To think we should ban private renting?

[honeyrosesandwich]

AIBU to think this is a great idea?

Imagine if private renting was banned. All rented houses were done under social housing / housing association. There are already over 4.5 million houses rented under social housing, so it's on a huge scale already.

It would mean rent would be affordable for everyone and effectively help the cost of living prices. I live in a housing association house and my 2 bed is £520 a month. My brother, who private rents, pays £1100 for a 2 bed in the same area.

Repairs for my house are done by the HA's own company. I just put in a request online for it.

People that want to stay in their privately rented home will be free to do so but they put a ban on any new tenancies. The owners will have the opportuntiy to sell the house to social housing or keep it for themselves, but not rent it out further. If sold, the tenant will be allowed to stay.

I've been thinking about this randomly today and haven't come up with any negatives so far. Is it bad to monopolise housing? Well, there are already certain housing associations which own hundreds of thousands of houses.

I’d rather be a person that asks a genuine question than be a judgemental rude person that’s obviously got a chip on their shoulder

There are many negatives….? For example:

1. family need to re locate somewhere temporarily for work (or whatever reason), don’t want to sell their house as they want to return to it when they return to the area, can’t have it sat empty due to costs. Currently they rent it out temporarily. Why would you stop them doing so?

2. who would pickup the tab of all the additional social housing? Clearly all the “free maintenance” you get isn’t “free” - the taxpayer (ie other people) pays for it

3. what would happen to the people currently privately renting* that don’t qualify for social housing (eg because they’re on good salaries or other). Where would they live? Would they be forced to buy a house to live in? Or would you gift them social housing? Surely not either as they may not be able to afford to buy a house and why should the state (=other people) pay for them to have cheap housing?

4. further reduction of individuals responsibility for themselves (to you themselves in this case) is going to mean they lean more heavily on the state for other stuff (as they become used to being dependent on the state for even basics). This clearly isn’t an acceptable trajectory

You can’t have thought very hard (or you’ve a limited world view) if you can’t see any negatives…

So landlords shouldn’t make a profit but a for profit company can?

@honeyrosesandwich what a daft notion. There are plenty of people who want to rent privately and don't qualify for housing association or state funded rentals. I agree rents should be reasonable. And their should be steps to ensure rents are appropriate to the market their in. But to ban all private rentals is absurd.

Part of the reason that HA’s and Council’s can buy housing is because they are purchased at discounted affordable rates from developers.

My team purchases houses for a council, it’s almost impossible because most older houses on the open market because most don’t meet modern decent homes standards that we have to comply with. To get them into decent home standard doesn’t work out financially. It would bankrupt the country.

@honeyrosesandwichwhat makes you think social housing is magically cheaper? Don’t you realise that’s because it’s subsidised….? Why should the state (=taxpayers) subsidise even more people’s living costs? After all they’re grownups who should be responsible for their own basic needs, not children

So I have my own home by decide to move in with my partner who also owns his.

My house I would otherwise let will be empty now, so that one unused property.

My next door neighbours are going to work in the ME for a couple of years. Their house should also stay empty according to OP.

Honestly, OP is either naive or else votes Green.

Rents are going up for a variety of reasons.

One is UC.

I appreciate that the OP is proposing banning all private rental, which throws up all sorts of situations and would likely be unworkable.

But a requirement that you can only own one property wouldn’t stop any of the situations you’ve described but would stop property hoarding for profit.

No no no!
in this utopia only if everyone gets the same! No more holidays to Sandals Jamaica for Tim and Monica and Grimsby for Terry and June… it’s a state sanction visit to Blackpool for both… although they still have to pay what the previous holidays would have cost.
state issued booze and cigs too, rationed of course! It’s all fair!

It will take properties off the market though.

Err, young people are leaving because of low wages & high housing costs, not because they can’t be landlords!

Given that most rented properties in the UK are privately owned, this would require an absolutely massive investment by the state, as more than double their current housing would be required. Extremely unlikely to happen.

I agree with you OP. Profiting from someone’s need for housing is not good economics. Increases inequality and widens social mobility too. It’s no coincidence that your model in 1950s and 60s led to better quality of life for many. Plus if implemented families like your brother would have £500+ a month to spend in the wider economy to support jobs and growth. Thatcher to blame. If she replaced the stock she sold, right to buy could’ve been a great policy. As is, many more have suffered vs gained.

Yes great idea - let’s all become reliant on the State! Race to the bottom and all that 🙄

Yes @RedRock41 our economy would be much healthier if people didn’t have so much income tied up in housing costs.

On the contrary, I think we should ban social housing!

It’s happened before. After World War I when homes for heroes did not materialise, massive house building took place after World War II as the people were in no mood to be again fobbed off or shortchanged. Governments don’t often give without agitation but with enough support it could happen. For too long too many have suffered insecurity of tenure and high housing costs, it’s unearned income for landlords, many have done extremely well yet mass private rentals have harmed more than have benefited. Housing, energy, water. These should be nationalised, state funded en masse imho.

It’s not reliant on the state, it’s providing basics needed to allow families to live and progress rather than (as many do now) exist and struggle, due in no small part to eternal high housing costs.

You forgot the most important factor! Private landlords pay TONS in taxes. Companies pay much less in taxes than individual landlords who are also working.

Like everything, it always sounds good when it means less cost to the beneficiary, but totally unrealistic when there isn't enough coming in the pot.

I supposed you could consider a system that mean lower rent but also a reduction in benefits, but then, is it really beneficial?

I posted upthread almost 1 in 3 families used to live in council homes in the past. Why was it ok for previous generations to live off the state?

I rented privately and I loved it. I paid a premium to have a modern flat in a good area. Not everyone who rents is struggling or wants to live in HA or LA housing.

Do you know why? In my area it is the same 3 greedy families that hoover up everything then sit on it til it falls apart. Laws need to be made against this and enforced.

Capitalism has its issues, but I don't think communism is the answer. Your proposal leaves renters with no choice, and no freedom, and it leaves landlords out of work (which means less tax coming in, which makes it even more impossible to finance)

The ideal system would have adequate council housing for those who need it, with the option of private rentals for those who want it.

It feels similar to the private school argument - if the government really wanted to get rid of private schools, all they'd have to do is make the state schools better.

Councils/HAs can’t afford to buy all these houses.

You can ban private rentals, sure, but the homelessness numbers will go through the roof.

Far better to devise some sort of rule enforcement on the behaviour of landlords and tenants.