To think that Landlords have a bad name.

But you have to pass a credit check to rent too!! I had to with my last three properties and for people that can't pass credit checks, you need a gaurentor who can... doesn't sound too dissimilar to a mortgage to me??

As for not being about to afford a deposit.. you have to pay a deposit to rent too! 😂 in fact for the house I am in now, mh husband and I had to pass credit checks, pay a deposit AND pay 6 months rent upfront which amounted to almost £8k. And this is not unusual.

It really is a case of LLs driving up property prices and charging high rents which put people in an impossible position with little chance to save enough.That's why it is the LL's fault. It doesn't mean tenants are un-creditworthy and poor.

Actually you can’t directly tell someone to fuck off on here because mumsnet delete people for that. They deleted you.

As much as it pains me to agree with anything written in the Guardian, Mr Bano is right. We don’t need to build very much. We need to introduce efficiencies into the existing housing market.

(I suspect Mr Bano and I would disagree abut RTB, but the gist of the wider argument we’d agree on.)

In my opinion, it doesn’t matter what a “nice” landlord you are. Buy-to-let is caused by and causes huge social issues. The overwhelming majority of renters would probably prefer to own, but can’t because the prices of houses are inflated by (amounts other things) people buying them for investments. I’m glad for you that you have that privilege, and I’m glad you’re not trying to exploit your tenants, but you’re the beneficiary of a huge inequality and you can’t seriously expect the have-nots to be kissing your shoes in gratitude for granting them the chance to pay your mortgage for you.

That isn't what happens.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/29/blackstone-rebellion-how-one-country-worlds-biggest-commercial-landlord-denmark

Just like I can rent houses out to help my family. 😊

All very good points. But you’re ignoring the fact that I accept there needs to be a profit motive for private provision. It’s a matter of how and how much.

If controlling your profits is unacceptable to you, let (highly regulated) bigger companies carefully vetted for being fit and proper, with block insurance contracts, long-term contractor deals, big cash holdings, in-house surveyors, specialist lawyers, and so on, take over.

BTW, I’m not suggesting that bigger operators now are particularly ethical; but some muscular regulation would weed out the bad ‘uns and leave a good, responsible and dependable industry.

In Scotland landlords already cannot “not renew” tenancies. Scotland still has the highest rental inflation in the whole of the UK and it does nothing to solve the real issue, which is one of supply and demand. The only way the housing crisis will be solved is when we build more houses. Everything else being discussed here is nothing but noise.

That’s ok.

I couldn’t call people leeches or tell someone online to fuck off.

What would happen when say children grew up and the parents don’t really need a three-bedroom house anymore?

Except that it's more of a "natural process", this probably comes under a similar heading to what happens if someone wins the lottery and doesn't need the house any more because they can well afford to buy their own

Looking at the insistence on absolute security of tenure it may be that some don't feel there's any scenario whereby the house should be handed back for someone else, but whether that's fair or desirable is another matter

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-landlords-surprisingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis

I have no problem with people disagreeing with what I do and discussing it, we all think different things are wrong/immoral, but calling people scum, leeches, cancer etc is pathetic.

Of course they're in business for profit.
I have several friends who rent due to their work schedules. They are on medium term contracts.
I have a relative who is renting with his partner with a view to buying
I'm a landlord and the family in my house are new to the country and i think they have a couple more years before they could apply for a mortgage.
None of these are currently eligible for housing association.
Someone mentioned the right to buy scheme. These houses were bought at vastly reduced prices and many of these have been sold on, making huge profits. This also contributed to the lack of housing.
There's a bigger picture than just the landlords

As a long term renter I think sadly, you're in the minority. IMHE and friends I’ve known landlords behave appallingly, illegally and I’ve only had 2 decent landlords both of whom begrudgingly let me decorate. So I think the reputation is absolutely justified

I think you’ve shown very neatly why private LLs are in the business! Mega-profits or run away.

I don’t believe for a moment that profit from renting has to be as absurdly high as it is now (counting the rent surplus and asset appreciation together) to maintain business interest. It would just move to more professional, long-term private providers and away from Mr and Mrs Smith and their ‘Homes Under the Hammer’ ambitions for big returns.

I’ve said that houses that couldn’t be sold to a very limited category of buyers would be sold to LAs/HAs at a discount. If they have no need for them they can sell on at a higher price.

If there are rent controls and regulation across the board, there would be fewer benefits to renting from an LA. So they could be open to everyone.

Because if there is a cap on the rent then there will be more landlords selling up and it was suggested that these should be sold to the LA . I'm asking where is the LA getting the money from to buy the houses and how would that affect who was eligible to rent them

All good questions. To which there will be good answers.

RTB has had plenty of takers. I don’t see why private RTB wouldn’t. But even if it didn’t things would be better if tenants had strong security of occupation.

As things stand these issues of changing circumstance arise. They’re managed. But I agree we need to work out ever better policies.

I am quite certain that fewer BTL dabblers and ‘nest eggers’ and more properly regulated private or state sector providers would make finding the answers easier though.

Why would they have lots of houses? Licensed private LLs would be making (controlled) profits. Why would they sell en masse?

If you mean that such intervention would provoke a huge initial exodus of BTL LLs - and despite how welcome that would be in some ways - I do accept that re-structuring the market would have to be managed in phases and over time.

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying In this scenario, would the ultimate goal be for tenants to save a deposit so they could buy their own property, or to stay in the secure tenancy longterm?

What would happen when say children grew up and the parents don’t really need a three-bedroom house anymore?

I’m not being goady, genuinely asking how the LA/HA housing would function.

At the literal expense of another family.

Couldn't be me.

So who would be eligible to rent from the LA then? Everyone? Given that they'd have lots of houses?