Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
I guess housing associations and charities, and the state.
No Fault Evictions
- Thread starter Ozi
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
"politics of envy" - a popular but mindless slogan from the right.It's about the politics of necessity.
https://www.theguardian.com/society...-level-on-record-national-audit-office-report
monster
Established Member
It's publication coincides rather nicely with the new government and is clearly aimed as a pressure piece as Labour announce their Renters Rights Bill.
monster
Established Member
Yes they should, its their property.
It would also be interesting to see the questions put forward. In a previous life I have seen many questionnaires with for example
1) have you in the last 3 years had instance of mould - answer yes or no
2) was the mould remedied - answer yes or no
3) has there been an occurrence since remediation - answer yes or no
If 50% had answered yes to question 1 and that 50% had answered yes to question 2, the data can say that 50% of the respondents claimed to have a problem with mould in the last 3 years. Statistically correct with respondents, but it does not give a true reflection of how things are now.
If 50% had answered yes to both 1 and 2 and 25% yes to question 3 the outcomes are vastly different but it is how the data is portrayed.
It is very much like a journalist reporting on a speech, one point can make one story but if you put the whole speech together you will often find something completely different!
It would also be interesting to see the questions put forward. In a previous life I have seen many questionnaires with for example
1) have you in the last 3 years had instance of mould - answer yes or no
2) was the mould remedied - answer yes or no
3) has there been an occurrence since remediation - answer yes or no
If 50% had answered yes to question 1 and that 50% had answered yes to question 2, the data can say that 50% of the respondents claimed to have a problem with mould in the last 3 years. Statistically correct with respondents, but it does not give a true reflection of how things are now.
If 50% had answered yes to both 1 and 2 and 25% yes to question 3 the outcomes are vastly different but it is how the data is portrayed.
It is very much like a journalist reporting on a speech, one point can make one story but if you put the whole speech together you will often find something completely different!
Diver Fred
Established Member
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.
Isn't it time the country (& the world) looked at things differently. TPTB keep on about a housing crisis but isn't it a population crisis? Time to stop paying child allowance after the second birth and Tax big families (4 plus kids). A declining birth rate would solve that easily and stop stressing the planet with the ever increasing numbers of humans who not only need a house/home but also more mouths to feed so we need agricultural land and the they amount of waste they cause.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
The child benefit isn't paid now for the third child or more, Labour is to reverse this. It suits them to do so as it buys votes from the underclass and the R.o.P. both of whom tend to have more children.
On a world scale it's the African Countries that are to cause the main problems by 2100- many of the their populations will escalate dramatically and they haven't the food or the water, so will attempt to get to Europe and the U.S. China's is expected to nearly halve.
.............................
From today's Telegraph -
Seven Labour MPs have had the whip removed for rebelling against Sir Keir Starmer over the two-child benefit cap.
The rebels, including John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor, have had the whip suspended for at least six months, The Telegraph understands.
They had voted for an amendment to the King’s Speech tabled by the Scottish National Party calling on the Government to “immediately abolish” the cap.
The cap was introduced in 2017 and prevents parents from claiming child tax credit or universal credit for their third and any subsequent children.
On a world scale it's the African Countries that are to cause the main problems by 2100- many of the their populations will escalate dramatically and they haven't the food or the water, so will attempt to get to Europe and the U.S. China's is expected to nearly halve.
.............................
From today's Telegraph -
Seven Labour MPs have had the whip removed for rebelling against Sir Keir Starmer over the two-child benefit cap.
The rebels, including John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor, have had the whip suspended for at least six months, The Telegraph understands.
They had voted for an amendment to the King’s Speech tabled by the Scottish National Party calling on the Government to “immediately abolish” the cap.
The cap was introduced in 2017 and prevents parents from claiming child tax credit or universal credit for their third and any subsequent children.
Keith Cocker
Established Member
And it’s someone’s home too. Shouldn’t they have rights too and shouldn’t government/local authorities help them with those rights.
Keith Cocker
Established Member
That’s a childish fallacy. I personally only own one property. It’s mine to do with as I wish. The moment I acquire another one and let it out I acquire certain moral as well as legal responsibilities. I can’t just do what I want with it now as another person now has moral and legal right to take into account. That’s how civilised societies and decent people operate.
Completely agree but the tenant also has an obligation and all protections for landlords when the tenant does not keep their end of the contract are being eroded.
Having been a landlord for 35 years I have quite considerable experience with damp and mould in properties and the root causes of the problem
In 100% of the cases it is the tenant at fault with the way they live, i.e. drying their washing in the flat and never ventilating the property (window vents closed)
All my flats are relatively modern 25-35 years, most have ECH 80% and 20% GCH, all the flats with GCH there is never a problem with damp and mould as the boiler acts as a ventilator of the main body of the flat.
So my policy over the years has been
1. to provide a washer drier in each flat at twice the price of a standard washing machine
Some tenant would not use the dry cycle due to the extra cost on the electric bill and continue to dry their wet washing in the flat because they think it's "free" drying.
2. to install positive ventilation units (PVU) at around £1000 per flat
PVUs made a massive difference whereby the ventilation of the flat was automatic, but some tenants taped over the air inlet duct of the PVU to stop the cold air entering the flat in the depths of winter causing them to fail catastrophically, i.e. burnt out. These PVUs all had heater elements so no excuse for that and they're not cheap at over £500 each.
However most of my tenants are receptive to advice regarding mould and damp, I am only highlighting the 20% who continue to ignore the advice given.
In 100% of the cases it is the tenant at fault with the way they live, i.e. drying their washing in the flat and never ventilating the property (window vents closed)
All my flats are relatively modern 25-35 years, most have ECH 80% and 20% GCH, all the flats with GCH there is never a problem with damp and mould as the boiler acts as a ventilator of the main body of the flat.
So my policy over the years has been
1. to provide a washer drier in each flat at twice the price of a standard washing machine
Some tenant would not use the dry cycle due to the extra cost on the electric bill and continue to dry their wet washing in the flat because they think it's "free" drying.
2. to install positive ventilation units (PVU) at around £1000 per flat
PVUs made a massive difference whereby the ventilation of the flat was automatic, but some tenants taped over the air inlet duct of the PVU to stop the cold air entering the flat in the depths of winter causing them to fail catastrophically, i.e. burnt out. These PVUs all had heater elements so no excuse for that and they're not cheap at over £500 each.
However most of my tenants are receptive to advice regarding mould and damp, I am only highlighting the 20% who continue to ignore the advice given.
Agent_zed
Established Member
Good and bad. If it turns out the tenant has been claiming rent they didn't qualify for the council just takes the money back off the landlord. The landlord then has to try and get the money off the tenant which is basically impossible.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
You have to ask yourself then; how is it that millions of households (including mine) have air dried their clothes for generations with no damp and mould problem, no tumble driers, no PVUs, no need of advice from a landlord?
The answer is surely that your flats are badly designed, inadequate. not fit for purpose.
Not your tenants' fault.
Not your fault either unless you designed them, but now your problem as the owner, looking for a profit.
PS obvious solution would be for you to provide the PVUs, extra heating bills and running costs FOC.
Last edited:
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
All you are saying is that there would be no housing crisis if there were no people in need of housing.
This is obviously true, but not at all helpful!
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
But it's also somebody's home. Evict them by all means as long as they are not made homeless, or forced into poorer housing, or had all their essential connections with the area and neighbourhood broken (access to work, school, friends, family etc etc).
Last edited:
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
I think you would find that it's one of many publications over the years, saying similar things.
https://www.google.com/search?q=rep...E2NDc1ajBqNKgCALACAQ&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Last edited:
Diver Fred
Established Member
As I said in another posting I'm getting out of the business.
When I first told the Tennant he was visibly upset; he was also less than happy when I handed over the S.20 notice.
3 weeks later he couldn't be happier and is looking forward to moving out. Why, not because he has a horrible, rotten LandLord (me) who has looked after him but because on reflection it allows, forces him to move to a local town close to his doctors, the shops and the hospital that he has to visit 2 or 3 times a week. Had he not been given the S.20 he wouldn't have considered the move. The district Council are very supportive of the move as well.
Terry - Somerset
Established Member
Assume most of us are capable of drying our clothes without creating a damp problem, yet tenants inhabiting fundamentally the same type of properties do create damp problems.
It must unambiguously be the case that the damp is a consequence of tenant ignorance or deliberate stupidity, not the property design.
Arguably the tenants should be charged for their wanton destruction of that which works entirely effectively for everyone else.
