Landlords fear the scrapping of s21 – and are selling up

Currently wanting to sell up is not a mandatory ground for a Section 8 eviction and there is nothing in the current white paper that says that it will be. Currently if you want to sell you would just use Section 21 which of course is going to be abolished. The fear is that a court might not allow you to sell up when you want to. Many landlords are getting on a bit (myself included). We were bolstered by the fact that when we actually wanted to leave the worries of the PRS behind us and realise the value of our assets for whatever reason we would not have to justify it to anybody, we could just serve a Section 21 notice and that would be the end of it, one way or another we would eventually get our property back with vacant possession but not in the future it seems. Also lurking in the background is the threat of what might happen to us as landlords if we can’t afford to spend up to £10,000 upgrading an EPC rating. This figure is well in excess of a year of landlord net income in most areas outside London. Would selling a property in order to pay the £30,000 fine that seems to cover most landlord misdemeanors these days, be seen as a valid reason to sell up? Then there is the fear of the prospect of rent caps, eviction bans and increased capital gains tax if you do delay selling up. All of this is encouraging landlords to actively sell up, especially if a tenant does leave of their own accord. I have a tenant leaving and have decided to sell. After capital gains tax I will still realise the equivalent of about 25 years net rent at today’s prices which would certainly see me out.

As above Ben Beadle doesn't represent us. He sat in an online meeting with the government, Shelter and Gen Rent and said "I don't have a problem with S21 going". Well may be he doesn't but his members do. As said above it is understood he has student lets so wants to protect that. Probably at our expense by sacrificing us.

The properties are landlords' properties. Why should they be handed over to the tenant and the lefty organisations like the councils and government to control.

I am selling up. I'm on my 2nd tenant. Nigerians. I never wanted them but I did the right thing and took them on. They break window and door handles (7 handles in 12 months). Grow mould and I got a no-win no-fee solicitor letter. Runs to the council for lots of things. She acts like S21 isn't even a thing. I'm going through all the expense of having a lawyer and the court costs for eviction now. And that's just for S21. None of this court business. Drawn out for 12 months + while they are free not to pay rent!

This is not to mention S24 with rising rates and the EPC nonsense. Everything is stacked against landlords.

Even with a good tenant I can't see it's worth it. Once S21 good tenants are free to turn bad. As some people on forums have reported where they issued a good tenant a S21 due to selling. They become a nightmare.

S21 is a healthy deterrent to bad behaviour. Although not with my Nigerians....

Reply to the comment left by Nick Van Hoogstraten at 20/03/2023 - 17:24
Agree. I dumped the NRLA all they seemed to be doing was encouraging me to "delight" my tenants by trying to get me to buy stuff. They certainly seem more tenant focused than landlord focused.

Reply to the comment left by Monty Bodkin at 20/03/2023 - 10:57
Revenge evictions don't make much sense to me. A bit like all the silly talk of 'no fault' evictions I think it's being overhyped, most landlords would prefer to put something right for a good tenant, rather than have a void, and then have to do the work anyway before marketing it.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Fleming at 22/03/2023 - 22:20
Mike, revenge evictions are not carried out by responsible landlords who, as you say, work with their tenants to address issues and negotiate rent increases.
These evictions are carried out by the minority of greedy, lazy landlords who only see their properties as a cash cow without recognising that they need to maintain their asset and provide the services which come as part of a landlord's obligations.

Reply to the comment left by Rod at 23/03/2023 - 10:03
Yes, it must be a very small percentage of landlords who would kick the person out to avoid doing work which genuinely needs doing - how is he going to rent it to the next tenant if its genuinely in disrepair and the work isn't done anyway.

Of course, there might be cases where the request is not reasonable, and this has contributed to the LL decision to evict, and this has been termed a revenge eviction, but if one thinks it through property the number of evictions that arise from people simply asking for required repairs must be tiny.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Fleming at 23/03/2023 - 10:14
Far too logical.

Imagine this headline: "Tiny % of tenants get evicted because they wanted some repairs done. Vast majority of tenants get evicted for good reason - rent arrears, neglect of property, causing mould etc."

Nope, doesn't work. Doesn't get views or votes.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. Ask our friends at Shelter, Generation Rant, The Grauniad et al.

Reply to the comment left by Freda Blogs at 23/03/2023 - 10:38
Exactly - and who suffers - everyone, LL's and T's

Let's say you die. You leave BTL property to your kids. They only have 6 months to sell it before they have to pay inheritance tax on your estate. After which HMRC charges the estate 6%.
And if your kids can't get rid of the tenants in time to sell they are liable.
It's madness.

Reply to the comment left by Andrew Main at 24/03/2023 - 05:35
The answer is for everyone to do thorough IHT planning. It is possible to mitigate/avoid IHT by thinking ahead. This is the same for all people who may fall into the IHT tax rate, landlords are not unique.