To think tenants aren't aware of the effect the section 21 ban will have?

[Treacletoots]

Another win for tenants... No more no fault evictions. Or is it a case of be careful what you wish for?

An unintended consequence of this will likely be more section 8 notices if a landlord needs to remove a tenant. Section 8 notices usually are accompanied by a CCJ if they are successful and due to rent arrears. Currently most landlords use section 21 to save the hassle of court and the tenant doesnt get a CCJ.

Good landlords simply don't evict good tenants for no reason. It doesn't make sense. With the tenant fee bans it makes even less sense to remove tenants and then have to fork out again to refresh the property, re reference new tenants, advertise etc.

In 90%of cases tenancies are ended by the tenant and in only 2% are they revenge evictions. Landlords will be more worried than ever to let to higher risk tenants so may just sell up, losing houses from the rental market. Local authorities don't have enough housing to re home people and so this will likely cause more homeless.

Can nobody else see that banning section 21 will likely lead to more suffering, not less!

Sofialemon

You say landlords make a choice to rent property out, do tenants not make a choice to rent?

Love this.

My rent is about twice the mortgage, never missed a payment. yet due to the fact that the rent is what it is I can't afford the deposit.

I would love to see banks able to take x years of good rent payment in lieu of deposit.

I should have said some tenants. I know there are many who for various reasons are unable to buy but there are also tenants who choose to rent.

@LuvSmallDogs seems to think all LL's choose to be in that position but that's no more the case than all tenants choosing to rent.

The point of the changes is that the tenant can only be removed because of fault ( non payment of rent / antisocial behaviour) or the landlord is relying on one of permitted grounds - primarily the landlord wants to sell of move into the property. UK unless one or more of these situations applies the lease cannot be terminated by the landlord

In which case what is in it for the ll. No flexibility no ability to sell a place if there is urgent need for money.

I foresee a drop in rental properties and because there are fewer properties then it will be supply and demand and rents will rise.

Those that can’t afford the rent will then be at the mercy of the LHA.

And not to forget a lot of Local Authority housing is just BTL landlords leasing property to the council. So without them then there will be less housing and more homelessness

In which case what is in it for the ll. No flexibility no ability to sell a place if there is urgent need for money

Did you read my post? Under the Scottish system one of the mandatory grounds to terminate a tenancy is the landlord wants, not even needs, to sell. The English proposals are following the Scottish system.

I foresee a drop in rental properties and because there are fewer properties then it will be supply and demand and rents will rise

The removal of section 33 (the Scottish equivalent of section 21) happened in December 2017. There is no evidence of this happening.

Those that can’t afford the rent will then be at the mercy of the LHA Not following your point here.

And not to forget a lot of Local Authority housing is just BTL landlords leasing property to the council. So without them then there will be less housing and more homelessness

Any private landlord who has entered into this type of arrangement is using a leasing structure completely outwith the scope of the private housing legislation. A landlord entering into such an arrangement will have had to make a longish, fixed term lease with the LA. The LA then sublets to the tenant using a public sector tenancy. This proposed change has no impact on these types of arrangements.

Oh okay, @SofiaLemon, and how many of these people who just love lining LL’s pockets for funsies are living in glorified sheds with an exposed gas pipe overhead of the only entrance and exit?

Sick of this fake victim language surrounding the privileged party in the LL/tenant relationship
When my tenant left me with £10k worth of damage and unpaid rent, I didn't feel much privileged at all! Agree with intentional being a beer choice or word than accidental although I think it would still not suit some as only such word as 'greedy' seem to suit.

That’s what I think the law should change. If you want to hire out goods you own and claim them back when it suits you, fine. But not housing
Thats fine but no LL is going to accept a position where all they get is risks with no incentives for it. Private LL are not social minders. They already pay taxes on their property to that effect. In the end, they either have to benefit more financially for a higher risk, or face low risk if the return is to be small.

swingofthings, well you should feel privileged, because you own property you don’t actually need. That is extremely privileged.

????

I own the house I live in... it has exposed gas pipes over both of the entrance/exits. In many older it converted houses that's the only way to run the pipes!

Weird!

I've had it happen four times.
Two revenge

Never reported because you are concentrating on finding a new home for you and your child and fast.

One was because the health visitor reported to environmental health about his lack of repairs and how awful it was getting.

One was because I wanted our boiler and hot water and heating to be fixed.

Second landlord remortgaged and did a bunk abroad with the money . Bank didn't know they had been turned into HMO or let out.

Other tried to force illegal eviction because he got a buyer for the house two weeks after giving us a six month contract. We weren't aware it was for sale.

Current landlord threatens to put rent up by £75 if we ask for anything to be fixed.

The dodgy landlords don't care about the deposit and redecorating as they don't intent giving the deposit back and don't redecorate.

@LuvSmallDogs

I'll be unpopular for saying this but I think some (not all tenants) would do better to try and improve their own situation so they either have more choice of rental properties or are in a position to buy.

It's a waste of time blaming LL's for a lack of available houses to buy and being bitter that others are better of than yourself. I've worked since leaving school, bought my first house before I was 20 (which needed complete renovation) and have worked hard to be in a position to have a rental property. I don't have a pension and so ideally would like to eventually buy some more property. That doesn't make me greedy or money grabbing.

@LassOfFyvie Do you have any idea how the new law as affected HMOs in Scotland? As I said in my post above I rely on being able to evict tenants in my houseshares who make themselves unbearable to live with and generally piss off all the other tenants, but it still wouldn't pass the threshold for a Section 8 eviction. How are Scottish HMO LLs coping now?

Tenancies which were granted before 1/12/17 will continue under the old system and , provided the landlord served the correct pre-tenancy AT5 can be terminated using s33 (Scottish equivalent of s21)

Post 1/12/17 if tenants are behaving in the way you say I can't see any reason why a landlord could not evict them. Their behaviour is either bad or it isn't.

LassOfFyvie - yes, I suppose it will take a while to take effect. And no, I don't think it will be easy to evict anyone for not doing their share of the cleaning/ using other people's food/being inconsiderate generally/ suffering from paranoid delusions and making everyone else's lives a misery because of it (an actual example of something I've had to deal with). Exactly where is that in Section 8? It doesn't cross the threshold for 'antisocial behaviour' and in any case proving any of it would be next to impossible.

@swingofthings oh yes!! The privilege of working hard to have it all destroyed by a jealous/malicious tenant. And for what?

Some people have a bizarre idea that all landlords own tens of properties so they are entitled to trash theirs, it doesn't matter right?

Without private rentals where would people live who couldn't buy or qualify for social housing?

@sofialemon. Yes you'll be unpopular but you're spot on. I bought a building site of a doss hole at 18 and renovated it by hand. I was piss poor and spent all my cash making the house fit to live in. I doubt anyone would be prepared to live in that today. But that's how I got on the housing ladder.

Im sorry if any of you sre landlords on here but all the ones ive had bar 1 are greedy horrid people. Hate making them wealthier at my expense!

malificent7 - well don’t, go and buy your own house. I’d hate to be renting to someone who hates me 🙄

Accidental landlords? No such thing. If you inherit a property you choose whether to sell or rent. If you can't sell a property, you are asking too much for it. Take responsibility for your choices.
.

I'd happily live in a dirty, empty shell (as long as structurally safe) as long as it got me on the property ladder. I've also worked since 17, sometimes 60 hour weeks. I still wont be able to get on the property ladder in the near future. In my case this is down to irreversible poor life choices when in my late teens (took on debt to facilitate financial abuse by an older relative), but for many others renting will simply never be an option through no fault of their own.

And I'd have gladly bought at 18 and renovated, too, but as I had no savings, no family assistance and the only jobs available were for less than £5 per hour, this wasn't really feasible. As I'd imagine is the case for quite a sizeable chunk of the population.

I do agree that landlords get a bad rap on here, but you so often see landlords speaking about housing as if it's an optional commodity that a tenant needs to earn and is privileged if a landlord lets them live there. Not to mention the old "work harder and you'll need better off" - oddly enough across the companies I've done payroll for it doesn't tend to be the higher salaried who work 60-90 hour weeks, and not everyone is able to forego paying bills to retrain in a field which will pay more (if they even have the capacity - as bad as this probably sounds, there are some people who are simply not likely to ever be able to earn more than minimum wage).

At the end of the day, somewhere to live is a basic human need. Something is going badly wrong currently, where it's possible for a well-behaved adult with a full time job to be unable to find a secure place to live, and this is seen as something to be expected, while others treat housing as an investment or a commodity to be bought, sold and restricted.

Of course, this is mostly down to large-scale property investors, and shoddy landlords, but they dont tend to be the ones who show up in public/on forums to defend landlords, so the ones who do take the full brunt of people's ire. Especially when in the process of defending themselves, they usually end up snubbing tenants in some way - as is usually the case in any kind of polarised debate.

WeirdAndPissedOff - that’s clearly not true though because my friends recently bought on a £22,000 salary with a 5% deposit. She’s a student so childcare cost through the roof with little coming in. If buying a house was your absolute priority you’d make it happen. I suspect though alongside your wages you’re in receipt of some benefits towards housing that you’d loose by owning. You’d also be responsible for all repairs. You don’t want that so you’re happy for someone else to take all the risk and that’s why you rent. Fine, but be honest with yourself

well you should feel privileged, because you own property you don’t actually need. That is extremely privileged
To me privileged is what you get through no investment on your part. This doesn't apply to me. I was once someone in very similar circumstances to many renters but I opted to study, all paid by myself and then work FT, even when having babies and go for promotions, even when it meant less flexibility, longer hours and more stress, a choice that many don't wish to take.

Inliverpool that wasn’t a very nice post and I think you need to give more detail.

Saying oh it’s easy to buy on £22k because I have a friend is ridiculous.

I’d love to know how anybody with children and expensive childcare pays rent, bills on top on £1500 a month alongside saving a 5% mortgage without accruing debt which would impact a 95%mortgage without some serious help.

You put it beautifully Weird.

I’m not so easy on the difficulties caused by small scale non-shoddy landlords though. A landlord can be a nice person and treat their tenants well - and they might have striven hard for their money - but the opportunity to own more housing than they need and to rent it out is still part of the problem.

Homefireburn1ng - it’s not impossible to buy on £22,000. That’s the only point. I actually think the friend shouldn’t have given she’s in bloody £40,000 of credit card debt now as a result of the house being a shit hole that needed everything going.

Errr it is impossible to buy on £22k. She couldn’t afford it, hence the £40k debt you omitted to tell us about.

I’ve been a homeowner for years and never accrued £40k debt. You don’t need to spend a fortune on upkeep just to be able to pay the mortgage which clearly your friend can’t. She was very foolish as I doubt mortgage lenders will be lining up to give her money when she has to remortgage with that amount of debt.

Our house needs a lot doing to it but we’re making do with the old bathrooms and kitchen and just saved for new windows at £6k. Somebody on £22k should not buy a house they can’t sfford to do crucial work on such as windows hence it is impossible to buy for many.Sensible people will look at the state a property is in before they buy. Property in the worst state will be cheaper but still out of reach for many as they simply won’t be able to do what is done and should recognise this. There is a huge difference between general maintenance and £40k worth of work

Many people are shut out of home ownership and should be protected.

She bought and could afford the house. She couldn’t afford all the work she’s had done to it and has zero financial, budgeting, ability for one reason or another who knows. In the same breath she tells me she’s bought her kids all new bikes for her birthday she tells me she’s relying on me for £9,000 in January when the interest free credit card is up.

Some people probably shouldn’t be home owners they literally are better off renting