Polly Neate – “It’s appalling that every seven minutes another private renter is slapped with a no-fault eviction notice”

Reply to the comment left by ImpartialObserver at 27/04/2022 - 17:46
I have tried to sell with tenants in situ. It limits the market even more as most landlords want vacant possession as most mortgage companies will not lend with tenants in situ. It not a matter of making money, its a matter of ensuring I can sell without losing more money. In the end the tenants left without me giving notice due to the uncertainty of what the new landlord would be like,

Reply to the comment left by ImpartialObserver at 27/04/2022 - 17:46Reply to Impartial Observer who doesn't know why you might want to sell a property vacant.
Say you had a desirable family home worth £500k. You decide to let the place for 2 years, discuss that with the tenants and they move in on that basis, 2 years go by and now you want to sell. However the tenants now don't want to leave. Should you s21 and get back your £500k house to sell to the whole market for say £500k or to a restricted investor only market for about £450k? (I am reckoning probably at least a 10% hit - I actually bought a £200k house for £170k a few years back because the tenants wouldn't leave.)
So why would the house be worth less? Let's do a car analogy: You have a highly desirable £20k classic car that you want to sell. There are a couple of comparable classics out there for the same price. Imagine trying to sell it when the buyer calls you and you say the following:-
"It's a really good car but actually I lent it to my mate Dave a year ago. He really wanted and needed it and agreed to pay me £800 for the year. He did say he would give it back to me after the year but unfortunately he has decided now that he won't and is going to hold on to it. It's fine though, you can buy it but Dave will keep hold of it and pay you the £800 a year instead. All you will have to do it tax it, mot it and generally maintain it for him and unfortunately you won't actually be able to use the car. I can assure you that Dave is a nice guy though. Would you like to do an online viewing and hopefully buy it? "
In summary, selling with a tenant in situ might be fine for a low end homogenous studio/1 bed typical for your standard investor, but probably a real hit on a desirable family home.

We're all wasting our time commenting on this issue on this particular forum. Its only being read by like-minded people who are painfully aware of the landlord witch-hunting of recent years and the blatant manipulation of statistics by ill-informed (at best) or horribly biased journalists.

Reply to the comment left by Joe Armstrong at 28/04/2022 - 20:00
How do you know who is reading the comments?

Wait till they see even less houses to rent for the Benefit tenants if/once Section 21 is banned. Another I told u so moment.

Appalling
Slapped
Grossly unfair
Forgotten
Limbo
Whim
Scrambling
Up sticks
Bills skyrocketing
Kick in the teeth

She's good with attack & sympathy words, I'll give her that. However she knows NOTHING of trying to keep Benefit tenants in their homes with acceptable rents. She only knows how to advise tenants to stay in houses that Landlord wants back even if tenant not paying & wrecking house. Which then takes another Landlord out of housing her people once he gets his house back.

I just gone though a section 21 on my last house. Tenant seemed to be an idea tenant. But because of Shelters lobbying government and M Gove standing up in the commons stating he plans to remove section 21 , I decided that my 25 years of a landlord had to end .
It's was my money invested on those properties not Shelters.
My letting agent has lost over 30% of his landlords in last 2 years.
So people and charities who get involved with housing your words have conscientious.
You are the reason why there is a section 21 every 7 seconds . Landlords are leaving.
So well done

This excercise in emotive and slanted language is based on a Yougov survey of only 1,029 tenants of whom 2% had received a Section 21 in the past three years. Even in sizeable samples 2% is not statistically significant so this data is pretty much meaningless. There does not appear to have been any investigation into how many of these 2% were actually issued to faultless tenants.

As in so many spheres, I think we need to correct the terminology employed; from the gov.uk website:

"Section 21 notice of seeking possession

You can use a Section 21 notice to evict your tenants either:

after a fixed term tenancy ends - if there’s a written contract
during a tenancy with no fixed end date - known as a ‘periodic’ tenancy"

As has become commonplace with even government sources, the TRUE definition of something has been obfuscated with a catchy soundbite to mean something else.

The second line of the above quote uses the politically advantageous meaning of "eviction notice" which an S21 is not, the only thing that a S21 notice is does is to INFORM the tenant that the end of the mutually agreed tenancy period is coming to an end and that repossession may be sought by legal means in the event of their not returning vacant possession which is THEIR contractural obligation, we should not fall into the trap of being painted as villains and should correct those who do so at every opportunity, this battle may be lost but the war will continue.

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 27/04/2022 - 14:31
I hope you don't mind that I pinched this for a comment on Shelter's Facebook page.

Reply to the comment left by Joe Armstrong at 28/04/2022 - 20:00
I am not the only landlord who does visit Shelter's Facebook page to put calm and sensible explanations. I do also sometimes try to help tenants who are having difficulties. Shelter asked me to be one of the landlords that I work with, but I said that I was too busy for this (didn't add that I don't trust them but....) Maybe more landlords could do join the discussions?