MNHQ here: Shelter's campaign for longer rental contracts

[FinnMumsnet]

Hello,

Shelter, whom we’re currently featuring as a Guest Campaign, are calling on the Housing Minister, Gavin Barwell, to give renters the option of secure five-year contracts. You can find out more and add your voice to their campaign here.

Shelter explain: “Renters would have the opportunity to stay in their home for a minimum of five years, but they wouldn’t be locked in. Renters with five year contracts would be able to leave their home at any time by giving two months’ notice. If their family grows or a new job opportunity comes up, they may well want to move. But if they don’t, they can be certain about where they’ll be living for the foreseeable future.

“Five-year tenancies would also give landlords more security, reducing periods of vacancy and lost rent. They would still be able to sell their home if they needed to.”

Last year, Shelter received this email from 'Rachel,' a Mumsnet user who had heard about the campaign; Rachel explains the impact that unstable and insecure renting is having on her and her young son’s life.

We know from discussions on-site that insecure private rents are an issue affecting many Mumsnet users -- and with 87% of respondents to our rent survey last year saying they would prefer to buy in an ideal world, we also know that, for an increasing number, private renting is the only option. It also seems to be an issue majorities of Mumsnet users would like to see action on:: our 2015 General Election survey found 80% support for tougher regulation of private landlords, alongside funds for tougher enforcement by Local Authorities, and 75% support for incentivising landlords through the tax system to offer secure, fixed-rate, long-term rentals. Both proposals had net backing from supporters of all political parties.

Feel free to find out more about Shelter’s campaign here.

Thanks,
MNHQ

There are a LOT of exemptions for EPC compliance if you look online.

thecatneuterer why the hell didnt the police report it to the RSPCA. It was a clear case of animal cruelty. Which is a criminal matter not civil. The poor little cat

Ive long suspected that there are class issues at play with the police and other organisations.

EPC rulings start next year

Helena - because we couldn't prove he had killed the cat. Even though we knew he had. We could prove that the LL had thrown out all her belongings, including cats, both alive and dead, onto the street . The Police were not interested at all though. They did come round, and phoned the LL in front of the tenant, and basically said that it was his house and he could therefore do what he liked! (This wasn't a lodger situation - where that would have been true). The Police are generally clueless about Landlord/tenant law.

What an absolute cunt.

I live on a social housing estate and certain organisations have no problem in suspecting social housing tenants of things they havent done.

Yet when a landlord breaks the law its a shoulder shrug and "nothing to do with us"

No wonder there is a lack of trust in them from parts of the community.

Changes taking place in Scotland:

www.acandco.com/newswire/article/new-landlord-rules

Mrsfrumble is right - private renting works far better in the rest of europe and banning no fault evictions is the first step here. I rented in Switzerland and it was a dream compared to the uk. We knew we wouldn't be asked to leave randomly and our landlord was a professional company and behaved accordingly (eg over repairs). On the othrr hand (to the landlords on here) we actually had more responsibility as tenants - as we lived in an apartment we had to agree to rules around noise which we were very happy to do (it protected us from noisy neighbours too after all). My understanding was that if you breached these conditions you could be evicted (and the conditions seemed to be enforced by the police when necessary - we had one set of neighbours who had one noisy party, a visit from the police and never again).Really don't see why this couldn't be the case here too. So many politicians are amateur landlords perhaps? Private renting is an awful environment for raising kids in this country.

As a landlord, I value good tenants and have only not automatically renewed a tenancy when there has been a problem, rent paid late or when I wanted to sell.

Landlords have to offer 5 years but tenants can terminate at any point with just 2 months notice?

Hmmm.

If you would only ever not renew in the event of a problem tenant, given that you would still be able to evict a problem tenant under these proposals, surely it wouldn't make any difference to you anyway?

I would like to know where all these long term renters are. Our tenants only stay for two years max. The are often young couples saving up for a deposit and once they have that they're off.
It's good that they can do that as the starter homes around here are thankfully still affordable, but we'd love people to stay for 3-5 years plus.
We allow pets and them to do their own decorating if they choose in our properties, so hopefully they feel at home.

rebel obviously we are in areas where starter homes are not affordable!

You sound like great landlords, but also, if you're in an area with less pressure on the housing market, that will weed out the shittier opportunist landlords as tenants will exercise choice and go elsewhere. In areas of housing pressure tenants have no choice often than to accept poor treatment or be homeless/lose £1000s in moves.

I've never had a problem with a landlord, it's agents that have caused any issues when we rented. They like 6 or 12 month leases because they charge you to sign a new one.

I have only had one dodgy landlord who was clearly involved with illegal stuff. I have had many unfair charges for things added to deposits, sometimes upheld and sometimes not. I have had agents walk in to the property without permission on two occasions that I know of (once I was in bed, in a studio flat). I have had agents make comments about my housekeeping in their inspection report. I have had agents flat out lie to my several times. I have had agents misrepresent the law, possibly because they don't even know it. I have paid thousands in fees to agents who are barely literate or competent.
Letting agents are bottom feeding scum (to be clear, the organisations are, not all individuals who work for them, though I question why decent people would choose to enter such an industry). They need to be regulated and fees to tenants must be made
Illegal. Landlords need to understand that paying for finding and checking tenants is their financial responsibility, as is paying for professional cleaning between tenants and all the other upkeep involved. The whole system is completely wrong and places the financial burden on tenants who often have little spare money (due to paying such high rents) rather than property owners who are benefitting short term from rental profits and long term from the maintenance of a valuable investment.

37% of families with young children rent (2014-2015). It is not just young couple saving for a deposit.

The private rented sector has doubled in size since 2002
Since 2002, the private rented sector has almost doubled, from 10% to 19% in 2014-15. By contrast, the social rented sector has nearly halved, from 31% of all households in 1980, to 17% in 2014-15.

The big decrease in social housing is down to right to buy, with few houses sold being replaced. The increase in the private rental sector is also partly attributable to right to buy: a recent select committee report revealed 40% of properties bought through right to buy are now in the private rented sector.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2014-to-2015-headline-report

Every single officially rented house I have lived in, the landlord desperately wanted a long term tenant. We as tenants opted to move on each time, not them. The tenancy agreement always stated the rent would increase by inflation only.

This is standard everywhere I know of!

Anecdotes are not evidence though, although to provide my own, in the south east, we had to move eight times in ten years as every landlord put the house on the market.

I completely agree to this and will be signing.
Something also needs to be done about landlords who rent out for 6 months to people in certain benefits, simply to get the new boiler and radiators.
I've seen so many people be made homeless because of this.

I think I'm missing something. 5 year tenancy agreements that the LL can't terminate but the tenant can with 2 months' notice? How does that give security to LL?

None of my local friends who rent have managed to get their children through primary school in the same school. The longest-staying tenants managed to hang onto their tenancy until their DC was in Y5 before the landlord sold the house and they had to move, but everyone else had to move every 2-3 years.

Speaking as a landlord...
We have just had a flat vacated. The place is a wreck. Brand new carpets stained. Mildew in the shower causing the seal to leak water behind the tiles. Grease all over the kitchen, stains on the walls.... the carpet is burned. When I asked the young man why they let it got so bad, he started getting agressive and saying it is not his fault.

It was like a showhome when the tennents signed the lease. I am very glad they volunteered to give up the lease without us having to kick them out.

As a landlord all I want is for someone to oay the rent on time, not be a noisy nuisance and keep the place reasonably clean. But there are a lot of people who don't live like that. I have to oppose any idea that gives people the right to stay longer when they are messing up my property.

there are good landlords and bad lanlords, good tenants and bad tenants - but all landlords are in it for the money and most will increase the rent whenever they can. Then they wonder why tenants move on and they have voids.

Unfortunately the latest changes on tax relief mean that more amateur landlords are likely to sell up so in the next few tears there are likely to be a lot more moves. Longer term that might mean more professional landlords but probably means less supply and higher rents.

Rather than the government messing around with ISAs and other things that fail to address the problem we need more social housing. The right to but was a disaster.

If I was a landlord and didnt need to sell immediately I woud offer my tenants a private 100% mortgage, with a full legal document so I can repossess if you dont meet the payments. Security for tenants and landlord.

I think that most full time landlords, the ones I would call 'professional landlords' want a good tenant to stay as long as possible. I know several that think like that and never put rents up, or at least they didn't.

They're now being forced to by the new legislation. I think they call it the Tenant Tax. And as I understand it this is where Shelter are completely contradicting themselves. They want longer tenancies and most landlords are happy to oblige, but Shelter are also supporting this Tenant Tax and that I KNOW is forcing landlords to sell their properties (or at very least put rents up). I don't think it applies to all landlords but I think that's irrelevant. If any landlords are being forced to sell then a tenant will almost certainly be evicted.

What a stupid proposal, typical of Shelter.

I much prefer the "Deed of Assurance" approach advocated by The Landlords Union at Property118.com