Renters Reform Bill enters crucial Committee stage

Landlords must have the right to get their private property back in a reasonably time not the debacle we have now.

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e9596c2a-1966-4c75-aecc-f5155a6733b5

So Generation Rent recommend that Landlords should allow tenants 2 months rent-free "so the tenant can save the deposit for the next property". What about the Deposit the tenants already paid to the current Landlord? Do GR expect Landlords will not return such Deposits from their tenants because of the poor state of the property and the repairs needed after they leave? GR also recommend 4 months notice before eviction. But what if the eviction is due to non-payment of rent, should the Landlord accept 2/4 further months of non-payment of rent? Either way, how will the Landlord pay the mortgage on the property if no rent is received? Being a Landlord is running a business not a charity. Perhaps GR or Shelter could pay the tenant's rent instead?

Reply to the comment left by Peter G at 14/11/2023 - 19:45
Having listened to generation rent and others I wonder what planet they all live on.
I think most of us will probably end up selling if they get their way because we would be running charities.

Two months free could be accommodated. It’d mean higher rents, of course.

Reply to the comment left by Peter G at 14/11/2023 - 19:45
Splendid idea, they should run a rent guarantee scheme for their members.

It is hard to believe that this bill has reached the floor of the house in this present state given that many members claim to be landlords and should understand the issues better. It must be that they have agents looking after their properties.
The second time I took a contract to work abroad, in 1970, my Building Society manager urged my to buy a property before I left and rent it out in (retrospect, they must have know they were going to loosen the rules so that everyone could bid hgher for a house , all to the bankers benefit). I argued that I couldn't possibly do that, as I would be lucky to get the property back before my unborn chlldren went to school. At that tme, my wife's uncle had a very fine establishment job, but was still living in a 5 bed house in Harrow on the Hill at the controlled rent from 1938!
The introduction of the AST and Section 21 changed all that, and meant that the absolute right to posession of property was assured, so I took the risk, bought the decayng block of fkats I lived in on a 90% mortgage and have spent 20 odd years restoring and improving it and several other wrecks. In a period amounting to over 250 tenant have used S21 3 times, twice going to court, to persuade anti-social tenants, who were making life hell for the others, to move on.
The courts are incompetent and inefficientEach case cost well over a years rent, let alone the opportunity costs involved.

One problem not addresssed by this or any previous legislation is that there are at least four streams of tenants, each of which has different needs:
1: Temporary but fixed term (students, people working on long contracts away from home) 6-12-18 months
2: new-starts - people who have left home, are finding their feet but don't want to buy or get a mortgage yet, but want to live locally until they move on: 18months to 3 years
3: Families, who want stability to live in a community, send kids to school etc. 5-15 years.
Mature singletons: don't want the bother of maintenance, don't want a mortgage: indefinite.
4: A few years ago Mark Alexander suggested a rolling 3 year lease, wth substantial security afforded to good tenants; this form of tenancy needs to be considered for families.

We have or have had 1,2 and 4. Type 3 only when type 1 suddenlly acquired ex girl-friends children and dogs and had to be persuaded to move out of a one bed flat. We specalse in 1 and 2 bed flats, in wholly owned buildings.

If this legislation goes through in its present form, with one rule fits all, no fixed term to ensure I can recover the turnover costs, no ablity to recover from lettng in a bad tenant, my property will in all effect no longer be mine. So I feel I wll have to sell before Ms Rayner tells me it is all hers.

And why cannot the government allow us to back date our improvements to the date whenever they announce we will have to be an E or a C. And will that be it? Having insulated to get to a Pavartti high C, I do not want to be told only a few years later to take off all the palsterwork, mouldings, fittings and decoration to be told I've got to get to an A or A*, or be fined £15000 or go to gaol. And this from a Conservative! government! What is the end-point?
It's hypcocritical to dither, let us do the work, and doubtless tell us we can only claim for work done after 1st January 2028!

Never has (my) distrust and dissatisfaction with government and politicians been greater.

And, for the most part, I have really enjoyed being a Landlord and doing my best to provide decent accommodation, and get the appreciation of our tenants. Time to move on.

Except I have a sneaking conspiracy worm n my brain that the whole S24 division between private and corporate landlords was to shake out the private landlords and let the fruit fall into the hands of the hedge funds and the like, the 'friends' of the government.

Renters beware!
Especially of people offering you other people's property.