To think we should ban private renting?

What a fantastic way of kicking even more ambition out of Britain.

Especially as private rented is only 20% of the housing stock.

There is not enough social housing as it is. The HA don't have the money to buy more houses or land to build upon. If they did, their housing stock would have increased already to meet the demand. If you do away with private let's, there will be an exacerbated homelessness crisis, again, because there's not enough social housing to go around. Don't blame the private landlords (and no I'm not one) - blame the state for their right to buy campaigns in the 1980s where housing stock was sold off cheaply so everyone could have the opportunity to own their own home without any thought being put in to the sustainability of the rental market thereafter.

Also consider students - no private let's, no students at university as the majority of halls of residence are now provided by private landlords.

Housing associations are predominantly not for profit organisations- not all private companies are for-profit. The reason the rents are so affordable is that the houses they have were mainly bought or built decades ago at much lower prices than today. The reason they haven’t expanded their stock as much as needed is because they can’t afford to buy or build at current construction or purchase prices. Even if compulsory purchase at purchase price was allowed ( which it wouldn’t be as would set disastrous precedent for uk investment) the purchase prices would still be a lot higher than 30 years ago as average house will have changed hands much more recently than that. Essentially your plan doesn’t work because based on house valuations the HA can’t buy the houses and rent them out at current social housing rents without losing tonnes of money. If they could they’d be doing it already.

what about those who have moved in with a partner and are rental their house at, but keeping it for security incase things don't work out?

They only own one property.

So the rental I have was a derelict. I brought it at auction. But I'd only get what I paid for it? I don't make any money on it as the service charge is high to cover major roof works (it's a flat).

what about those who have moved in with a partner and are rental their house at, but keeping it for security incase things don't work out?

there are plenty of renters who don't need cheaper rents. People who relocate short term for work, who keep their house as they know they'll be back in it after 2 yrs on contract elsewhere etc.

Housing Associations are not for profit. About 1% of affordable housing is under FPRPs.

This exactly. I've had the same discussion recently with friends about this. Reduced rents would bring the housing benefit bill right down too.

Agreed! As someone who lived in a flat owned/run by a housing association for over 10 years, I can tell you that they are not the solution! Lack of transparency regarding costs, inefficient (suspected nepotism) selection of suppliers, cladding remediation work that has gone on for over 5 years, shoddy building in the first place, not fit for purpose, extortionate service charges, the lift breaks at least once a week, four hour waits to get through to their phone line…..give me a private landlord anyday!

I think you should investigate the Singapore housing model. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_and_Development_Board. 80% of the population live in HDB property. And you can use your taxes to pay for one (CPF, equivalent of NI). Only citizens or permanent residents can apply and if I recall correctly you have to be married or over a certain age. You apply for a property based on the size of your family. https://www.hdb.gov.sg/homepage

Probably because they're stuck in an expensive rental with a bad Ll.
It must be tough. Especially in the SE.
However that area has always been expensive. We moved to Buckinghamshire in 1985 and sold a 4 bed detached in Lincolnshire, we doubled our mortgage to buy a tiny 3 bed semi in Bucks.

Why is a privately owned housing association better than a private landlord? If they're a profit making company they will still charge market rent.

There’s a good argument for allowing people control over their property and out of the whim of councils. Quite a few left-wing voices argue for that.

I think the problem is really property accumulation for personal profit rather than private ownership of one’s own home.

Homes Under the Hammer is a good place to find the culprits.

Then there wouldn’t be a rental market?! It’s no different to any other business. I can never understand why people see it wrong to make a profit from housing but not gas/ electric/ supermarkets etc who all provide essentials too.

Absolutely.
Thatcher has a lot to answer for.

Most of the pp's on here if they have a private pension will be investing in large scale private rentals via the London stock exchange.

Why not say what you think. Individuals must not be allowed to use housing as a business opportunity. Anyone with that mindset should be voting for socialism.
Ll's are not to blame for high rent, it's market driven. Flood the market with homes and rent will fall, basic economics. Of course some Ll's are doing very nicely, especially the Duke of Westminster.

The government have never built enough housing and have encouraged anyone who is willing to become Ll's. Having let our home briefly whilst abroad I can honestly say never again. Good Ll's will only lose out. All the new rules have done is left the market with less housing and more bad Ll's as they never follow the rules anyway.

This. It should never be sold off, especially under market value, because who picks up the tab/ makes up the difference? The taxpayer of course!

Where as I think housing associations should not exist and rent should be a free market. Why should the state subsidise housing and let it and sell it below market value? Your example shows exactly why this wouldn’t work because your not paying enough to cover costs where as your brother is.

OP, what about temporary renters? Young people living in London or Manc don't want a lifetime tenancy, they just want to experience London for a few years.

I don’t agree that all private rental should be banned but I do think the right to buy social housing shoukd be permanently abolished.

all social housing to stay as social housing

I assume someone has to buy all the privately rented property so they can continue to be rented? Or will the landlord just sell and the property is no longer in the rental market? The first is going to be hugely expensive and the second will mean far fewer properties for rent. And if it does create more subsidised housing where will the money come from for that, or will properties be rented at a market rate? Will it also include people renting a room to make ends meet? And HMOs catering for itinerant workers and students, etc?

Like hell i want to move into a low social economic area of rental hokes run by a goverment here or the Uk
Duno about Uk but Nz I would be wondering if the car was in the drive every morning
The druggies, bums and low lives cant rent in a private rental is one advantage of private.
No stupid idea and are the house healthy and decent...probably not from what i read on here.
Nz has had a batch of goverment owned and built 2 yr old new social housing area having most of thr heating needs replaced...the neighbours are feral and near a know drug unemployed street...fark off no way.

So basically you are saying that everyone will be able to rent the house they want, where they want, it will just be much cheaper.

So what will stop everyone from deciding to rent a mansion with a swimming pool in Notting Hill? And given you won't have as many as you will need, how will you choose among potential renters?

The price mechanism does serve a purpose. The reason it is currently distorted is that there has not been enough building to keep up with demand, which has driven up prices so that housing has been one of the safest places to park your money for retirement. If new houses kept being built then house prices would be relatively stable and it wouldn't be worth the hassle and maintenance cost to be a landlord for most people.

Housing associations are not for profit. Their schemes like part buy part rent subsidise low rates for rentals. They get hmg money for capital build spend.
Don't get me wrong I would love to have a council or HA flat but they're unaffordable to be roles out..
Interestingly my leftie mate was saything the other day to scrap all social housing as its distributon is so unfair with so many good earners in there.

In which case they're private renting, just on a large scale.

I doubt that what you propose would work. OP. But I agree that we have to do something effective about home ownership in the longer term.

One of the most dismaying things I ever see on here is posters talking about their buy-to-lets as ‘nest eggs’. People just shouldn’t be able to use houses and flats as investments for themselves in that way. If you own real property you should live in it.