New partnership wants to know why private landlords won’t rent to councils

It’s not a “A groundbreaking partnership” it is more like a bunch of lefty fools trying to cover up the root cause of the problems. Why would a rational landlord fall for this nonsense.

Reply to the comment left by MartinR at 02/09/2024 - 11:11
A rational landlord wouldn't fall for this nonsense. But a rational lender or insurance company wouldn't either. My insurance doesn't permit me to house asylum seekers. I haven't checked whether my insurance would permit me to house homeless people, although there would be no point because they wouldn't pass the affordability checks. But if I went to my lender and said that I wanted a buy to let mortgage to house homeless people they wouldn't give me one.

If councils want to enter into contracts with private companies to house homeless people then they can do it. Of course, rational private companies will expect all sorts of guarantees from them.

I am really struggling to understand WHY these organisations do not understand all the root causes of the current homelessness and why many on the PRS don’t provide more accommodation.
I recently engaged with a local authority to try to understand their multiple problems re housing.

They sent to me a financial report of what they believed was an attractive package to house a family of 4.
Unfortunately their report was not based onALL THE TRUE costs of buying a property in their area (south east) -which had EPC of D or ideally C, stamp duty plus 3%, and I would be taking all the financial risks of non payment of rent arrears and maintenance.

The rental numbers ( with no negative issues) meant I was about £100 a month out of pocket from day 1, plus the stress etc.or
I could have invested the capital required at the time in cash deposits and receive more money.
it is important all those who want to help the homeless that All the variables are considered and not cut corners in any research they carry out just to make their case and get a conclusion that suits their cause.
One variable they need to be honest about is to ensure whoever takes the financial or long term risks they are fully protected if something goes wrong with the agreement.
I don’t believe the PRS has any statutory requirement to provide housing- at the moment.

Reply to the comment left by JeggNegg at 02/09/2024 - 12:11
I agree. As a landlord you don't have the powers to check that somebody is genuinely eligible for benefits; local and central government do, but you don't. So for any agreement to house homeless people to work, local and central government would need the powers to share tenants' personal data with you and/or indemnify you against tenants who defraud the system by providing false information; and it would need to indemnify you against tenants whose circumstances change but they don't let you know and you don't have the powers to check.

And the council would also need to enter into an agreement with you to keep paying the rent. If the council walked away from the agreement leaving you with the tenant you would still have all the costs of getting rid of the tenant. Maybe years in the courts with Crisis advising the tenant to stay put in your accommodation.

There are additional costs and extra work in housing both benefits tenants and homeless people. Councils already have the powers to enter into contracts with private companies to house both. They are already putting families into temporary accommodation such as B&Bs and hotels. The issue is that they don't want responsibility for these families even though it's their job, and they want to dump their responsibilities onto the PRS, not to come up with a solution to housing homeless people that might work for all parties.

It's not just all the costs that they need to take account of when considering these agreements, it's also all the risks. The reason they need to take account of the risks is because it is only local and central government that have the powers to mitigate them.

This new 'partnership' is a partnership between Crisis and the TDS. Crisis has a history of attacking the PRS but the organisation doesn't house anybody. There is no excuse for the TDS not to understand the risks for landlords in entering into an agreement with a tenant as the TDS has to deal with claims from landlords where tenants have caused more damage than was covered by the landlord's deposit [it's not the tenant's deposit: It's the landlord's deposit unless the tenant leaves the property undamaged].

It's also not just conservative MPs who are or were landlords. Plenty of people in the labour party do it. There isn't an excuse for the government not to understand what's involved in entering into a private landlord/tenant agreement.

Over the last couple of days there has been some coverage of a labour MP who has sacked his agent for not looking after his flats:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crkm15z1r82o

As far as I am concerned, the more landlords there are in parliament the better. At least they can't then reasonably claim ignorance when it comes to policy concerning landlords and tenants.

Civil servants/charity workers etc have little idea of how commerce works. They are innately opposed to `profit` & capitalism despite living in & being fully immersed in our wholly capitalist system. They cannot grasp the fundamentals of business as they don`t really want to accept this fact of life which always makes their suggestions fail at the first step..

We have three typical forms of tenure. There are owner-occupiers, private tenants and social housing tenants.

Most migrants are likely to be tenants. Many will take priority over native U.K. inhabitants when it comes to applying for social housing. Others will need to chase a private rental., often supported by government-appointed contractors such as Serco.

Over the years, government actions on taxation, such as Section 24 and legislation that unreasonably targets the PRS, means that some landlords are selling. Labour threaten more such taxes and legislation. The properties that are sold by landlords could become holiday lets or be sold to owner-occupiers. Some may end up as private rentals but this is increasingly unlikely.

The result is that the ratio of rental properties vs owner-occupied properties is changing. That’s bad news for tenants.

The average tenant’s ability to pay rent is falling because those with the most income are more likely to buy a home of their own. Less ability to pay the rent also means an increased risk for the landlords. It is inevitable that rents will rise to cover the greater risk.

The result is that the poorest amongst us are increasingly struggling to find suitable rental properties.

Lets be honest, if the council, Serco, TDS or whoever places someone in the property you don't know what kind of riff raff you will end up with - and its still the landlords problem to sort out. I personally know of a family being allocated a property by the council next to some friends of mine and they are an absolute nightmare.

I also see that some insurance companies like Direct Line have now really tightened up on their landlord insurance. The vetting procedure is now tighter, photographs of the tenant have to be kept, job references etc.

the reason the council abuse landlords - end of tenancy and you want the property back they cannot find alternative accommodation - you end up evicting
paying for the pleasure - it has taken me 18 months despite giving the council 5 months notice. it is not the landlord's problem that they have no accommodation but we are made to pay the price. well barking & dagenham now have 5 properties less for their homeless tenants as mi am rented in the private sector.

the majority of the homeless familiesj ust go from rented property to another - mess up and are moved out by landlords into another property it is a constant circlle.

NEVER take any tenant who is likely to qualify for Legal Aid. They can make any spurious claim they like with financial impunity. I know to my cost.

A good answer to these questions found here: https://pdpla.com/component/easyblog/private-landlords-and-housing-claimants-homeless-applicants?Itemid=236