0:04 AM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago 50
Text Size
A Conservative commentator says that the Renters (Reform) Bill can best be described as a ‘wholesale and fundamental invasion’ into the principle of private property.
Tim Briggs goes on to say that the Bill ‘will demonise landlords – and bankrupt councils’.
Writing on Conservative Woman, he says that the Bill ‘insinuates that all tenants are victims, and all landlords are villains’.
He adds: “It forces the cold, dead hand of the State into the mostly harmonious mutual dependency of landlords and their 4.6 million tenants, infantilising the parties into dumb, bad-faith spectators in their own private relationship.”
He goes on to praise a group of Tory MPs as a ‘white knights’ who are trying rebalance ‘the relationship between oppressor landlords and oppressed tenants’.
Mr Briggs adds: “Astonishing that only one landlord representative was asked to give evidence to the Bill’s scrutiny committee, while handfuls of left-wing tenant groups were invited.
“In National Residential Landlord Association (NRLA) webinars and podcasts before Christmas, I criticised the Bill as one of the worst pieces of housing legislation, with no redeeming features.
“Landlords seeking to increase rent will require government involvement. Landlords must accept tenants with pets in any property.”
Mr Briggs points out that the abolition of Section 21 ‘no-fault’ evictions will hurt the supply of rented homes since ‘landlords cannot get back their properties without the tenant agreeing to leave’.
He says: “What is difficult to understand is that the Government must know that this Renters (Reform) Bill is the disease of which it purports to be the cure because, like all bad law, it makes a bad situation for tenants worse.
“The Government hints that it knows this, yet it still wants to proceed, apparently having abandoned making good law that benefits everyone for the appearance of helping different interest groups.”
He also raises issues with the government believing that a landlord’s property belongs to a tenant – and ignoring the rule of law when doing so.
Mr Briggs says the Bill should be scrapped and writes: “Landlords are leaving the private rented sector in droves.
“If Section 21 notices are abolished, I do not think it is controversial for me to suggest that more landlords will sell up, increasing rents for the rented properties left behind. “Meanwhile left-wing politicians tout the idea of rent levels controlled by politicians, which has never worked anywhere in the world, would make a bad situation worse, and always has to be abandoned.
“This is why abolishing Section 21 Notices will also bankrupt local authorities.
“For the last decade, there are a number of exponential costs that local authorities have been struggling to get under control.
“If Section 21 Notices are abolished, landlords have another option – to lease a property to a company that allows the property to be used for temporary accommodation by the council.”
And that, he says, will see councils having to rent properties at a higher cost to house homeless families because there are no homes to rent – leading to a huge bill for taxpayers.
Caley McKernan
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up11:43 AM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 14/03/2024 - 04:42
Problem has been the third way. For example Shelter and homeless charities .Get funding from the government and dictate to the councils response to homelessness. Council are trained by the very same people who challenge their decisions?
The same probably for relationship with renters charities . but, both then pally up and the people they are suppose to help are not that interesting any more. For the charity it is being part of the establishment.
Charities are the developers- housing associations -L and Q, Peabody, etc all started out as philanthropic ventures. So, Private rented has been captured and I believe it is right to presume the plan is for banks/corporations/private equity to have all the land and assets they can get.
Just like academies or e-services in place of NHS.
Cider Drinker
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up11:51 AM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Robert at 14/03/2024 - 10:52
If the objective is to drive out landlords so that FTBers can buy property, this will essentially lead to only the poorest of tenants and migrants chasing PRS and social housing properties.
So, the budget was racist.
Robert
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up11:52 AM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
I just saw Ranjan Bhattacharyas video in this email on the Budget and he seems to agree with me that there is a deliberate policy to get rid of small landlords in favour of corporate investors. "Go big or go home".
I just think we landlords have been very slow on the uptake here, believing that they needed us.
Golfman
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:01 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
This has always puzzled me. We are deliberately making life worse for the renters in the long run. ECONOMICALLY daft.
POLITICALLY not sure anyone will support Tories purely from this - I’m just perplexed why they sequentially determine to alienate traditionally conservative voters.
But not much makes any sense anymore in broken Britain. Policies are driven by lefties spending other people’s money. Not sure who or what can change this seemingly irreversible course.
Ps I am a member of the NRLA and am disgusted by the comments and approach its leader takes towards this bill. But I’ve stopped trying to rationalise so many things….time to give up and leave the government to it. (pps 20% of working age adults seem to have already done just that at our collective cost…).
Broken contract of how social democracy was ever supposed to work. Our property rights are being taken away - make no bones about it,
Caley McKernan
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:15 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Robert at 14/03/2024 - 11:52
feudalism
Bernard Mealing
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:20 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to Beaver
Have started that already I have no mortgages and I Rent to rent to a guy and he rents ( Sort of) to the council. It's a 3 years FRI. Lease
Beaver
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:29 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Robert at 14/03/2024 - 11:52
There are more than 2.8 million unincorporated private landlords in the UK. Driving them out would have an enormous upward impact on rents.
Bobby Ridgewell
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up12:34 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 14/03/2024 - 04:42
Think you will find landlords live this system. Council renting from them. Very lucrative.
A while back I met a guy form South Africa that was delighted the council pay up to a particular some to rent a property regardless of condition. So he was going around buying up property's in order to glean from this.
Pity this country places everything on housing using homes a bank .
Every single person should have home. And it's time the social housing stepped up. Nottinghill housing trust was started by ordinary people who transformed derelict homes to house people. It was really brilliant. Now it's been bought by genesis ( what a name) and they are the worst social housing although they advertise themselves to manage for other landlords. Majority of people have damp and mice plus disgusting conditions to live . And guess what the company just ignores the tenants till it is taken to court. People have lives to live why do they have to use their time trying to live in reasonable healthy comfort.
Robert
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:43 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 14/03/2024 - 12:29I agree they won't do it all at once, obviously but over a period of a few years while the corporate/large scale organisations gradually move in and bridge the gap. I think we are in a phasing out period in which PRS landlords are incentivised to leave or disincentivised to stay.
I think the RRB is intended to make it less attractive for small landlords who cannot take this level of risk but that it will work for corporate investors who may be given different rules anyway.
I also think there may be some part of the PRS left where the landlords have no mortgage and are incorporated but it will be a struggle to compete with the big corporates.
I think all of this would have happened regardless of what the NRLA did or didn't do. I think they were just as niave as we were about what was really happening and it was only with this most recent Budget that the government put their cards on the table.
Clint
Become a Member
If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!
Sign Up13:55 PM, 14th March 2024, About 8 months ago
Reply to the comment left by Golfman at 14/03/2024 - 12:01
It is a matter of choosing between two nonsensical parties. Labour have pledged to ban section 21 on the first day of coming into the government if they win the elections.
At least one conservative politician Jacob Rees-Mogg has attempted to knock some sense into the others in the conservative party.