No Fault Evictions

[Jacob]

.... the future of landlords in the UK I think it's probably dying out unless something radically is done to protect landlords rights

BTL mortgage policy was probably a big mistake. Easy to forget how recently it was introduced (1996)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_to_let

after all. Is there bloody property and they should have the right to sell it if they want to.

They have that right but they shouldn't have the right to turf out their tenants - this can be a life changing event for many - not simply like swapping between hire cars.
Interestingly - the term "turfed out" originated with the highland clearances when tenants were forced out of their primitive homes and return made impossible by ripping off the turf roofs.

 

[spiritburner]

I don't disagree with what you're saying but I still strongly believe that Landall should have the right to sell their properties. Perhaps option 21 is the wrong way of doing it and landlord's should aim for shorter leases and at the end at least they should have the right to evict the tenant if they want. yes it will have an impact on housing it is bound to if you own a property you should have the right to sell it with or without tenants. I always thought BTL was not a good thing because it was opening up the market to people who had no experience whatsoever in leasing properties rather than leaving rental properties to much larger companies who have years of experience and cater for these situations.

It's just a typical Tory timebomb that's now coming to fruition as the financial squeeze is put on people they need to realise their assets. BTL owners were never really in it for the long haul, it was a quick rich scheme which is backfiring in my opinion

 

[Terry - Somerset]

BBC news just reported that according to Citizen's Advice, nearly half of all private tenants are living in damp, cold or mouldy conditions, many afraid to complain for fear of Section 21 evictions.

Just had a swift look at the CAB report - the source of the data. It is unclear whether the 43% is a statistically good sample of all rented property - a footnote to the report is as follows:

Survey data based on an online survey of 2,000 private renters in England by YouGov Plc for Citizens Advice, fieldwork undertaken between 12- 14 June 2024. Quotas supplied by Citizens Advice were set on age, gender, region and social grade, whilst custom weighting was applied to ethnicity and disability to ensure data were representative of private renters in England.

If CAB have set the quotas, and applied custom weighting, I am far less than convinced that the 43% is any other than a soundbite with limited credibility. It may simply be tweaked data to deliver the answer they wanted!

 

[Jacob]

Just had a swift look at the CAB report - the source of the data. It is unclear whether the 43% is a statistically good sample of all rented property - a footnote to the report is as follows:

Survey data based on an online survey of 2,000 private renters in England by YouGov Plc for Citizens Advice, fieldwork undertaken between 12- 14 June 2024. Quotas supplied by Citizens Advice were set on age, gender, region and social grade, whilst custom weighting was applied to ethnicity and disability to ensure data were representative of private renters in England.

If CAB have set the quotas, and applied custom weighting, I am far less than convinced that the 43% is any other than a soundbite with limited credibility. It may simply be tweaked data to deliver the answer they wanted!

Of course it is not a "sound bite".
It's the result of a particular survey as described, doesn't claim to be a survey of "all rented property", perfectly credible as evidence.
Do you have better evidence or are you just guessing hopefully that it's wrong in some way?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...rivate-rented-homes-citizens-advice-reveals2/

 

[paulrbarnard]

Of course it is not a "sound bite".
It's the result of a particular survey as described, doesn't claim to be a survey of "all rented property", perfectly credible as evidence.
Do you have better evidence or are you just guessing hopefully that it's wrong in some way?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...rivate-rented-homes-citizens-advice-reveals2/

8 out of 10 cats

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Of course it is not a "sound bite".
It's the result of a particular survey as described, doesn't claim to be a survey of "all rented property", perfectly credible as evidence.
Do you have better evidence or are you just guessing hopefully that it's wrong in some way?
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/a...rivate-rented-homes-citizens-advice-reveals2/

Disagree.

Credible should be based upon a statistically representative sample taking account of:

• all renters
• all income groups
• all ages
• all groupings - single, HMO, single parent, family
• employed or unemployed
• etc etc

Without that the results are meaningless as the basis for policy or consequential action. They simply end up being "tuned" to provide the answer desired - they fail to properly inform and may even prompt inappropriate responses.

 

[Jacob]

Disagree.

Credible should be based upon a statistically representative sample taking account of:

• all renters
• all income groups
• all ages
• all groupings - single, HMO, single parent, family
• employed or unemployed
• etc etc

Without that the results are meaningless as the basis for policy or consequential action. They simply end up being "tuned" to provide the answer desired - they fail to properly inform and may even prompt inappropriate responses.

This survey is obviously not intended as the basis of policy. Also it does not seem to have been tuned in a dishonest sort of way.
More than anything it's an alarm call - demanding a closer look at the issue.
Landlords making feeble excuses and hedging all their bets on stupidity of tenants may be disappointed!
I expect a proportion of the problem will be also down to the stupidity of landlords, not to mention cupidity!

 

[Diver Fred]

Regarding regulation I just wanted to make the two general points:

1) That continually increasing regulation tends to place upwards pressure on rents.

2) If the legislation is such that it infringes upon landlords property rights and their ability to control or recover their own property, then this will drive landlords out of the sector and create a greater shortage of rental properties.

So True. After 43 years I'm getting out of the business; I've traded through the years of 'Registered Tenancy' and for the last 20 with AST. The way the law is changing it's actually getting worse than the years of Registered Tenancies.

 

[Ozi]

Jacob I’m with you on second homes. Far too many properties empty for large parts of the year.

I'm only against 2nd homes when there is a housing shortage and local people get priced out of the market destroying communities. I wish the government would cease to talk about them as one and the same, by all means tax second homes as a luxury. This is why we need building firms to be compelled to build not just the houses people require where they are required, I may sound a bit Jacobesk here but why not put a national levy on income tax (to my mind the fairest tax going) to build council houses so that everyone can have a place to live.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I'm only against 2nd homes when there is a housing shortage and local people get priced out of the market destroying communities. I wish the government would cease to talk about them as one and the same, by all means tax second homes as a luxury. This is why we need building firms to be compelled to build not just the houses people require where they are required, I may sound a bit Jacobesk here but why not put a national levy on income tax (to my mind the fairest tax going) to build council houses so that everyone can have a place to live.

How is income tax fair if there are different rates depending on how much you earn

In my opinion it should be simplified to 0% up to the minimum living wage then 40% on everything above that.

 

[Jacob]

How is income tax fair if there are different rates depending on how much you earn

In my opinion it should be simplified to 0% up to the minimum living wage then 40% on everything above that.

I doubt 40% would do it.
We are in a post tory government state of emergency with 45 years of austerity to remedy. Top rates could be raised to 75% or so. If there is any intention to do anything about climate change than 1944 wartime rates of 98% would be justified.
We had "surtax" on excessive wealth.

 

[Tris]

That'll only lead to more creative avoidance schemes, and HMRC is a shadow of it's former self so chasing those schemes is a non starter.

More rights for tenants should be balanced by a more streamlined approach to removing those who break the terms of the tenancy. It is a legal contract after all.

I see the Bibby barge is being decommissioned, perhaps the worst offenders could be rehomed there. Still a roof over their heads.

Having been a tenant with a few private landlords I've never had a problem. Communication has always been key to getting the best out of the situation for both parties.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I doubt 40% would do it.
We are in a post tory government state of emergency with 45 years of austerity to remedy. Top rates could be raised to 75% or so. If there is any intention to do anything about climate change than 1944 wartime rates of 98% would be justified.
We had "surtax" on excessive wealth.

Actually just removing all avoidance schemes and enforcing corporation tax would not need the ‘general’ public to be taxed so hard.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The bots are active. I've just had this on my emails. (for some reason AdBlock doesn't stop them, it used to.)

Council & Housing Association Tenant Compensation Programme.​

Check how much compensation you could claim.*£55.1m paid out to tenants within the last 5 years.​

 

[Phil Pascoe]

That'll only lead to more creative avoidance schemes, and HMRC is a shadow of it's former self so chasing those schemes is a non starter.

The tax code thought to be the world's most efficient is Hong Kong's - 276 pages. The Uk's is 21,000 pages.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I doubt 40% would do it.
We are in a post tory government state of emergency with 45 years of austerity to remedy. Top rates could be raised to 75% or so. If there is any intention to do anything about climate change than 1944 wartime rates of 98% would be justified.
We had "surtax" on excessive wealth.

We also had a brain drain - anyone with real ability emigrated.

And with 98% tax the incentive to work or take risks was close to zero, and the benefits of avoidance (or perish the thought) evasion immensely attractive - hence the rise of the tax accountants and lawyers.

Politics of envy at work, not common sense

 

[Billy_wizz]

When the Labour government has built all the social housing it needs to meet the demands of society and migrants there will be no desire or requirement for privately owned rental housing which means house prices will plummet due to the market being flooded with properties which were once rental accommodation.
Win - win for everyone.
Just one question, when do you think that will happen?

More importantly who will be able to afford these cheap houses after they've paid to build and subsidised the people in the social housing?

 

[Billy_wizz]

Expecting others. Tax and spend. How else? There is no magic money tree but there is a massive surplus of wealth just waiting to be taxed.
Bring it on!
But don't worry it could be many years before our new govt realise that "growth" and "trickle down theory" won't do it.

You do realise that most of the surplus wealth can't be touched by the UK government as it's in other countries?

 

[Jacob]

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-level-on-record-national-audit-office-report

 

[Jacob]

You do realise that most of the surplus wealth can't be touched by the UK government as it's in other countries?

It's not true.
Amazing how many people routinely chip in with dubious arguments in favour of the mega rich hanging on to their ill-gotten gains! Sad really.