Judge Rinder - Renter's in reform

[mrshoho]

Well done Rob Rinder speaking so passionately and spelling out the inequalities in our communities. Come on Boris Johnson it is time to do what you pledged and protect millions citizens giving them basic human rights such as a safe and secure place to live. The time is long overdue and I can't see how any decent landlord would be against these reforms.

Link?

Agreed, Rob Rinder was amazing on GMB this morning, he spoke so passionately and with such empathy, what a lovely man.

I wish he'd take up politics, we need him in parliament.

Havnt seen it but I think there should be rent control

...which have been repeatedly proven not to work.

Enforcement of standards ( including housing associations which are exempt), protection for normal tenants, quick eviction for dealers/stealers/non payers. Stop right to buy, stop buy to leave (London) , raise taxes to pay for decent social housing, no vat on renovations to encourage getting the hundred ps of thousands of empty properties back in use.

england.shelter.org.uk/support_us/campaigns/renters_reform_bill

Sorry I don't have a link to his piece but the shelter link above is what he was highlighting.

"Enforcement of standards ( including housing associations which are exempt), protection for normal tenants, quick eviction for dealers/stealers/non payers. Stop right to buy, stop buy to leave (London) , raise taxes to pay for decent social housing, no vat on renovations to encourage getting the hundred ps of thousands of empty properties back in use."

I especially agree with the bit I've bolded. At the minute it feels there is no protection for tenants until they start causing trouble (by trashing the place, by not paying rent, by being antisocial to the neighbours). At which point the law kicks in and makes it as difficult as possible to evict them.

My opinion is that rent should be restricted to 80% of the monthly mortgage payment on the property. That way people could still buy to let, getting the property as an investment, but there would be no career landlords.

Thanks for this I’ve signed the petition. I’ve been saying for years that we need to have far stricter controls on private renting and controls on the rent charged.

Remember that shelter extrapolate numbers, twist facts, ignore poor standards from housing associations and are basically haters of private landlords. They provide no actual shelter and have seriously fucked up campaigns - for instance, that's why most landlords can't take pets now as higher deposits illegal.

Might make you jealous, but not all rented properties are mortgaged. Not the first time that MN has suggested giving properties to tenants for free.

Oh, and housing associations don't have mortgages either. So no social housing.

@StormyLovesOdd

Agreed, Rob Rinder was amazing on GMB this morning, he spoke so passionately and with such empathy, what a lovely man.

I wish he'd take up politics, we need him in parliament.

People with any useful ideas are soon destroyed by party politics.

Are you a landlord @murbblurb or involved in property services in some way?

If it is what Skirk said sounds quite good.

Dont agree with the 80% sorry. Pretty much negates the standards/ vat exemption for improving properties and discourages owning a property.

Why would I own if I can rent for 80% and get all my repairs done for me.

@LemonSwan

If it is what Skirk said sounds quite good.

Dont agree with the 80% sorry. Pretty much negates the standards/ vat exemption for improving properties and discourages owning a property.

Why would I own if I can rent for 80% and get all my repairs done for me.

Yup.

Maybe acceptable would be to cap above the mkrtgage. Like 30%.
This is like saying food should cost only 80% of raw materials, disregarding all other costs

My opinion is that rent should be restricted to 80% of the monthly mortgage payment on the property. That way people could still buy to let, getting the property as an investment, but there would be no career landlords.

Yeah that makes business sense. Make the landlord take a loss on their investments to give people cheap rent. What a ridiculous idea.

Totally agree that the law needs a shake up - it's outrageous that landlords have to jump through so many hoops to get rid of people who just won't pay any rent at all. The balance needs to be struck between protecting tenants from rogue landlords who want to throw them out on the street with 5 minutes' notice, and protecting landlords from piss-taking tenants.

I will never forget an episode of Homes Under the Hammer where one of the buyers had a property potfolio of over 500 rented houses. Being a landlord should not be a career,

@Getoffmyhat

I will never forget an episode of Homes Under the Hammer where one of the buyers had a property potfolio of over 500 rented houses. Being a landlord should not be a career,

And they probably did them up on the cheap as well. I hate it when the properties on that show clearly need about 20k spending on them and the bloody landlord says the budget is 2k 🙄😡

@mrshoho

Are you a landlord *@murbblurb* or involved in property services in some way?

Well *@murbblurb*'s point about the pets is correct. Because landlords can't charge a higher deposit for pets (which should be fair enough considering the mess/damage/smell many pets create) most landlords now say out and out no pets. They'd rather not take the risk. So now renters with pets have an even harder time finding a property.

Enforcement of standards ( including housing associations which are exempt), protection for normal tenants, quick eviction for dealers/stealers/non payers. Stop right to buy, stop buy to leave (London) , raise taxes to pay for decent social housing, no vat on renovations to encourage getting the hundred ps of thousands of empty properties back in use.

I agree with all of this. If buy to leave can't be stopped I'd add an eye watering annual property tax which can only be spent on social housing.

Thankfully the blanket ban on pets that landlords were permitted to use is changing. It will be written in to agreements that tenants cover any damage. Landlords can object to requests for domestic pets but it would have to be for a specific reason.

He a private letter on yesterday and she was 38 and had moved 28 times. He was amazed she'd moved so much. He'd obviously never private let recently.

@osbertthesyrianhamster

He a private letter on yesterday and she was 38 and had moved 28 times. He was amazed she'd moved so much. He'd obviously never private let recently.

I'm a private renter and my record for staying in one property is 2.5 years (and counting). Previous record was 20 months.

I've only stayed here so long because I have a dog and finding somewhere new with a dog is difficult. I've got chronic damp that the landlord has completely failed to fix. They painted over the damp before viewings and have completely failed to fix the render on the outside of the property which is the cause. I can't begin to count how many bottles of mould blaster I've used.

I counted and I've had 9 addresses in the last 9.5 years.

On one occasion I was evicted because I told my live in landlord that a date for surgery had finally come up and I'd be off sick (and therefore at home) for two weeks. She sent an eviction notice on Boxing Day, timed to expire a month later when I was due to be in hospital. This was entirely legal.

@MissyB1

Thanks for this I’ve signed the petition. I’ve been saying for years that we need to have far stricter controls on private renting and controls on the rent charged.

I've no problem with any of this but it also should include protection for decent landlords who currently find getting the rent-thieves, ie non-payers, out. It should be miss one payment and you're out, not drag it out for months while you continue to steal and then trash the property.

Yes, I'm a landlord. Disgustingly for MN, i even make some money, because it is a business. Current tenant has some benefits, previous tenant had a cat. No problems. Took a long time to sort after the cuckoos but all you fuckers who think weed is a victimless crime take the blame for that.

I also know that a section21 is not an eviction notice, as will anyone who can be arsed to read the readily available information. Shelter wrote some of that, they are useful in that way.

@mrshoho even if a tenant has a legal agreement to cover damages caused by pets, they can dispute it and refuse to pay. It’s easier for a landlord to refuse pets in their property because they want to avoid the hassle of potential court action.

I completely agree that renters and landlords need better protection and the whole system needs to be reformed urgently.

On one occasion I was evicted because I told my live in landlord that a date for surgery had finally come up and I'd be off sick (and therefore at home) for two weeks. She sent an eviction notice on Boxing Day, timed to expire a month later when I was due to be in hospital. This was entirely legal.

Your LL was clearly very unkind in this instance but there would be a lot of problems if it was made more difficult to evict lodgers. Having a tenent live in your house means you are much more vulnerable if they behave badly. Lodgers pay less in part to account for the fewer legal protections. The flexibility goes two ways as well which works for many people who choose to lodge.

Agree private rentals need to be managed much better. A lot is enforcement I think as good landlords seem to do a lot to keep on top of the changing legislation where rogue ones seem to have no checks on their behaviour. Council teams seem toothless and only go after easy targets. It doesn't help that a lot of council housing is also in dire states. We need fair rules and investment into local teams that can enforce them.

Similarly, making it easier to evict based on non-payment or anti-social behaviour may also change landlord behaviour since they may be less incentivised to invest in making property nice if they run the risk that rogue tenents will trash it with no recourse.