Why is the NRLA supporting anti-landlord needs?

Reply to the comment left by AccidentalLandlord2024 at 12/03/2024 - 11:02
Regrettably, Kier Starmer is leading a rudderless ship, and if the likes of Angela Rayner get their way, then the Goves reforms will seem quite tame in comparison to what she wants to do.

It has been speculated that BB is more interested in protecting his student BTL properties, and is prepared to sacrifice Section 21 so he can concentrate on the reforms that he wants. The NRLA conduct surveys to get their member views, but none seems to have been done on what members think on the abolition of S21. I will not be renewing my membership this year, as it's obvious that they have no interest in supporting landlords.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 12/03/2024 - 20:26
See my comment above - link to his “outstanding performance” at the public accounts committee, where he goes on public records saying “my members” referencing scrapping S21. At that point in time the NRLA had in no way polled its members - shocking on every way possible!

"I made this call because I believe it to be in the best long term interest of our members and the wider sector.

Ben Beadle
Chief Executive Officer NRLA"

Ask the members if they believe it was in their best long term interest.

I'd guess over 90% would be very much against it.

You certainly don't speak for the wider sector.

"I made this call"

Not on behalf of landlords. Or tenants for that matter.

24 years in the prs and are in the process of leaving the prs , if you can't get help of a organisation that preports to support landlords what chance have we got.

Ben's 100% correct here. Let Labour run the show on this and it will be a completely different kettle of fish. What is there that's hard to understand about that? Surely it is self-evident?

Reply to the comment left by Adam Lawrence at 13/03/2024 - 11:26
Maybe if tyd RRB falls we would have time to put up a coherent argument with Starmer in regard to Grove's ill thought out proposals. . Particularly by looking at Scotland. The first thing to do is challenge every usage of "no fault evictions" and substitute with "abolishing fixed term tenancies". When I inform people, including renters, what the government really means by abolishing "no fault evictions", their attitude is transformed. We need to point out the special requirements for students, internees, people on short term training and secondments. Most of all we must challenge fool Grove's blithe comments on making it easier to evict anti social tenants including the use in court of "hearsay" evidence.. We will soon have Shelter and Gen Rent screaming about "hearsay evictions" and it could be challenged in the ECHR.. Instead we should propose the Spanish model of the first year of a tenancy being probationary /conditional before automatically becoming a Assured Tenancy. NRLA should be proposing this (even publishing adverts in newspapers abt it) and not supporting Grove's nonsense. The vast majority of people, including tenants, understand that a first year conditional tenancy is reasonable. I suggest all landlords start writing to Starmer now. Our fight has so far been pathetic.

Reply to the comment left by Mike Thomas at 12/03/2024 - 20:17Rayner did not bother to respond to my letter to her. She knows perfectly well that there were not 18k of cases last year of blameless tenants evicted by "Section 21"...She is, as with her RRB council house purchase a self serving popularist.. Starmer appears more reasonable and opposes rent controls.. However, if the RRB passes, rent controls will have to follow. Tenants who have nothing to lose by appealing to the rent accessment office, will overwhelm rent officers by disputing even below inflation rent rises. . Instead, as with Housing Benefit, rent will be determined by size. Such a policy encouraging slum landlords who neglect their properties... I believe we should put up a better fight for commonsense reform of the PRS. All landlords should be writing to newpapers, their MP's, contacting "talk radio"...

I hear you Yellard but where we are is where you always are when people abuse the law. I've spent the best part of a decade telling people to use s8 and MCOL when there are rent arrears rather than using s21, but because it is "least line of resistance" people then use no-fault when there is fault, and in those situations the only thing that ever happens is that the law gets changed. Eventually.

Rayner's rabid chat about abolishing it on day one of a new parliament is unstoppable, there is no way on this earth a Labour sponsored version of this bill is better than a Conservative sponsored one in my view. No chance. Zero.