Landlords – what are your suggestions to better the current chaos in the PRS?

Why dont we make BTL into serviced accomodation, they book it 6mth in advance at say £20/ night and at the end of 6mth its up to landlord if they get another 6mths as they have no rights under SA.

Reply to the comment left by Hamish McBloggs at 29/11/2022 - 14:02
Fantastic Hamish,

We run round like a blue arse fly every time Govt & Council's bring something in new. I coped fine before all these latest rules.
When I couldn't do all Licensing forms in one month, nor would the Credit cards allow for so much in one month-£57,000 in one month Aug 2023-Nottingham Council Licensing said to me 'Well you shun't have so many houses Mick'.
I said I DIDN'T buy all my houses in one month-It would have been impossible.
I don't get all my boilers break in ONE month.
All roof's don't break in one month.
You are now asking me to do something impossible.

If the silly minimum room sizes in HMO's were abolished, that would release hundreds, maybe thousands of rooms in London. We sold two properties, evicting 8 tenants because one room was too small, less than 6.51m

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 29/11/2022 - 14:10It could eliminate the need for an LA to contemplate licensing.
Instead an LA could propose of the portal addresses that should be considered as candidates for licensing.
A proper two way consultation process captured by the portal.
Licensing costs centrally structured.
Money not directly going to the LA but the portal. Disinentivise local money grabs and department building.
Any judges' time saved = lower cost and/or increasing quality of decision.
Less stick and big fine and more ushering, convincing, building, partnership.
Eventually make it a requirement to use the portal if you want to be a landlord.
LA's incentivised to chase real rogues as LL's using the portal by definition cannot be rogues
I will freely admit that this could be seen as a 'national landlord register' and may rub some up the wrong way.
But I could have anxiety free sleep if I wasn't worrying about having missed something e.g. According to a recent s21 I recently filed, this question appeared :
Has the gas safety cert been prominently displayed in the property throughout the tenancy?
I'm assuming it's simply not enough for both me and British Gas to post these to the tenant and guarantor, for me to email and WhatsApp them to the tenant and the guarantor and for me to make them available to download 24/7 from a GDPR compliant file sharing site.
A rules based system with all accessibility considerations in place would stop the need for Great Aunt Maude's portrait above the fireplace being displaced by a Gas Safety Certificate.
I would pay a fee towards this as any modest cost would be cheaper than paying for the (laughably termed) fast track in the local court where I am eventually told I can't charge interest or expenses to travel.
Hamish

Reply to the comment left by Hamish McBloggs at 29/11/2022 - 16:07
U talking common sense & joined up thinking-Which we know the Govt departments & Council departments don't do.

It would be great for councils to buy up houses from landlords, in fact I think that this can be done in London but it's about 10% below market value so not likely to be popular. Market less agency costs would make more sense.

Arrears should be treated as theft after 1 month and 1 day (as rent is payable in advance, this is the equivalent of leaving a shop with goods that haven't been paid for). It wouldn't help though as theft just leads to numerous warnings before an official caution and even after repeated offences they are set free.

The thing that would make sense to me is specialist property courts. These could have well trained judges and also employ their own surveyors who could distinguish between tenant damage/lifestyle and a need for repairs. These court should act quickly and have the power to rapidly respond where a tenant doesn't leave on the eviction date. Access to the courts should be allowed at 2 months arrears even if the tenant repays later, but with the judge willing to listen to the mitigating circumstances. They should also have the power to penalise the rogue landlords and have all their properties inspected.

Reply to the comment left by Raz at 29/11/2022 - 09:02
To put 10,700 properties into perspective, that won't even house the rubber boat migrants that arrive each year. You need to stick at least one zero on the end of that!

Reply to the comment left by The Forever Tenant at 28/11/2022 - 15:52
1) Good idea to save councils money by not spending so much on hotels. If I were a council, I wouldn't want to pay market prices, but a distressed sale price similar to companies who buy landlord portfolios.

2) Unworkable. First, a criminal trial could take ages to arrange. Second non-payment of debts is really a contract law issue and there are plenty of tools available to get the money back if the non-payer has any money. Third, a criminal judge is unlikely to award sufficient compensation to cover the lost rent etc. The civil courts are more appropriate. Instead, I would like to see rent payments added to a tenant's credit record whenever they are collected by an agency on a landlord's behalf, so the tenant has an interest in keeping a good record.

3) Sounds sensible.

Reply to the comment left by Smiffy at 29/11/2022 - 17:52
THEY got the 20,000 odd homes that the government actually DID build last year.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 29/11/2022 - 16:24
Michael Gove's property portal proposals are not the same as mine.

He seems to be proposing a repository of information that can be viewed & used. I am defining processes which require as a minimum this repository of well maintained information for which central government take responsibility. A LL, tenant, agent, represeentative can never be liable if incorrect.

What I'm proposing means licensing becomes irrelevant from a LL point of view unless there are specific LA requirements for an area that would mean additional actions by a LL. An LA would have to define these actions but would not receive money from a LL for these additional tasks.

Licensing is meant to 'bring up standards'. If a LL is on the portal then the minimum standards are met. LL's can be 'struck off' via the portal. Authorities can proactively 'decend upon' struck off LL's to make sure they haven't gone and rented another hovel.

Equally, tenants can also be 'struck off' and struck off tenants must become wards of the state.

To bring up standards, actions outside of a LL's control need to take place. E.g. Policing, care in the community, mental health, condition of a park or street, properties that will never be EPC 'C' or above. These are firmly LA and central government and (other than lobbying an MP) cannot be influenced by a LL.

'Licensing' then becomes a cooperative contract between LL and LA where the additional costs incurred by both are openly recognised and central government are forced to appropriately fund it rather than asking LL's to pay which is effectively what's happeing now.

Treat the whole problem more as a national health issue.