You can’t have rent control without mortgage control.
Surely any right minded person would be in favour of rent control. But no system can effectively force a landlord to control rents when he has no control over his mortgage payments. His only ‘control’ then would be to sell the property, with many more facing eviction.
In much the same way, everything has a value. If the market value of your rental property rises, you’re lucky if the landlord decides to ‘play nice’ and keep your rent down. If I had a rental property used as somebody’s home, that’s what I’d do where possible.
But realistically, people can ‘sell’ their service or asset for whatever it’s worth. You wouldn’t ask somebody selling a car to sell it for much less than it was worth because you want to buy it but you can’t afford it. And you wouldn’t sit in the car refusing to move because it’s out of your price range.
Ultimately, when rents are out of control, either the tax payer has to foot the bill via a raise in the cap on housing allowance, or people have to buy what they can afford.
With people’s homes on the line, as a taxpayer I’d support plugging the gap rather than the upheaval caused to families, however the taxpayer cannot be expected to pay when landlords see this as an easy way to bleed the public purse.
The answer is secure tenancies on local authority housing, however it’s far more convenient to blame and shame landlords, and this being the case, we can expect an increase in the number of landlords quitting, and this a decrease in the availability of rental accommodation.
It’s a timebomb of epic proportions.