To think that Landlords have a bad name.

But firstly I don't think LL would be forced to sell under this policy (did read the full thread but may have forgotten about some bits due to going out for icecream) - just that if they want to sell they'd only be able to sell to the tenant or other landlords, or an LA/HA if all else fails. This is already how some shared ownership works - you are restricted in who you can sell to.

Secondly, it wouldn't be landlords like now - people like you, or a lot of the other landlords on the thread. It would be registered landlord companies who would be making decisions about individual properties as part of a larger company, rather than based on a small number of properties they are keeping for their pension/children. It's a different kind of decision.

Thirdly, this wouldn't be theft. It would be a purchase.

I don't have hate for landlords. Ive chosen to rent. One day when I own my own place and if I have enough money to buy an investment property I might xo sider buying one (if you can't beat them, join 'em).

But claiming it is not for profit is ridiculous. If the rest doesn't cover all expenses. It is still for profit. Unless you genuinely plan to donate the house to charity or something. It is an investment you're hoping to profit. The new kitchen isn't for the tenant. It is to add value to the house.

Ah, the slippery slope.

Yes, I would object to that for me and anyone else. But there’s no coherent reason for the action. There’s every coherent reason to re-shape housing provision by private LLs.

I’m not suggesting your family home comes into this. Just the other properties you’d own for profit were you to enter into the highly regulated sector I’m proposing. There’d be a good long run in for you to make your mind up.

Could we all bear in mind the total and utter disaster the Green policy here in Scotland of rent freezes? Scotland has rents increasing at a higher rate than anywhere else in the western world and in the past year alone 22,000 properties have been removed from the rental market.

Scotland, trying out shite socialist policies for the rest of the UK.

I’m making the point that the purchase, use and disposal of real property routinely attracts restrictions.

What I advocate is really just an extension of CPOs but would no doubt be fought against in the courts. But I would expect a government to win, and I believe it would be a very popular policy.

If the courts did find against such a policy it would still be possible to introduce incentives to sell at a discount to eligible buyers, through tax penalties. That would be unchallengeable.

At this point we dearly need some 'market interference'.

Late stage capitalism is collapsing.

There are 270 houses in a 5 mile radius from me for sale up to 150k
The cheapest is 60k
The oldest listing was reduced June 2022.
I'm in the North West.
Landlords are not stopping anyone buying these houses

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying I take it you’re also agreeable to the government compulsory purchasing your 3 bed house once your children leave home? After all, it’s for the greater good, a forward thinking social policy to free up family housing stock for those in their 30s. The government says a one bed flat will be all you need. Honestly, where does this end. You need to take a long, hard look at your policies of market interference.

You need to be in the game to understand ! Not just be an MN spectator 😂

I’m generally a free marketeer, not an absolutist.

If somebody wanted to build a breaker’s yard or a tanning factory or a sewage treatment plant next to one of your rental properties I’d imagine you’d miraculously become interested in public and community interest restrictions too.

Interesting language, says a lot about how you consider others.

I am neither landlord nor tenant, so able to be much more biased than you. I have no skin in this game.

Lol ! MN is the stinking pit of bad tenants who hate and mistreat landlords properties! 😂

Im a landlord. Ive got a few properties. Ive made lots of money from my good well kept properties with good decent tenants 👍🏼

Do I care what those MN renters think ? .... big no - as they are not my likely tenants

Not convincing. Sorry.

With respect, that’s sophistry
With respect, you clearly have no idea what you are writing about!

Er, yes. They’re restrictions in the public interest. But are they ‘communist’?

The LL would be obliged to do so. By law. In the public interest.

Those rules apply to everyone not just LL's.

No, I said quite the opposite! Have a look.

You can't give someone a right to buy with discount if the seller doesn't want to sell to the tenant. The house belongs to the LL not the government or council.

You can’t build what you like on land you own, and plenty of land is prohibited from development altogether. Is that communist control?

I’ve been as clear as I can about this. Housing is not like other markets.

I’m a free marketeer, but not in a market that is so subject to constraints, doesn’t respond as others do and is so critical to human welfare.

Selling your only house is just your concern. Acquiring multiple properties for gain is a different matter.

LAs deal in public funds, not personal profit.

It would be governing like in a communist country. If you want to live in a country like Russia you can do so. The UK is a capitalist country, whether you like it or not. Even Corbyn didn't go as far as to suggest theft of property.