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

Guest posts

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Guest debate: What should we be doing to support renting families?

69 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 11/06/2014 16:18

In April, MN Blogger Fiona Elsted wrote a powerful guest post asking why renting a home has to be so tough on families – and plenty of posters shared their stories, too.

Here, Housing Minister Kris Hopkins and Shadow Housing Minister Emma Reynolds debate the best way to tackle the issue.

Emma Reynolds MP, Shadow Housing Minister:

"Last month, Fiona Elsted's frustrations and anxiety struck a chord with many people who are renting, had rented in the past or had close friends or relatives with similar experiences.

It also struck a chord with me, because, since I was appointed Shadow Housing Minister late last year, I've heard countless stories about the problems encountered by families and many other people who are renting privately.

That's why I'm proud that, last month, Ed Miliband announced that a Labour government would reform the private rented sector to provide greater stability and security for renters and families.

Under our plans, we will legislate to make three-year, long-term tenancies with predictable rents the norm, and, as part of our plan to deal with the cost-of-living crisis, we want to ban agents from charging letting fees to tenants. These measures would allow the nine million people who rent – including 1.3 million families with children – to live safe in the knowledge that their rents will not jump up from one year to the next, nor will they be evicted at two months’ notice.

Labour will reform the current system so tenancies would start with a six-month probation period - if the renter passes this period, the tenancy will automatically run for a further two-and-a-half years, providing the security that many crave. We will also pass legislation for predictable rents in order to stop excessive hikes in rents out of sync with the market.

Landlords and tenants will set initial rents based on market value as they do now, and conduct a rent review no more than once a year. Rents could be reviewed downwards, upwards, or stay the same – it will be subject to market conditions. But there would be an upper ceiling on any rent increases, based on a benchmark such as inflation or average market rents.

And it's not just about the rent. Giving people back the ability to plan the family budget is an essential part of our reforms, but it's also about something much deeper - giving people the confidence that they have a home in a community where they can put down roots.

As Fiona highlighted, families who rent privately are nine times more likely to have moved than home owners. Few people enjoy moving, it’s a stressful and anxious time for home-owners and renters alike. But imagine having to do it every few months or years. It's not just the time spent packing boxes and paying for removals, it’s the disruption, or, as Fiona put it, “the tears, the anxiety, and the genuine sadness”. Children who move regularly are faced with either the strain of changing schools or the burden of a longer journey each day.

As well as providing confidence and security, our reforms will remove the sense that a rented property is not a home. Why re-paint the bannisters and skirting boards or maintain the garden if you're not sure if you’ll be there in a couple of months’ time? Without that sense of insecurity, renters will not only have peace of mind, but they’ll feel able to take pride in a home that's really theirs, re-decorating the property and getting to know their neighbours.

Landlords stand to benefit from our reforms too. By encouraging a long-term approach, they are far more likely to have good tenants who pay the rent each month and care for the property as if it were their own.

There will also be strong safeguards for landlords. If their circumstances change and they need to sell the property or move back in, or if tenants fall into rent arrears or commit anti-social behaviour, landlords will be able to reclaim their property. We’ll make sure this is a streamlined process and that the circumstances for recovery of the property are fair on both sides - but the practice of evicting tenants because they've complained about the standards in their property is not acceptable and will be brought to an end.

We've come in for some criticisms for our proposals. The Conservative Party has dismissed our plans as “Venezuelan style rent controls”. This is a great shame, because the government had previously said it was in favour of longer-term tenancies, but has failed to make any changes to bring them about.

It's also a shame because our private rented market is one of the most unstable in Europe. In Ireland, similar changes were made ten years ago – with no adverse impacts on the market. And it's a similar story elsewhere: in France they have a three-year tenancy period, in Spain it's five years, and in Germany – where half the population rents, and 60 per cent of landlords are individuals – there is indefinite tenure.

And it's a shame because David Cameron has often claimed that the Conservative Party want to stand up for families. "Families are the most important institution in our society. We have to do everything in our power to strengthen them”, he tell us. And yet, he opposes Labour's reforms to the private rented sector, which will do just that, by providing renting families with security, stability, and peace of mind.

Of course, as well as reforming the private rented sector, we need to be building many more homes to ensure housing is more affordable and home ownership is a realistic prospect for young people and families. That's why Labour has committed to increasing house building to 200,000 homes a year by 2020.

But even if we build many more homes, I agree with Fiona that the "private rented sector needs to be fair and less precarious for all, but particularly for young families". The status quo is simply not working for the millions of people renting from private landlords. Fiona rightly asks why private renting has to be so tough on families - but the truth is it doesn't have to be. That's why Labour will reform private renting so the sector can provide decent, stable and affordable homes for all."

Kris Hopkins MP, Minister for Housing:

"As someone who has lived in a council house, I know exactly what it is like to experience the world of renting, but also to strive to leave it, too. It was the aspiration of my parents to own their own home, and they made sacrifices to achieve that. Holidays, meals out, treats; these were all carefully considered so that they could afford the mortgage. This was my own experience, too, after I left the army.

My parents wanted to better themselves, and for them, this meant making the long-term investment of home ownership. For today’s generation who share this same drive, Help to Buy is making the transition from renting to owning so much easier. So far, it has helped [[https://www.gov.uk/government/
news/help-to-buy-building-a-new-generation-of-homeowners 27,000 households]] turn their dream into a reality. [[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/10862683/Help-To-Buy-not-driving-property-bubble-
Treasury-says.html 85%]] of sales have gone to first time buyers, and the vast majority have been sold outside of London. Property sales are at their highest level since 2009, and mortgage approvals were up 39% last year.

The very British tradition of home ownership is about much more than just having a nest-egg. Home is a place of sanctuary, a place most of us cannot wait to see at the end of the day. Owning that home can also be a source of pride, and in my opinion, it is that unique feeling that keeps the dream of home ownership alive.

We must remember, though, that whilst home ownership remains the desired choice for many – it isn't the full story. There are those who enjoy the flexibility and freedom of renting, or aren't in a position to afford or commit to a mortgage. It is our job to ensure that the system does not penalise those people for not being home owners, and that renters have access to affordable and high quality places, wherever they want to live.

The best way to ensure improvement of housing standards for renters is to increase the housing supply. Topping up choice and availability is the natural path to driving up quality. The £1 billion Build to Rent fund is one way we are achieving this - by progressing large-scale rental sites and producing up to ten thousand new homes. On top of this, we've delivered 170,000 new affordable homes since 2010 and our Affordable Housing Guarantee scheme (which enables housing associations to borrow money at more favourable terms, so they can build more homes), is providing real support. Up to £3.5 billion worth of guaranteed loans are available for affordable housing developments across the UK.

For those who call for rent control, I disagree. It is simply a sure-fire way to choke off supply. Those with a longer memory than Labour will remember that this was tried and tested – and it failed. It caused the rental sector to shrink, and a move towards rent controls again would hold back investment at a time when we need it most. Just last week, Jersey's Housing Minister, Deputy Andrew Green, reflected the exact same sentiment – that the best thing for the price of rentals is to increase supply.

Many renters have called for more protections – and this government has delivered. We're working on a Model Tenancy Agreement, which will support tenants who would like longer, family-friendly rentals, taking the edge off for parents who want peace of mind and a stable environment for their children. We want to encourage longer tenancies free from the fear of upheaval. Additionally, the code of practice will set the benchmark for a well-managed property.

Not only are we making sure that tenants (and landlords) are aware of their rights and responsibilities with the How to Rent guide we are publishing, we are also making it easier for them to complain when they do not receive the service they are entitled to. Complaints about a letting or management service will be heard by approved redress schemes, and if upheld, tenants will be entitled to compensation.

Lastly, we've been clear that exploitative landlords have absolutely no place in our rental sector. Local authorities can now take decisive action to prosecute landlords who do not comply with the law, and we have allocated £6.7 million to local authorities where this issue is particularly prevalent.

To make the private rented sector bigger and better, we have made our policies bolder. I have seen the frustration and upset that an unstable housing situation can cause, and hard-working people deserve better than that. It’s a legacy of uncertainty that we will not allow to carry on. Renting is not the second choice, nor the lesser choice. It’s a choice that deserves better recognition and support, because whether mortgaged or rented, everyone deserves a place that they can call home."

Guest debate: What should we be doing to support renting families?
OP posts:
differentnameforthis · 12/06/2014 08:26

And of course it doesn't mean we should all be penalised.

HeeHiles · 12/06/2014 10:28

Marineville Excellent post!

Adele It's a disgrace isn't it? I hope whoever gets in next grabs this issue by the balls and has the guts to stand up and say 'Selling our council homes and not replacing them was wrong'

A huge building project would employ tens of thousands of people, reduce the benefits bill by millions - If it's so obvious to everyone it does make you question the Government's motives doesn't it?

This is so obviously been a social experiment with us as guinea pigs and it hasn't worked - we can't all afford to buy a home now we need council homes - there are huge developments in Earls Court and Old Oak Common - these need to be council homes ALL OF THEM!! We don't want another Olympic Park where a huge proportion of council homes were promised and not delivered.

fakenamefornow · 12/06/2014 10:45

I was talking to a friend of mine who is looking for somewhere to live but finding it almost impossible because she has two children and so many landlords advertise their properties 'NO CHILDREN'. I was telling this story to another friend who then told me she was told to leave her home by the landlord when she was pregnant because the landlord didn't want children living in the property, a two bed house with a garden. Her child is now about six and she lives in a house without heating because this was the best thing she could find that would be willing accommodate her child. Another family I know are living with a one year old and four year old in a property without a proper kitchen because of the 'no children' barrier, meanwhile a three bedroom house with garden that they could afford came up for rent across the road advertised 'no children'.

From looking at letting list locally I estimate that about 15% of two and three bed properties ban children and a further 20% place restrictions (one child, children considered etc). 'Are you willing to accept children' is a standard tick box question that letting agents ask, along with accepting dogs.

In many many other countries this sort of discrimination against families is legal, do any of you plan to do anything to prevent it?

HelpMeGetOutOfHere · 12/06/2014 12:05

If there is really nothing that can be done about the wages/rent ratio and rents really are not affordable to the vast majority of workers, especially in the SE. I make no apologies for living here, I was born and raised here, I did leave temporarily but came back once I started my family for the family network and help with childcare. Then there needs to be some kind of ruling over landlords not accepting any level of housing benefit.

Too many times people are turned away as despite 2 working adults they still require a small % of the rent to be covered by housing benefit. They can't rent one house because they have children, the next house they can't rent because they have HB, the next house they can't rent because they have a pet and children, the only house they can rent is via the unscrupulous landlord that will leave them without hot water or gas or unsafe heating, etc.

IT shouldn't be shameful to rent and it shouldn't be the be all and end all to own a house at any cost.

Both of my grandparents lived/live in council homes, one because my grandfather fulfilled his full service in the armed forces and was then housed by the council in an area of his choice and the other because he worked for the council.

Build more council houses or housing association properties and let them to working families as was he original purpose of them where doctors lived alongside miners/council workers etc.

I live in the borough of Wokingham and we have one of the longest waiting lists for a LA property in the whole country, averaging 17 years, although in reality council housing officers are telling people to not bother going on the list as not a hope of getting anywhere near the top. Even as a homeless family, we were not accepted onto the council list. Yet in Woodley there are at least 3 new build developments and not one of them is building any la housing or low cost housing, they are all advertised as luxury 3/4/5 bed houses semi or detached. The vast majority of Woodley residents can't afford them, so they will be brought by commuters, who will put a further stretch on school places, dr surgeries etc.

TheABC · 12/06/2014 12:39

I am fortunate to be a homeowner, but I remember very well the desperation of moving every six months when renting in London. More social housing benefits everyone - I would rather see flat or declining house prices and lots of rental choice with genuine long term lets than the current merry-go-round.

HB is one of the biggest slices of the benefits pie (after pensions). Imagine what we could build if we put that money into council housing instead of private rents.

vitaminz · 12/06/2014 13:14

Divert all the money that currently pays housing benefit to private landlords (so is basically wasted taxpayer money) into building millions of social homes. Not only is this good for the country economically (to build assets which pay for themselves after an amount of time), it is good for a healthy society to not have people at the mercy of unscrupulous landlords, living in appalling conditions and paying through the nose for the privilege. Labour should end "right to buy", this policy has been a disaster, selling off so many social homes which become BTL properties and the taxpayer ends up paying so much more once the landlord of these properties rents them out on the private rental market for 4 x the social rent they would have previously charged.

We also need rent controls like in Europe and to stop making BTL so attractive by ending all the tax breaks they are given or extending such tax breaks to first time buyers so that BTLers can't outbid them and pay less tax.

Do we really want to return to a world of Rachmans just so that the few with unearned wealth can get even richer exploiting those that do actually work?

CassandraW · 12/06/2014 14:44

"Kris Hopkins MP, Minister for Housing, as someone who has lived in a council house"

There lies the problem. House building starts have fallen off a cliff since councils stopped building houses. Now they just sell them off.

Why does the government prefer to spend £20bn a year on housing benefit? All that does is put taxpayer's money in the pockets of landlords via increasingly higher rents.

Perhaps it's something to do with how many MPS receive rental income? You can check if your MP does on theyworkforyou

wonderstuff · 12/06/2014 15:10

I agree with a lot of what has been written. Once living in a council house gives you no idea of what private renting is like. Housing lists in the SE are massive, people wait years to get a council house. I currently privately rent, I'm very lucky to earn a decent wage and be able to afford reasonable accommodation, but the insecurity is gut wrenchingly awful. My 6 year old is in house number 3, we're moving in a fortnight to her fourth home. Thankfully my parents have helped and the next home we'll own.

All this 'think carefully about holidays and meals out' is patronising crap and shows how out of touch you are Mr Hopkins. To afford our house we needed a deposit in excess of my gross annual wage (which is above the national average wage). Most families think very carefully about anything non-essential just to afford rent, food and heating. Most ordinary people have given up on home owning, it's just too far out of reach, even with help to buy schemes.

I welcome Labours proposals, they are a start, but I don't understand why we aren't building more council homes, the are an investment, they will pay for themselves, they will create employment and reduce the housing benefit bill. It seems like a no brainer.

Currently the housing market is concentrating wealth in the hands of a few. When your house earns more money a year than you do something has gone very wrong.

cestlavielife · 12/06/2014 15:50

As someone who has lived in a council house, you cannot possibly know what it is like to experience the world of private renting, what a daft thing to say!

high rents on ASTs even rolling ones is not at all like renting on a long term stable council tenancy with low rent.

juliascurr · 12/06/2014 16:02

build ecological council houses
employ the unemployed
save housing benefit
virtually self-funding

Quivering · 12/06/2014 16:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

cheeznbreed · 12/06/2014 16:45

Labour's proposals are a condescending sham. 'passes the probation period', how patronizing. Even worse is the fact that a landlord can issue an S21(2 months notice with no right of appeal) after 6 months for a variety of scenarios that they cannot do so today, eg to let it out to family, or refurbish, or to sell the property. If you have an AST of greater duration than 6 months then Labour's proposals are an unarguable recession in tenant security. It's a repugnant deception to suggest otherwise:

------

press.labour.org.uk/post/84352297129/ed-miliband-launches-election-campaign-with-rents

"But landlords would be able to terminate contracts with 2 months’ notice only if they can have good reason:

· The tenant falls into rent arrears, is guilty of anti-social behaviour or breaches their tenancy agreement
· The landlord wants to sell the property, needs the property for their own or family use
· The landlord plans to refurbish or change the use of the property."

------

Tories couldn't care less about private rental sector so Hopkins is here to make up the numbers. His comment about knowing about the vagaries of the private rental sector as he once lived in a council house shows his utter contempt. His party has a track record of doing absolutely nothing of interest to the private rental sector, and his price bubble pumping "Help to Buy" are continuing to lay waste to young people's opportunities to enjoy the dignity of a financially independent family life as we speak.

Living standards are under attack from the extortionate cost of housing in an era of depressed wages and rising cost of essentials. Neither of these parties are going to do anything about that. They will continue to encourage people to take on ruinous levels of debt at series lows in rates and deny a bubble exists. Labour made, Tory extended.

Damnautocorrect · 12/06/2014 18:02

I rent, it breaks my heart. I'm not exaggerating I genuinely get upset every hour of every day about it with tears most days.
This instability is not how I wanted to bring my child up.
I send him off to school not knowing if in two months time where we will be so what school he will be at.
We can't decorate his room
He can't have a pet, as this landlord allows it but the next might not.
He can't plant a bulb in the garden as he might not see it grow.
Every decision from buying curtains to a trampoline 'best not get too big one as our next garden might be small', is related to renting. 'Dont buy too much furniture, you don't know where we are moving'

We have no hope of saving for the 30k - £50k deposit we would need for ten percent deposit, let alone our 3x income affording us a 90k mortgage. Yet our rent is over £1100 a month.
I want a proper family home. I'd also love the knowledge it could support my old age and maybe they'd be some left as inheritance.

The answer is social housing being built, not luxury flats with 1 in 8 being given to HA. Proper houses or maisonettes with gardens, nice places to being families up in. We'd pay our rent to the council (we don't claim benefit) who would in turn be able to use that money for housing benefit/ maintenance.

Damnautocorrect · 12/06/2014 18:03

I don't aspire to own that's too far out my reach. I aspire to rent a council house

IfNotNowThenWhen · 12/06/2014 18:15

BUILD SOCIAL HOUSING. Decent social housing, mixed in with private housing. Stop councils selling off green space in nice areas to developers building "luxury" detached town houses or whatever, and instead give councils incentives to build real homes for ordinary families. With gardens. No one wants flats.
I do agree with having better, longer tenancies, and fair rent. It's a start, but it's not enough. Social housing used to be about providing affordable housing for ordinary families, not the last resort for only the most destitute/troubled in society.
Also, stop fueling the insane rise in housing costs. The "property" market is no basis for an economy. You can't start to narrow the massive gap between rich and poor, without addressing the fact that housing used to be about homes, i.e a human right, and now its about "property" i.e a privilege.
If you do not address the crisis in housing (because it is a crisis) you are facing a two tier population of haves and have-nots with a massive divide between them.

IfNotNowThenWhen · 12/06/2014 18:16

"I don't aspire to own that's too far out my reach. I aspire to rent a council house"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Me too.

EhricLovesTheBhrothers · 12/06/2014 18:47

So under labour's proposals landlords could issue notice during a tenancy agreement for spurious reasons such as refurbishing or selling? No no no! This is a sop to property owners to keep them onside and will be much worse for tenants.

We need security during our long term tenancies! Currently I sign a 12 month tenancy each year with no break clause so I know I'm safe for 12 months at a time. I can't bear rolling tenancies with no ability to plan ahead, which is what labour's so called long term tenancies would be.
Landlords need to plan ahead and if they need to refurbish or let to family then tough, they have to wait til the end of the 3 year tenancy. The only exceptions I suppose would be if the landlord was facing bankruptcy or similar and needed to release the capital to prevent it.

Hopkins' response is typical Tory spin. We don't all want to buy, the country can't sustain everybody owning anyway! A balance is needed. Help to buy is simply a way to persuade banks to help people to over stretch themselves so I'm not interested in that thank you very much. All I want is a secure tenancy for a period to be negotiated between me and the landlord, 2-3 years probably. I also want letting agents to be regulated and fees to tenants to be abolished.

YoungAndAngry · 12/06/2014 18:49

IfNotNowThenWhen Decent social housing (liveable by families) integrated in private developments would be marvellous. But even the private developments being build in this country are not really anything for anyone to aspire to. Poorly-built, crammed in, tiny bedrooms, no gardens, no communal green spaces, "garages" too small for most cars! The private sector doesn't deliver (for profit!) the standard of housing people need and desire for a reasonable life, they make profit from land banking and planning permissions, not on the actual business of building the houses.

Which is even more reason for the state (the communal will of the society) to look after its own and build social housing itself. Breaking the housing developers' profiteering from land ownership will benefit both social and private tenants and homeowners! Government house building wouldn't prevent private companies earning money through honest work, but it would be an escape valve against the worst excesses of profiteering due to simple monopolisation of planning permission land.

Sadly, I think the idea of a two-tier society of landlords and peasants is quite acceptable to the political class (of all colours), and they might even think it's a benefit! Keep watching, see if any of they do anything to rebalance things in favour of the young and temporarily housed, and away from the older homeowners sitting on unearned next eggs from the insane house price bubble (hint, there's a lot of the second lot and they vote!).

IfNotNowThenWhen · 12/06/2014 19:02

yy councils should be the ones building the houses, not private developers, and I agree about the poor quality of even the privately built estates.

AdeleNazeem · 12/06/2014 19:46

having a socially owned property with a fair rent would have totally transformed my life

I would have probably remained in employment rather then losing a temporary job when I was being harrassed from a landlord to get out and was on the verge of a breakdown

my rent would go into a social kitty to supply more housing...rather then lining the pocket of a private landlord and pay for their holidays and children in private school

particularly...I would be able to afford the rent rather then rely on a top up of housing benefit (so the local authority too, is paying for my landlord's holidays etc)

a few years ago I was evicted from my private flat (no fault, just the owners sold their house and wanted to live back in it). Went to the local authority for help ... even with a 9 year old i was told to wait til the landlord took me to court, and on the day the baliffs came to kick me out, to turn up at the homeless offices with my stuff in a truck, daughter, cat and all, and they 'might be able to put me up in a b&b)

At that point i'd been on the waiting list for 9 years too and lived in the area all my life. I grew up in a council house, my grandparents also lived in one. but I am now worse off then they ever werre..

that is so fucking shit!!

FutureMum · 12/06/2014 19:48

I would like to see reforms to protect families who need to rent flats because we cannot afford a house, yet we get told the lease makes it unsuitable for children. It took me several attempts to secure one.

cheeznbreed · 12/06/2014 20:08

EhricLovesTheBhrothers

Correct, Labour's proposals effectively put everyone on a 6 month AST. The eviction scenarios for 'personal or family use' are so vague as to not offer any protection whatsoever.

Also the one where the LL wants to sell. There are plenty of homes up for both "sale or rent" by accidental LLs, so entering a tenancy agreement you already know the S21 for a sale could be played at any point after 6 months.

If you are used to 12 month ASTs or longer, these proposals are the last thing you want. Talk about a Trojan horse.

Not that Ms Reynolds or Mr Hopkins seem keen to come along and address any of the points raised here....

LucySMumsnet · 13/06/2014 10:15

Thanks all for your comments on this. We let Kris Hopkins and Emma Reynolds know that there are lots of questions over here, and Kris has given us the following statement:

"Firstly, of course I am aware that there are a great many people who rent who have aspirations – but it is clear a lot of those people have aspirations to buy their own home, and our Help to Buy scheme is designed to help them do just that.

But we also want to build a bigger, better private rented sector, and that’s why we’re introducing a range of measures to do just that. That includes our Build to Rent scheme - £1billion investment to deliver up to 10,000 new homes specifically for private rent, increasing choice and professionalising property management; a How to Rent guide so people know exactly what their rights are when they rent in the private sector; changes to ensure letting agents are upfront about the fees they charge, and so there’s somewhere to go if people have complaints; and a model tenancy agreement so tenants can seek longer tenancies when they want more stability

Rent controls would do the absolute opposite of what we’re trying to achieve – when it happened in the 1980s the numbers of homes available to rent shrank to just 9 per cent of households, compared to 18 per cent of the market today. So that reduction in the number of rented homes would only result in less choice for tenants, not more.

But we also need more affordable homes – that’s why we’re investing the billions we are in affordable housebuilding. New figures out today show we’ve delivered nearly 200,000 new affordable homes across the country, and we’ve have plans to build even more after 2015. And council housebuilding is actually up – with starts now at a 23-year high."

Damnautocorrect · 13/06/2014 10:23

Just a thought, most smaller affordable houses I see going up for sale a being bought as buy to let's so pushing the prices up.
If there was more council houses it would bring private rental down, fewer people would be buying them as buy to let's, therefore bringing them back slowly to an affordable level? Both rental being affordable, buying houses affordable, councils employing more staff, housing benefit staying in the system.

I simply cannot see a downside

soleils7 · 13/06/2014 10:47

Mr Hopkins,
I do not think you have been listening. You write like a robot, endlessly reciting the same ode to the private sector. It is tiresome and profoundly unhelpful. Did you read the comments?
Incidentally, I would be very interested in some precise figures regarding how many families HTB has helped in London specifically, which might as well be a different planet, and countrywide too. Also, I find it most unfortunate that this government implemented HTB precisely when house prices were at their highest.

Swipe left for the next trending thread