Rachel Reeves considering freeze of private rent?

[Locutus2000]

It's being widely reported suggesting the Guardians original article is correct.

Rachel Reeves is considering a one-year freeze on private rents to help tenants with the cost of living amongst the fallout from the Iran war.

I find the concept of rent control appealing but there's evidence they produce mixed results.

What does MN think? YABU - rent controls bad, YANBU - rent controls good

Why would anyone go into the rental business? It's not an easy gig at the best of times, contrary to what some naive people think.

My sister has 2 rental properties. The tenants have lived there for years and pay a lot under the market rent because they are good, undemanding tenants. She regularly updates things: offers new carpets etc before being asked, re-decorates etc. I think, if the campaign against private landlords continues, she'll just sell the properties when these people leave and that will be 2 less rental properties available.

Landlords have sometimes invested large sums and lots of effort in their properties with the hope of having a pension or similar in old age. How can victimising these people help the demographic which needs a rental home?

If tenants have signed a contract for a certain rent for a certain period, the LL can’t just increase it at will.

Slumlords with tenants who often pay cash will of course just ignore any rules, as usual.

This won’t happen because when they did it in Scotland, landlords raised rents in anticipation and it distorted the market.
Also, plenty of buy to let is financed by banks on variable rates linked to interest rates so they cannot shaft the banks en masse, indirectly, either.
From what I heard, Labour are getting rid of right to buy new council housing for at least 35 years, which is a good thing. They should never have limited the pool of social housing by selling it off at big discounts. It also means nobody wants to invest in building social housing. Social housing needs to remain social housing primarily.

A lot of smaller landlords have subsidised tenants and the State with below market rents (when the capital could be in the bank at a higher rate) - a lot of the older generation just stashed their money in property. Will be interesting to see what happens now with the whole painting landlords as the bad guy. That was always very shortsighted. Hopefully a lot of small landlords will just continue and not chicken out. It will be the taxpayer picking up the bill for housing tenants at greater cost especially where they get top up for that element. It also affects the economy badly as less money to spend there affects everyone.

They are absolutely atypical of corporate landlords who operate using a completely different model. I can't work out if you're being disingenuous or really can't understand the difference between a typical corporate landlords and a Housing Association. All this discussion of corporate landlords having WACC rise by only 1% was just bonkers. You must know that this isn't true for almost every other corporate landlord. You must also know that housing associations aren't going to snap up all the BTL properties or even fill a significant proportion of the gap left by small private landlords leaving the sector.

Well yes - but if I had the power to raise it/no contractual constraint, I would. That's because Labour won't stop at one year - once they get a taste for interfering in private property, they don't stop. If LLs don't get in quick with a raise, they'll end up out of pocket fast as all the other costs rise.

Steve Reed confirmed this morning they are doing rent controls.
I think they have enough headache on their hands with section 21s, en masse, having been served in the last few months/year/some still following this week before the deadline.

Sorry meant to say the opposite, there will be NO RENT CONTROLS confirmed by Steve Reed on the media round this morning