evict tenants if it makes them worse off

How can this be 'fairer for all'?? Landlords yet again - taking the hit. What if a landlord is in financial hardship and as a result needs to sell their property?

I am a letting agent so this further fuels the need for more scrupulous referencing, an overhaul of the deposit amount taken (totally messed up by the last goverment) and every landlord MUST take RENT & LEGAL COVER.

There is opportunity in every crisis.

Have we ever had a Housing Minister who has been/is a landlord?

And so, slice by slice the labour government take control of the landlords assets, and eventually takes over rental housing completely. Their moves are to remove all PRS landlords completely, using these slice by slice legislation tactics until all rented properties are owned by companies.
The final stroke is to then nationalise all these companies into one govenment owned rental housing system. Labour just loves to nationalise everything.
I'm not sure if Two Tear Starmer will last long enough to achieve this, himself. The way things are going he may be out on his ear very soon. Let's hope so. The nation is fed up of his blatant hypocrisy and his lies already.

I currently have good tenants. When/If they move I will now have no hesitation in selling unless this nonsense is reversed.
I had planned to stay in the sector for another 15 years.
What about anti social tenants in blocks...Will they also be given an endless right to remain.
4 years 11 months and counting till Starmer is out.

Soon we will be back to the legislation pre 1986 and the Shorthold Tenancy Act.
Lifetime tenancies with rents fixed!
Therefore no accommodation to rent!

If nobody is gullible enough to offer accommodation, such that former tenants can't find somewhere else to live, the answer is... to make offering accommodation even less attractive! All hail the politicians and the state! We would be lost without them.

More labour actions that will fuel a reduction in rental property supply, not really what's needed when we are in a rental availability crisis, is it?

Surely NOT. What if the tenant gets paid rent from the council and does not pass it to landlord..STEALING is the word for that.. So would we forced to let them stay and keep stealing. Surely NOT. !!!!or just maybe ???

Everyone must get their rents up to the new rental rate otherwise every tenant can just claim there is nothing to rent at the same rate.

Sadly being nice to tenants by keeping rents low is apparently now a reason to punish us.

Reply to the comment left by Bernard Mealing at 05/08/2024 - 13:15
not a worry - very soon no one will be taking on anyone who relies 100% on the state for their rent to be paid. The risk is simply too high. It not about affordability anymore.

The most sensible LL in the world will now be demanding at the minimum a guarantor for every tenant if they entertain taking them on (given everything else being proposed RRB, S21 eradication etc)

ALL LL's should be bringing ALL rents to market rate now while they can, (in light of worries over rent caps, in anticipation of the spend to get up to EPC C and cost of potential rent loss/getting a possession though the courts, increased GCT when you sell).

Benefit applicants have now even less chance of securing accommodation than ever - and that's saying something!

Labour can go on about LL 'discrimination' against those with pets/kids etc till the cows come home - wont make any difference if they can't pass affordability.

Numbers in temp accommodation will only increase. Those LL's who do not vote with their feet (and sell up), will be the ones stamping them instead and being very very particular who they rent anything to.

You can tell the real state of affairs when a LL is confronted by 4,5,6,7 plus applications and the first thing they try to determine, is the risk of possible possession (and all that entails) before they even really look at anything else?

THAT's how toxic the government has made renting in the PRS.

Communist Britain