The Latest Campaign Poster from Shelter

Reply to the comment left by "Industry Observer " at "28/03/2014 - 15:06":

If you really want to know they came round with a new set of taps for the bathroom and said they wanted to leave them in there for a plumber to come and fit at a later date. We weren't expecting it because the taps worked fine... all in all it was bizarre. However, I mean it when I say the relationship with this landlord is pretty good all things considered.

A previous landlord, who also failed to fix heating during cold months, found out that a pipe had fractured during that time and tried to withhold the entire deposit to pay for it. A friend very recently moved in to a flat to find the shower only had two temperatures - scolding and freezing. They were told this wasn't serious enough to warrant work. Another friend moved in a few months ago to find that the oven didn't work. It still doesn't work.

The list goes on sadly; this is just off the top of my head.

Reply to the comment left by "Flat Detective" at "28/03/2014 - 12:55":

"I have never had a landlord (out of 15+) who hasn’t breached their side of the agreement in more than one way"

Where do you live, in what type of property, and how did you find these landlord/properties and moved in?

There are some bad landlords in the same way that they are some bad tenants.
I don't have any statistic to back this up, but I suspect that the answer to these questions an provide a level of risk.

BELOW IS MY CONVERSATION WITH SHELTER ON FACEBOOK

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152143490828999&set=p.10152143490828999&type=1&comment_id=216347680

ME:
Shelter are a despicable organisation who peddle distortions and half lies to further their political agenda. Have no idea how they have kept their charitable status. Not long ago they ran a campaign depicting a landlord as a serial murderer! Crisis are a proper housing charity.

Like · Reply · March 27 at 10:46pm
SHELTER:
Shelter Hello - that's a ridiculous claim and totally untrue. We can understand the need for discussion, but please keep things civil and stick to the facts. Further to this - we know that most landlords are decent and treat renters fairly, but the fact is that some are still evicting tenants unfairly. They give good landlords a bad name, so protecting renters is good for everyone. This campaign is focusing on the need for a legal change and about better protecting renters, it’s not about shaming or demonising landlords. Thank you.

ME:
Im sorry if you think i'm not being civil. As to 'sticking to the facts', what facts have Shelter provided?????? This latest campaign against landlords provides no statistics and nor does it explain that tenants are entitled to damages for disrepair! There are many reasons why a tenant may be evicted and many reasons why a tenant may claim foul play. It just does not make any business sense for a landlord to evict a rent paying tenant. In fact RLA said: “the fact that almost 98 per cent of tenants have not faced the problems should be a sober reminder to Shelter that the majority of tenants face no problems whatsoever with their landlord” http://www.property118.com/rla-probes-shelter-anti-landlord-propoganda/64391/ Perhaps most people think Shelter acts like the Crisis charity but that’s not the case unfortunately. Shelter provides no shelter! Shelter is a Lobby Organisation; most of its funds going towards lobbying or marketing. Shelter doesnt work with landlords to achieve better enforcement against the minority of bad landlords/ raise standards across the sector. Why is that?
Shelter lost all credibility with their ridiculous campaign featuring sean lock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1tB9y55UrI this is a disgrace. i complained to shelter about this and never got a reply.
So i stand by my views about shelter being a political organisation and despicable. Shelter is in my opinion an anti-landlord organisation at it route.
Support Crisis, not Shelter for protecting vulnerable people requiring housing.

Reply to the comment left by "Joe Bloggs" at "29/03/2014 - 19:36":

Hi Alex, I'm not a Shelter member but your posts seem quite 'impassioned'... Just a few points:

"Shelter are a despicable organisation who peddle distortions and half lies to further their political agenda."

I'm not sure they're "despicable". I think they try to stand up for people lacking power in an area crucial to human existence... housing. It takes up a lot of people's salaries and those who don't own have zero power and no choice, so it's important to have checks and balances to highlight and prevent abuses.

"It just does not make any business sense for a landlord to evict a rent paying tenant."

I'd argue that the rent market has overheated to the extent that landlords know their properties will be snapped up within days of them going online. From (extensive) personal experience if you don't put down a deposit within a day of a flat being advertised, you won't get it. Landlords with dubious moral standards know that they can get rid of 'troublesome' tenants and not really lose out.

"So i stand by my views about shelter being a political organisation and despicable. Shelter is in my opinion an anti-landlord organisation at it route."

Ironically this is a politically ill-judged statement given the current climate.

Reply to the comment left by "Flat Detective" at "29/03/2014 - 20:41":

I think your views must be very specific to a particular area. If demand really is that strong landlords should raise the rent to balance the supply and demand and also get pickier about the quality of their tenants. That would improve the area even further as well as their cash flow and funds to take their properties upmarket, hence increasing capital values even further. I'm sure owner occupiers in the area would be very supportive if that too.
.

PS I had a look at the Shelter Facebook thread that Joe linked to and I was shocked at just how strong the feelings amongst landlords are against Sheltet and just how many landlords are expressing their disapproval these days.
.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "29/03/2014 - 20:55":

Well yes, I'm talking about the city where a quarter of England's people live. And rest assured, rent has been raised at a quite crippling rate. Service levels appear to have fallen at an inversely proportional rate unfortunately.

I think your view of supply vs demand is slightly skewed... supply is currently choked, but demand is at a record high. How will raising rent lower demand? People have to have a roof over their heads within commuting distance of their job.

Reply to the comment left by "Flat Detective" at "29/03/2014 - 20:41":

“Shelter are a despicable organisation who peddle distortions and half lies to further their political agenda.”

I’m not sure they’re “despicable”. I think they try to stand up for people lacking power in an area crucial to human existence… housing. It takes up a lot of people’s salaries and those who don’t own have zero power and no choice, so it’s important to have checks and balances to highlight and prevent abuses.

REPLY - 'ZERO POWER AND NO CHOICE' IS AN EXAGGERATION AT BEST. TENANTS HAVE A LOT OF POWER, THEY HAVE THE POWER OF WITHHOLDING RENT, WRECKING THE LANDLORDS ASSET AND THE LAW IS MOST OF THE TIME LEANING OVER BACKWARDS TO HELP THEM. THEY ALSO HAVE CHOICE WHERE THEY LIVE...MOST HAVE THE WHOLE OF EUROPE TO CHOOSE FROM. I CAN SEE THAT SHELTER ARE A LEFT WING/ COMMUNIST AKIN PRESSURE GROUP AND THAT IS FINE. WHAT I OBJECT TO IS THAT THIS IS DONE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF A CHARITY AND PRETENDING TO BE SOMETHING THEY ARE NOT.

“It just does not make any business sense for a landlord to evict a rent paying tenant.”

I’d argue that the rent market has overheated to the extent that landlords know their properties will be snapped up within days of them going online. From (extensive) personal experience if you don’t put down a deposit within a day of a flat being advertised, you won’t get it. Landlords with dubious moral standards know that they can get rid of ‘troublesome’ tenants and not really lose out.

REPLY - AGAIN THIS IS AN EXAGGERATION. EVEN IN LONDON, WHERE I HAVE BEEN A LANDLORD FOR MANY YEARS UNLESS A PROPERTY RENT IS GROSSLY BELOW MARKET RENT IT WILL NOT NORMALLY 'BE SNAPPED UP WITHIN DAYS'. A TENANT WOULD HAVE TO BE EXTREMELY 'TROUBLESOME' FOR A LANDLORD TO RISK MONTHS OF WITHHELD RENT WHILST COURTS SLOWLY PROCESS EVICTION PROCEEDINGS. AND I NOTE THAT YOU DONT PRESUME TO HAVE HAD SUCH DIRECT EXPERIENCE.

“So i stand by my views about shelter being a political organisation and despicable. Shelter is in my opinion an anti-landlord organisation at it route.”

Ironically this is a politically ill-judged statement given the current climate.

REPLY - I DONT UNDERSTAND THIS BIZARE COMMENT...IM STATING MY HONESTLY HELD BELIEFS IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THEY ARE POLITICALLY WELL JUDGED OR NOT AND SURELY THAT IS WHAT DISCUSSION FORUMS SHOULD BE ABOUT?

PLEASE IGNORE LAST POST. THIS IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY:

“Shelter are a despicable organisation who peddle distortions and half lies to further their political agenda.”

I’m not sure they’re “despicable”. I think they try to stand up for people lacking power in an area crucial to human existence… housing. It takes up a lot of people’s salaries and those who don’t own have zero power and no choice, so it’s important to have checks and balances to highlight and prevent abuses.

REPLY - TO ALLEGE 'ZERO POWER AND NO CHOICE' IS AN EXAGGERATION. TENANTS HAVE A LOT OF POWER, THEY HAVE THE POWER OF DECIDING WHERE TO LIVE, WITHHOLDING RENT, WRECKING THE LANDLORDS ASSET AND LITIGATION (AND THE LAW IS MOST OF THE TIME LEANING OVER BACKWARDS TO HELP THEM). THEY ALSO HAVE CHOICE WHERE THEY LIVE...NOT JUST ANYWHERE IN THE UK BUT MOST HAVE THE WHOLE OF EUROPE TO CHOOSE FROM. I CAN SEE THAT SHELTER ARE A LEFT WING/ COMMUNIST AKIN PRESSURE GROUP WHOSE IDEOLOGY IS DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO CREATION OF WEALTH, AND THAT IS FINE. WHAT I OBJECT TO IS THAT THIS IS DONE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF A CHARITY AND PRETENDING TO BE SOMETHING THEY ARE NOT.

“It just does not make any business sense for a landlord to evict a rent paying tenant.”

I’d argue that the rent market has overheated to the extent that landlords know their properties will be snapped up within days of them going online. From (extensive) personal experience if you don’t put down a deposit within a day of a flat being advertised, you won’t get it. Landlords with dubious moral standards know that they can get rid of ‘troublesome’ tenants and not really lose out.

REPLY - AGAIN THIS IS AN EXAGGERATION. EVEN IN LONDON, WHERE I HAVE BEEN A LANDLORD FOR MANY YEARS UNLESS A PROPERTY RENT IS GROSSLY BELOW MARKET RENT IT WILL NOT NORMALLY 'BE SNAPPED UP WITHIN DAYS'. A TENANT WOULD HAVE TO BE EXTREMELY 'TROUBLESOME' FOR A LANDLORD TO RISK MONTHS OF WITHHELD RENT WHILST COURTS SLOWLY PROCESS EVICTION PROCEEDINGS. AND I NOTE THAT YOU DONT PRESUME TO HAVE HAD SUCH DIRECT EXPERIENCE SO THIS SEEMS MERE PROPAGANDA SHELTER STYLE.

“So i stand by my views about shelter being a political organisation and despicable. Shelter is in my opinion an anti-landlord organisation at it route.”

Ironically this is a politically ill-judged statement given the current climate.

REPLY - I DONT UNDERSTAND THIS BIZARE COMMENT...IM STATING MY HONESTLY HELD BELIEFS IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THEY ARE POLITICALLY WELL JUDGED OR NOT! SURELY THAT IS WHAT DISCUSSION FORUMS SHOULD BE ABOUT?

Reply to the comment left by "Joe Bloggs" at "30/03/2014 - 00:48":

I'd be interested to see whether any of your colleagues on this site would care to back you up.

I'll admit it's not usual to read an entire post in capital letters, but I'm sure that level of anger doesn't translate into how you treat your tenants.