New renter rights act is a bloody good thing!

[Pineapplewhip]

Naturally landlords have some justifiable concerns/questions but those that are up in arms about the whole thing are completely bloody immoral. The slum landlords have spoilt it for the good ones and the decent landlords should blame them and not the government for protecting people.

If you arent aware of the actual points of the bill - I've listed them below. I cant see how any reasonable person can disagree that it's just enforcing the most basic human decency and regulation.

• End to no fault evictions: landlords can only evict renters if they want to sell, move in themselves, move their family into the property or there are serious rent arrears. They have to prove they are selling too - they cant just say they are!

• Rent can only rise once a year, any rise above market rate can be disputed fairly and 2 months notice is given.

• Landlords can't refuse you for having children or being on benefits (if you prove that benefits/finances make the property affordable). This isnt about being on full benefits either. Many single parents need benefits to top up income.

• Landlord ombudsman - tennants can raise fair disputes and repair issues for free online and landlords cannot just ignore it/grey rock. Repeat offenders will be visable in the database. Landlords legally must act on the complaints.

• Faster action must be taken on damp and mould. Basic human rights! No more shitty emails from a middle man letting agent just blaming the tennant for not opening a window - when actually (for example) a house needs its brickwork repointing.

The only legitimate thing I have empathy for is the concern that it will be more of a process to evict non paying tennants as it will need to go through a court. However - this is why landlord insurance exists!!

Please ask yourself - if your child was renting - wouldn't you want them protected like this?

For all those saying that 'corporate landlords' will be far worse... I've lived in a country where it is far more normal to rent long term (as in decades) than the UK. Most of the apartments are owned by corporations. It works precisely because they are big and faceless and invested in diverse ways. So they won't be bankrupt by 1 tenant letting hair build up in the drain as mentioned up thread. They can keep the properties habitable in the longer term as an investment. It works well and is nothing to fear. When I rented in the UK it seemed far more precarious. I was aware that if my landlord had any change in circumstances (or mood even) I could be turfed out.

Maybe the end of non professional or insecure landlords (or accidental as they liked to be called here, as if they have no agency) would be no bad thing

Genuine question but as pretty much every house up for rent has multiple people applying for it, how would anyone ever be able to prove that the landlord chose to rent it to the person with a full time job and not the person on benefits

You cant. As long as everyone is being treated the same then it's not discrimination. Eg you could ask that income must be at least 2.5 times the rent, they provide a guarantor and they have excellent credit checks. As long as everyone is judged on the same criteria you can still choose which tenant you want.

You can refuse someone on benefits with bad credit but only if it's based on financial criteria that you've applied to everyone equally. It doesnt mean you MUST rent to someone on benefits.

There Is a shortage of property. Landlords can’t take money in advance. If 4 people want the property you offer cash in advance - some dodgy landlords will take it as they can avoid paying tax.

A family could have cash (or access to cash either via family or crime) yet would not pass a letting agent’s employment and income and credit checks.

Many people have cash and a default or ccj or are an ex bankrupt.

The government want corporate landlords and as a previous poster said that means tenant can say goodbye to landlords who keep the rent at the same level for a few years.

To a corporate landlord you are tenant number 791 who needs a rent review every May. The AI system will check multiple databases to provide evidence of market rent. A local landlord will have no idea what tenants down the street are paying (unless s/he owns another house on the street or sees a house on rightmove- the agent will likely use rightmove plus for comparables ). A corporate owning 20 houses in a 0.25 mile radius will have much more data to access. And a bank account that can buy in data from surveyors etc to prove a higher rent is justified. The rent will be in line with market rents and reviewed without fail.

Agree. I'm not a landlord myself but did rent out my flat for two years, a decade ago, when I relocated with work. I'm glad I'm not in that position now. I am currently looking at the rental market as we're looking to sell and move location. Rightmove is currently offering up half a dozen properties across three counties that could suit us. I find that quite shocking.

So basically no change then and I am certain the infrastructure to challenge won't be in place anyway...

This

I’ve been an accidental landlord. As executor of a relatives will I became responsible for selling a property and distributing the proceeds according to the will ( I wasn’t a beneficiary). It was hell.
Shortly after I inherited myself and could have made a lot of money renting out a property. I didn’t even hesitate. Straight on the market.

I agree there is a lot of stuff in there that is necessary. Under this law though, if a tenant is trashing the property and upsetting the neighbours, what redress is there?

There are strict laws across Europe for renting and it all works ok.
The actual commodity, the property, still exists regardless of who owns it.

What about the fact that renters will need to now pay stamp duty when moving into a new rental?

We'll just sell up when our current tenant moves out. They've been there 10 years so hopefully they'll be happy there for more years to come and then we'll call it a day.

The unintended consequences of this legislation will land on those who are most risky to let a home to - particularly the young who have already been locked out of jobs to 'progressive' employment rights.

There are going to be a whole lot of jobless young adults stuck living at home thanks to all these shiny new Labour policies.

The landlord would have to serve a Section 8 notice and then hope the tenant leaves, and if they don't, apply to court for a possession order, which would take months.

This is one of the main reasons why flat prices have fallen recently - landlords selling up because they do not want to deal with this process.

You can still evict someone for antisocial behaviour or damaging the property.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act/guide-to-the-renters-rights-act

Where a tenant is at fault, landlords can give notice using the relevant grounds at any point in the tenancy. This includes where a tenant commits antisocial behaviour, is damaging the property, or falls into significant arrears.

Sorry landlords, but you don't get damp problems that cause you thousands of pounds to fix because your tenants don't open the windows. The fact anyone claims this makes them look like one of the terrible landlords this act is about. I own a Victorian house.

The best landlord I ever had was a faceless corporation type landlord who had staff and procedures for repairs, carried them out quickly, put systems in like permanent air vents and integral hair catchers and didn't try to guilt you into doing anything because it was a business transaction not a personal one. Of course they did not take any shit and did 6 monthly inspections and liked a solicitors letter, but it was much fairer than any other type of landlord I had in my many years of renting. Hopefully these types of company will buy up all the cheap properties that come in the market from "accidental" landlords who actually can't invest in the process of renting out homes to people.

Landlords are not forced to accept every tenant but they cant blanket refuse groups.

If there isnt enough social housing to meet the demand then thats really on the government to fix, not private LLs.

We rented out our family home when we relocated overseas temporarily for work.

We only owned that property, so we paid rent on one in our new location and were renters ourselves.

We didn’t have “nightmare” tenants, but still the ongoing repairs, maintenance, cleaning at the end of each tenancy, plus the percentage we paid to our letting agency meant we just about broke even over 5 years - and that’s not taking into account the mortgage which we still paid on the property.

When we came back, we gave our tenants notice, they moved out, we sold the property and bought somewhere bigger, no problems.

If we were in the same situation now, it would be much easier and safer just to leave the property vacant for several years - we know we would want it back at some point because it’s our family home. Having to go through a long winded court process to get it back could mean we were the ones ending up homeless!

If it’s not worth it to small landlords, who aren’t even attempting to make a profit, then presumably the only way it will be worth it to big corporations who do want a profit will be much higher rental prices across the board.

Sorry landlords, but you don't get damp problems that cause you thousands of pounds to fix because your tenants don't open the windows. The fact anyone claims this makes them look like one of the terrible landlords this act is about. I own a Victorian house.

I am not a landlord any more but this simply isnt true. If you constantly hang washing up to dry in unventilated rooms you will get mould forming due to the high humidity conditions. It doesnt mean the house has a structural damp issue.

Rentals supply is still 23% lower than pre-pandemic levels. The idea that corporations will swoop in and save renters from the inevitable spike that will result from lack of supply is quite naive.

There is now going to be an even greater backlog in the courts of getting people out after the massive section 21 orders. Tenants will be told to sit tight, as they have been previously, by councils. It’s unfair on landlords that it takes so long to get a tenant to move out.

There are many good landlords and it will be those who are exiting the market. One month’s rent as deposit is not enough imo when there’s a risk of damage to consider, even the smallest thing is ££&& now. I don’t think it’s acceptable to say landlords have to accept dogs either.

If I were a landlord I would be selling or looking at corporate lets or Airbnb.

I’d never take anyone offering 6 months rent upfront. Have had guarantors in the past who actually don’t have the funds to pay the rent they have guaranteed so not interested in a tenant with a guarantor either. These days our tenants have to pass the insurance guarantee company’s checks. And as our properties have so many applications when they become available it’s never a problem to find a solvent tenant.

but as I said earlier up thread, the family house we own will be sold when the current tenants leave. And they have been tenants there for over ten years now, but will be leaving sometime soon as the kids have grown up and gone.

I'm so glad that thanks to this new bill I can hand my notice in on my god awful rental. Damp, mould, leaking roof that hasnt been sorted in six months.

One thing they still need to fix is unregulated letting agents.

Yes it is. Ive been without a working bathroom for over a month, cant shower can only have very small baths as weve been left without a bath panel or sealent they went to replace it and decided to put in a new bathroom… said it would be done 2 weeks ago. Chased them the landlord only got thr quote last week…. Meanwhile we can’t really bathe properly. Roll on tomorrow so I can get on their case!!

My DH is a landlord. Too nice for his own good.
I don’t think you realise that George Osborne changed tax rules around landlord income so it’s virtually impossible to make any money at all out of property lets. This chancellor has also demanded more tax/NI from landlords, and the new legislation will lead to massive losses for them, so they’re all going to sell their properties and move on. My DH certainly is.
They’ll likely be sold to large property companies and rents will sky rocket.

If my DC were in the rental market, we’d be looking at getting them out of it. Rents will be much higher than a mortgage, but deposits to secure a mortgage will still be a problem for most. More adult children will be staying at home with their parents for much longer.

All of the protections look good on the surface, but the underlying economics mean they’ll be catastrophic for the rental market and anyone who needs to engage with it.

Question

So if the tenant is anti social e.g having raging arguments on the front drive, being a general pain in the backside to neighbours - can they still be evicted or are they untouchable provided they pay the rent on time?

As regards damp, it’s not always just drying clothes indoors however there are many things a tenant can do to mitigate damp. But no, we’re not allowed to expect tenants to do anything to maximise a good living environment such as taking care of property and ventilating it. According to MN any problem with a property should be fixed immediately at any cost by the LL even if the tenants actions have caused it. Yet another area of society where people are allowed to just not take any responsibility for themselves.