Where are all the rental properties?

[Butteryflakycrust83]

A few years ago when we moved, Rightmove would be updating easily 20 or so properties a day. There were many to choose from, and it was relatively easy to find yourself as a first viewer.

I always like to keep an eye on what's on the market and for the least year, I would say a mile radius now has probably 2-3 properties a week. Initially we put this down to reluctance to move during lockdown, but what is causing the shortage now?

Are people reluctant to move while the economy is so unstable?
Are LLs selling properties instead?

As a private renter I always have a worry that if we were to be given notice, we would seriously struggle to find somewhere. I saw a family who have had to buy a tent because they cannot find any properties in their area.

Curious as to thoughts as to what has happened for the stock to drop so dramatically?

Not sure if this is meant to evoke pity because it doesn't.....

I've been a landlord and a renter for the last five years. I'm not asking for or expecting pity for either.

It is factually accurate in my personal experience that recent changes to landlord legislation makes being a landlord less attractive. Therefore fewer people people are and there are fewer properties to rent.

This may well benefit people who are able to be first time buyers but is likely to disadvantage people who wish to rent.

It’s a combination of:- Renters selling up because regulation, taxation and management fee make it not worthwhile. Less social housing being built. Air BNB in holiday areas.
Its not going to improve until either private landlords get a better deal, or more social housing gets built - neither likely.

Because it reads as almost a complaint that LL can no longer discriminate against those on benefits, cannot charge needless admin fees etc.

May be factual but if that kind of legislation removes those kinds of landlords, then good riddance IMO.

It means that any future landlords would be rich people who can afford to buy a property outright and not need to worry about paying the mortgage. That kind of landlord would not worry about void periods or tenants on benefits not paying.

It is more likely that we would move to a European model of renting where the landlords are usually corporations. The problem is if the corporation owns the whole street and then it goes bust because it is over-leveraged, what happens to the tenants...

It is a nice idea that reducing the pool of landlords will lead to a reduction in what you consider discrimination.
In reality, unless there is an increase in social housing landlords a reduction in landlords and their properties will not make things easier for those on benefits.
If there is more competition for the remaining properties it is those on benefits who will lose out because they will be less attractive to the remaining landlords.

The government have proposed that all rental properties will need an EPC rating of ‘C’ or above by 2025
The penalty for not having a valid EPC will also be raised from £5,000 to £30,000 from 2025.
For older properties this will be at best very expensive or in some cases simply impossible (you can't put cavity wall insulation or cladding on a beautiful barn conversion) in which case the landlord would have to withdraw from the rental market.

barn conversion is a good airbnb type property. I would like to stay there on holiday but definitely not as my main home.. But the government is giving mayors powers to ban airbnb i.e. people who wish to do airbnb/short term lets need to apply to council for change of use. I can see most councils opting to ban airbnb in tourist hotspots.

Have to be honest- as a landlord would you pick ourselves who have rented very nice houses since 2002 - work , late 50s ,have a great track record of paying on time in full , keep a home really lovely, no pets, no kids at home - the gvt can in my opinion put all the rules in the world there, but if a landlord has choice and a nice house (especially owners who are abroad etc) they will usually go for someone like ourselves. That's why the social housing situation needs sorting - so people can have kids and pets and decent housing and not be at a disadvantage to someone like us-

It’s an explanation. I thought that’s what you were looking for.

It’s also a very clear illustration of actions and consequences. There has clearly been a failure to understand that landlords are people who have choices - introducing legislation which increases the burden on them while reducing or even removing profits, means that they will very well choose not to continue as landlords.

But maybe that will benefit those who have been unable to buy.

Swings and roundabouts, but why would landlords stand still when everything changes around them and against them?

@Butteryflakycrust83

May be factual but if that kind of legislation removes those kinds of landlords, then good riddance IMO.

But you'll still be left with dodgy Ll's.
You said yourself there are less rentals.
If all tenants were model tenants there would be no problem. But they're not and if the Ll sells up the good tenants will suffer.
Surely you can see that.
Interest rates are set to rise. If I can get 5% on my savings I'll sell my house and do it because I'll have less stress.

I'm being evicted in less than a months time. In fact I'm just taking a break from packing writing this.
I have nowhere to move to. In 16 weeks of looking I haven't been offered a single viewing on a rental. Not one
I have cancer
I have two dogs
I'm a single woman
I'm self employed
All of which go against me.

Every rental has over 30 applicants go for it. So landlords have pick of the tenants. I don't get a look in.

I will be putting my things in storage and will most likely end up living in the car.

The council can't help. I'm eligible for a 1 bed only and they have none. Not allowed to bid on anything bigger. They won't accommodate dogs in temporary accommodation. I will not give up the dogs. So I will end up completely homeless.

the majority of renters are young and therefore at the age where they wish to have 'fur babies' and human babies. I mean, my MIL is 60 and earns below minimum wage but she somehow owns a house! in London, no less. There are exceptions like you but as a whole, renters tend to be on the younger side.

I own a flat and our lease actually prohibits pets. However, renters and owner occupiers alike in our development are all allowed pets; there are very few flats in my development who don't have pets even though the majority are owned by landlords. I am sure that my neighbours who are landlords are not doing it cos they are great animal lovers. Its because the kind of demographic they want to attract- young professionals- are into pet ownership. There are also a lot of young families on our development.

This. Its an utter disgrace. People are literally homeless and others have 2 properties and eating them empty. Awful.

There's not enough profit to take on the risk anymore. Either people leave them empty and take the capital gain later or they sell them. We are going to end up with almost all big company landlords who actually tend to offer less quality homes and less flexibility.

*Because it reads as almost a complaint that LL can no longer discriminate against those on benefits, cannot charge needless admin fees etc.

May be factual but if that kind of legislation removes those kinds of landlords, then good riddance IMO.*

Well it was a factual answer as to the reasons they are in less supply.

@onthefencesitter I think our difference is a lot of houses we've had wouldn't accept pets at all- that's why we don't have one- it's not that we wouldn't like one by the way!!

@Butteryflakycrust83 not meant to evoke pity at all, but a round up for the reasons as collected via various landlord forums and threads.

I have a single property rented out. I work in the area, so I know the rules and I am a professional, but at the same time I'm kind to my tenant. She has a disability I believe, she is on benefits, she has a cat and 2 dogs, she has decorated how she wants. There is a schedule of works for the house, so it's well maintained. And do you know why I accepted the majority of that? Because if I needed to, if the dogs were damaging the house, if the government's change of rules to pay rent direct meant no rent was paid, if the house was neglected or damaged, I could put through a no fault eviction, and move on.

But that option is going. So now, if landlords decide to rent out their property, theyll go for the less risky option. Someone full time employed, an older couple with no kids, those with no pets on their application. And we'll ask for a guarantor as well. As my personal experience over the years has shown me these are the tenants who pay rent on time with no problems. The ones who you can help out ( such as @Dobbysgotthesocks , I'm sorry to hear your situation) can turn out great. But they can also turn into a nightmare situation that's very hard and expensive to get out of.

Landlords selling mostly and capitalising on the high property prices, due to people relocating. We live in the south east and were given notice unexpectedly on our long term rental end of last year. After 2 months hunting and trying we finally got somewhere else, supposedly another long term, only to be told 6 months later the landlord is selling as the profit to be made is so high. So here we are again trying to find another property and having to find another £3000 to move again unexpectedly. Needless to say I'm struggling with the whole private rental situation right now. Rent increased by 50% moving as demand is so high, now looking at another increase, meaning our rent will have doubled in a year. Not eligible for council help unless bailiffs show up, which sets off a load of other problems. Rent prices being so high, unable to save for a mortgage. It's a horrendous situation to be in.

All our tenants are long term ones and we’ve been incredibly lucky that they’re all fantastic.
Two of the families were planning on buying in 2020 but can no longer afford to now so we’ve had no reason to advertise any of our houses. I would imagine others are in a similar position.

Having and being able to afford a roof over one's head should be a right not a luxury.

Sadly for people like myself this isn't how it currently is.
Landlords should be licensed and in it for the long haul. Or they should not be landlords. They shouldn't have the right to dictate if a tenant has children or pets. It's the tenants home. Long term rents should be the norm. We need bigger housing association type landlords who are willing to allow people to live as they choose. Jo public should not be allowed to be a landlord if they are not prepared to accept that the property is the tenants home.

In my city, Portsmouth, the local council have decided that they are against Houses in Multiple Occupation, HMOs.
They are trying to introduce draconian licensing at huge expense which will reduce the number of rooms available in the city.
The outcome will affect the less well off, those in the care, cleaning and hospitality sectors will be made homeless.
Recent University leavers and the young professional will be impacted too.
Landlords may either rent to fewer occupants to avoid the licensing, sell the property or let to a family.
What ever the outcome those landlords who do pass the tests will be raising the rents to cover the 'tax'.
The council struggles to find accommodation now so I don't understand how they think this process will help.

'landlord should be licensed' Many are.
'in it for the long haul' many landlords have been in the profession for decades
'longterm rents should be the norm' How would that help a postgraduate student from Nigeria find a home for 9 months?

How about tenants should be licensed.

Quite frankly the language about it being worthwhile make me sick. Private renting should be abolished. We’re talking about a safe roof over peoples heads, a basic human right vs profit.

@Dobbysgotthesocks but putting these rules in place doesn't mean those things happen. It just means that the landlords who only have one property, or who have seen a great increase of their house price, or who have had a bad experience, will just think 'why bother?' and sell the house or leave it empty. That won't flood the market with cheap houses, or benefit those who can't afford a deposit, it just means no houses left to rent. And people like you are uprooted from their home.

The government need to invest in social housing. That's how to make it so everyone can have a home for however long they need. Yes, license landlords- fine! Most landlords do the right thing anyway but could do with clearer guidelines. But trying to say who they can rent the house too, how much they can charge, whether they can have it back again won't work.

People should be licensed to have a roof over their heads????

Wow!!!