Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder how Labour’s Right to Buy on privately rented houses would work?

421 replies

Bearbehind · 02/09/2019 10:49

Just read something this morning about Labour proposing Right to Buy on privately rented properties - how would that actually work?

How can they force a private landlord to sell at a discounted rate?

Also, if one of the requirements is you have to have been renting the property for several years, that’s just going to lead to less secure tenancies because landlords will make sure tenants cannot qualify for this.

It seems like a bonkers idea to me

OP posts:
CendrillonSings · 02/09/2019 12:05

It’s because, as I’ve often observed, he’s a stupid communist. Once that is understood, everything else falls into place...

Original poster
Bearbehind · 02/09/2019 12:05

The government always reimburse the discount.

Using what?

OP posts:
Passthecherrycoke · 02/09/2019 12:06

The government always reimburse RTb discount. They do it now. It’s no problem. You use the cash to purchase or build more houses, which is what we need. It works well.

Bluntness100 · 02/09/2019 12:08

People also have to remember 20 percent of labour MPs are private landlords. It would be like turkeys voting for Xmas 😂

Original poster
Bearbehind · 02/09/2019 12:08

cherrycoke these are private houses - the government wouldn’t make anything from their sale and certainly could not afford to fund the discount from the sale

OP posts:
Passthecherrycoke · 02/09/2019 12:09

I’m aware they’re private houses. That’s nothing to do with it. I never said the government would make anything from their sale 🤔

And They could reimburse the RTb discount. It’s not an issue .

mateysmum · 02/09/2019 12:10

How can you legally force someone to sell something they own for less than it's worth. You can't.

You'd think so wouldn't you.

Ever hear of "compulsory purchase"?

A far left government with a working majority could potentially enact legislation to permit such theft purchase.

Bluntness100 · 02/09/2019 12:11

these are private houses - the government wouldn’t make anything from their sale and certainly could not afford to fund the discount from the sale

Of course not. Where would the money come from. Take it from the nhs? The police?

It's moot anyway, even if he could get a majority and get his own mos to vote for it, such a thing would never pass the House of Lords. I'd even doubt it would get to a parliamentary vote to pass it into law, the legal challenges alone would tie it in knots.

It's just a bonkers idea to try to get votes ahead of the ge. They are hoping renters are a bit too thick to think it through, will think whoopee cheap houses and vote for them.

Fucking crazy.

Original poster
Bearbehind · 02/09/2019 12:12

You’ve lost me cherrycoke

You said the cash would be used to purchase and build more houses - how do you control that if it’s private landlords?

How could the cost of the discount be funded by the government?

OP posts:
mummymeister · 02/09/2019 12:13

ask the people who have had their properties compulsory purchased if they felt that they were properly recompensed or not.

have a look back at slum clearance legislation in the 1950's/early 60's. How happy do you think these landlords were?

big business will pay the compensation obviously via increased taxes. personally wealthy people like pop stars and actors will pay with 90 - 95% tax rates. Anyone else remember these under Labour?

Why are people so blinkered to think that this wont happen. It will. Property ownership is a central tenant of Momentum and McDums philosophy. If Labour MP's dont like it then they leave dont they?

Alsohuman · 02/09/2019 12:13

Compulsory purchase can easily mean you get less than market value @Bluntness100. There are a lot of former owners of houses in the HS2 clearance who can testify to it.

Bluntness100 · 02/09/2019 12:15

Ever hear of "compulsory purchase"?A far left government with a working majority could potentially enact legislation to permit such theft purchase

Eh yeah, I addressed that, compulsory purchase is not at a loss to the owner, and it doesn't matter about a working majority, what matters is could you get a majority of MPs to vote for it, when twenty percent of labour MPs are private landlords,,and then could you get it through the House of Lords, you've more chance of developing wings and flying, and the odds of it getting through legal challenges is likely zero and will take time,

Laws have to be voted for by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. No one in their right mind can think the House of Lords would vote for such a thing, even if Corbyn, who can't get his own party to agree on anything and is hated by a majority of his party, could get them to agree on this.

mummymeister · 02/09/2019 12:16

Bluntness what House of Lords? it will be a new second chamber. Momentum have spoken about the need for this in the past.

you dont honestly think an ultra left Labour administration is for one minute going to leave in place that Bastion of the class war the House of Lords do you? probably one of the first things they will do.

Bluntness100 · 02/09/2019 12:18

Compulsory purchase can easily mean you get less than market value

That's not right, it's about the way it's calculated on market value that was at dispute for some. What's never been done is someone being force to sell their own home at a level below what is market value, however you decide that market value.

And as said, labour don't make laws. They need to get through legal challenges then be approved by the House of Commons and Lords.

This is why labour get votes on these daft issues. People believe this shit.

longwayoff · 02/09/2019 12:19

Oh Jeremy Corbyn. What else can the Labour Party think of to ensure it doesn't get elected by mistake?

Passthecherrycoke · 02/09/2019 12:19

“You’ve lost me cherrycoke

You said the cash would be used to purchase and build more houses - how do you control that if it’s private landlords?

How could the cost of the discount be funded by the government?”

The government Are desperate to fund RTb. They find an unlimited amount now through housing associations (private landlords) and local authorities.

Currently there are far fewer RTBs than the government want. Because even with the discount, many renters can’t afford to buy their house.

Housing associations usually use their RTb discount reimbursement to build more houses. They WANT to do this because it’s free money to invest in a profit making venture (selling and renting new property) there is no reason why a large private landlord wouldn’t want to do the same.

With the greatest respect Op, you don’t know anything about this and I’m just explaining it. It’s not outlandish at all, it’s actually been mooted a number of times previously by different governments and very nearly happened about 5 years ago.

Alsohuman · 02/09/2019 12:19

@Bluntness100, why do you keep insisting that owners don’t lose through compulsory purchase? They do.

Passthecherrycoke · 02/09/2019 12:20

fund not find

mummymeister · 02/09/2019 12:20

Bluntness100 you dont have to look very far to find articles about the shabby treatment of those under CPO's on HS2 and other projects.

www.spectator.co.uk/2019/02/is-the-financial-logic-behind-hs2-collapsing/

Google it - you will find no one is EVER happy with what CPO's offer them.

MrsBethel · 02/09/2019 12:21

If not being able to buy your own home makes you feel inadequate, that's your problem. Certainly luck can play a part (parental help etc), but so can lifestyle choices. E.g. choosing to have kids whilst living in rented property is going to make it more difficult for you to save a deposit.

Nasty.

People who own three rental properties and/or who have this sort of attitude are not 'ordinary'. They think they are. But they are not.

BongosMingo · 02/09/2019 12:22

This reply has been withdrawn

Message from MNHQ: This post has been withdrawn

Disfordarkchocolate · 02/09/2019 12:22

Thatcher found a was to force councils to see assets and also not allow them to invest any income from it in new housing so I'm sure it's possible. Still, don't think its a good idea.

Bluntness100 · 02/09/2019 12:22

you dont honestly think an ultra left Labour administration is for one minute going to leave in place that Bastion of the class war the House of Lords do you

Cmon now. 😂

You seriously believe that Corbyn will win a majority, and be able to command it, vote to abolish the House of Lords, which they will command a majority for in the vote and win, abolish it, put a new house in, then put to the vote to be able to force people to sell private let's at a discounted rate, which will be approved by both houses and then it will happen?

This is what you believe will occur? Cmon, you don't really? 😂

Original poster
Bearbehind · 02/09/2019 12:24

With the greatest respect Op, you don’t know anything about this and I’m just explaining it

Cherry I’m not convinced you’re the expert you think you are as your explanation is not aligned to the proposals I’ve read, this isn’t about HA properties, it’s entirely private landlords

OP posts:
mummymeister · 02/09/2019 12:26

cherrycoke - people become private landlords for lots of different reasons. some by accident, they have to move quickly to a new job so rent the home they have left behind and for some its an investment/business decision.

why on earth would a business person buy a house, do it up, rent it out to someone knowing that it could then be "CPO" ed or whatever the term is given for it. they wont make back the money they spent on Stamp duty, repairs, letting agents fees etc. Its not a sound business, it really isnt. And no one would want to do it. Yes, its attractive to HA but thats because they are very different animals from private owners.