No fault eviction

[clarkkentsglasses]

Forgive me for being stupid ....

What does the "no fault eviction" actually mean?

So for example, my landlord is selling due to various different reasons which is fine, I'll just move on. But could I just stay there if I wanted now?

That is what landlords are doing already

I'd imagine it doesn't apply to HA or councils @LadyCrumpet because they already can't evict for no reason. They have to have a very good reason. I've never campaigned for anything but could happily get behind this ending on no fault eviction. The stress private rental causes is insane (and IMO can contribute towards people becoming so). People deserve secure homes. Nobody has a right to be a "small LL". Either run their rental professionally as the business it is, complying with all the rules or just stop.

Labour already got rid of the right to buy in Wales some time ago. Hopefully the rest of the UK will become the same now @Mintypig . Hopefully we'll see a return to the times where people on a low wage can fairly easily get social housing. Or at least a secure private rental they can make their home knowing they're not going to be asked to leave in a year or so.

At the end of a tenancy, assuming that the LL doesn't want to sell and the tenants are paying their rent and looking after the property, what would lead a LL to evict them and find new tenants?

IME tenants wanting repairs done (rightly so) that LL doesn't want to do. If the tenants stay long enough to see the process through, they can get environmental health involved who will force improvements. Easier for LL to evict them and rent to someone else, who chances are won't complain because they don't want to be evicted...

I understand that this will lead to small landlords selling but isn’t that what people want? I understood that the argument was that LLs were buying up the housing stock that would otherwise be available to first time buyers. So if the market is suddenly flooded with ex rental (which tend to be the houses that FTBs are after) then property prices will drop.

But what will happen to all those who haven't got a deposit to buy, nor any realistic prospect of saving up, or those not considered suitable for a mortgage?

I think there are far more unable to buy than will be able to snap up all these cheap properties that will suddenly appear........(nor do I think the prices will crash significantly).

Hopefully it will get rid of the many many cowboys landlords.
Time for change and proper secure housing for people.

Cowboy LLs should never be tolerated but as with a lot of top down regulation, good LLs are affected as well and often end up exiting the market.

In some cases, but the trouble is there are plenty of people who don't want a mortgage, aren't ready to buy or will never be in a position to buy. They need landlords and private rentals.

Single people, people saving for a deposit, people in the £30k - £50k bracket, divorcing people who have savings but not enough for a house deposit, older people who don't have 25 earning years left, those with poor credit.

And now there will be fewer appropriate properties.

Calling S21 a no fault eviction is technically accurate but in reality masks reality. Many bad tenants are evicted using the S21 route. The alternate is called S8 and is often a protracted process made worse by court backlogs.

I fear it'll be the cowboys - and ones with a certain amount of muscle - who will end up dominating the sector.

I thought the reason the last government didn't proceed with ending section 21 was precisely because of the court backlogs - they already can't cope.

It will stop landlords terminating tenancies in order to avoid doing maintenance or simply to increase the rent by a lot - there are rules on how much they can impose as a rent increase on existing tenants.

I'm not sure it will necessarily reduce the amount of rental property - basically landlords will have to decide whether to sell now to avoid the new rules (and take a low offer due to an influx of selling landlords flooding the market) or sell with tenants in situ. Bigger landlords may well decide to take advantage of lower house prices to buy up houses with tenants either way.

I'd have a lot more sympathy for these oppressed landlords if when they are "forced to sell" it wasn't to another landlord. Mainly because that does rather undermine the narrative that "it's not worth being a landlord".

I imagine it will be like the Australian rental market -- can do no fault eviction after the 1st lease period. From the 2nd onwards, you can only evict if you intend to sell the house, do major renovations, or have an immediate family member move in. If you evict under one of those, you cannot claim rental income on the property again for a year.

@ErrolTheDragon yes, that's why it was paused. I think Labour has said the courts need reform in parallel but I think they'll end up binning S21 before that happens.

Ultimately, court backlogs benefit tenants not LLs and that's what Labour cares about.

. If not, what’s the point? Nothing changes.

The idea is that it stops the landlord evicting to then re-rent at a much higher rate, for instance. Or malicious evictions.

It's not active in law yet . My understanding is the landlord can get their property back if they sell it or plan to move in themselves .

It's really daft imo to announce this without these new houses built because I think an awful lot of landlords will sell up so where then do renters find their next property

I should add I have one rental property and a tenant in there for 8 yrs . I will be giving her notice because I don't want any risk I may not get my property back for reasons I want or without protracted court dealings .
It's a shame because I'm a very responsible landlord , she is a good tenant and I've kept the rent lower than the local rate because it's a good set up .

Either run their rental professionally as the business it is, complying with all the rules or just stop.

There are plenty of small landlords have run their businesses professionally, complied with all the rules, and still used S21 when necessary. I did when my tenant moved an extra nine people into a studio flat then asked for new carpets every five minutes. If I’d had to show just how much fault they were at in breaching their tenancy, they’d never have gotten another one elsewhere. Even the council would have considered them intentionally homeless and then been unwilling to help.

This policy will backfire on tenants more than it will landlords.

S21 is easier perhaps and less problematic. Makes it easier to claim homelessness and get support from the council although people are generally not helped very much by the council. (Waiting until bailiff and being offered a hotel room probably means you abandon all your possessions.,)
Your new landlord doesn't need to know about your antisocial behaviour or rent arrears.

S8 can yoyo if people pay their rent arrears and then stop paying... But you'd be intentionally making yourself homeless perhaps not paying rent and not being eligible for housing support from council.

There's other grounds for eviction but probably harder to use.

Low level neighbour nuisance is hard to prove and so expect crappy neighbours if s21 is banned..

@hattie43 The devil will be in the detail but what would stop a LL saying they need to sell it, change their mind, do a quick repaint, and re market? Nothing.

Something like the Australian law @Meowzabub mentioned upthread?

If the landlord can't afford the mortgage, so the property will be repossessed by the bank? Then what?

Depends if the mortgage is going up. With increases in the pipeline for landlords this could happen. Thats why it’s foolish to now rent out a property you might need to sell. Having a mortgage and non payers is an issue too. It’s all hassle. You can get 5% by investing money. More if it’s a share/isa portfolio. No tenant issues and no maintenance costs. An easier life.

If the mortgage lender repossesses the property then the tenants are evicted too. This happened a lot during the early 90s when landlords got into mortgage difficulties.

But it's not the tenants fault if the LL can't pay the mortgage. So is that a not a no fault eviction?