The scrapping of Section 21: landlord responses

Reply to the comment left by Frederick Morrow-Ahmed at 02/07/2019 - 01:39
Interesting. I always thought the Blair years were the best we LLs had…it would seem it takes some time (more than I thought) for legislation to filter down and take effect.

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 02/07/2019 - 07:40When the 1988 Act was passed there were almost no long term unfurnished properties available to rent because rent controls were keeping the returns too low for the landlord to make any profit or even, in some cases, keep up with maintenance and this, combined with indefinite tenancies meant once tenants secured a rental they stayed for the duration even being able in some cases to pass the tenancy on to a successor who had also been in occupation. Only short-term furnished lets were exempt I think. However, it was not until, in the early 1990s, lenders started offering Buy-to-let mortgages at rates not far above residential rates rather than the much higher commercial rates, that the shortage of properties to rent began to be alleviated to any great degree. Once interest-only BTLs were available the sector burgeoned. It sounds from your comment as if it took until the Blair years, 1997 onwards and almost a decade on from the 1988 Housing Act, for the full effects to be evident. It suited the Labour government to privatise the public rented sector and subsidize it with benefit payments rather than build new council housing or subsidize the growing Housing Association sector to build them.

Reply to the comment left by Yvonne Francis at 01/07/2019 - 11:49
Sorry I still don't understand where your three year tenancy comes from:
"The key features of the new tenancy are:
Tenancies will have no end date.
Statutory terms are mandatory
There will be no ‘no-fault’ possession procedure
Termination of a tenancy can only be effected in accordance with specific provisions made by the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) Act 2016."
Alongside scrapping S21 in in England its widely anticipated that the indefinite tenancy will also be introduced. An initial 6 or 12 month tenancy will not be allowed

Reply to the comment left by Annie Landlord at 02/07/2019 - 09:40
My idea of three year tenancies came from the fact, this is the minimum one can offer. I realise the tenancy, as before will roll on, so you could consider it infinite. However this is not being considered at the moment in England and Wales but abolishing section 21. I cannot see how abolishing section 21 also abolishes fixed terms of 6 or 12 months, where neither landlord or tenant can give notice. I agree this may be in the pipeline at some time, even very soon, but it is always best to consider correctly what is happening now, as it may be damaging to have exaggerated the situation, with what I believe false information.

Reply to the comment left by Thomas More at 01/07/2019 - 11:45
It's all due to typical Politician's flawed logic that causes all the problems. Not landlords. A decision taken by the government in favour of something, is a decision against something else. Cause & effect. They don't think through the domino effect.

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 02/07/2019 - 07:40
Correct. It took time for Mr Blair's perverse Housing Act 2004 to filter down and take effect. Mrs Thatcher's HA 1988 introduced 'Registration' of HMOs, which required some very specific safety features to be incorporated. Perfectly logical and acceptable. Mr Blair's HA 2004 replaced 'Registration' with 'Licensing' and gave Council's unlimited powers to set whatever conditions they wanted, way beyond safety.

Reply to the comment left by Old Mrs Landlord at 02/07/2019 - 09:25
"When the 1988 Act was passed there were almost no long term unfurnished properties available to rent"

There were no furnished or unfurnished accommodation to let! Period. The Rent Act 1974 had abolished the difference between furnished and unfurnished lets and the Rent Act 1977 brought in 'Fair Rents' and 'Secure Tenancies' for both. There was no such thing as 'short term furnished tenancies'. I know, I was a London landlord at that time. Luckily, it didn't apply to me as I had gone abroad to work and was renting my own residential property, for which there was a waiver.

Reply to the comment left by Frederick Morrow-Ahmed at 02/07/2019 - 18:34
Thanks for putting me straight on that - I was writing from memory and as a joint homeowner from the time of my marriage so not personally involved with the rental sector. However I did know some people who were renting at that time and my son had a joint private tenancy with other students in his final year at university, so they must have existed although scarce.

Reply to the comment left by dismayed landlord at 01/07/2019 - 15:14I don’t blame you, I have thought the same myself. However I think it would be helpful if we started looking at statistics, so in case anyone from Shelter or government mandarins are reading this forum, they may just get a measure of the consequences of their unrelenting attack on the PRS. Do you mind telling us how many tenants will be a displaced as a result of your exit from the sector?

Reply to the comment left by Frederick Morrow-Ahmed at 02/07/2019 - 01:39
Yep that's why it will not turn around - all this is happening with a TORY Gov!