We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Change of law for long term rentals

13»

Comments

  • franklee wrote: »
    Sorry but why would it be two sets of rules? Surely one set of rules that specify what behaviour would lead to eviction? I'm thinking a beefed up and faster Section 8 type thing in return for no Section 21. (Section 8 does allow the LL to evict based on moving back into his old home, for redevelopment etc. as well as for the tenant breaching the agreement like non-payment etc.).

    Most of the grounds ( not all ) of a S.8 notice are at the discretion of the court.
    Yes it is the tenants home, but it is still the LL's property and as such ( and presumming the LL is a fit and property person ) they should have the right to regain possession of that property when they see fit.

    Do bear in mind, that to a LL the property is an investment, how else could that investment mature if they could not sell the property with vacant possession. ( I don't buy into the argument of just selling to other LL's)
  • ET1976
    ET1976 Posts: 315 Forumite
    Do bear in mind, that to a LL the property is an investment, how else could that investment mature if they could not sell the property with vacant possession. ( I don't buy into the argument of just selling to other LL's)

    but why would this preclude selling with vacant posession? the only problem I could see with this is if the notice required when evicting a T on the grounds of selling was very long (e.g. 6 months +).
  • ET1976
    ET1976 Posts: 315 Forumite
    Having re-read my posts I realise I haven't made my point very clearly at all - which is that the proposals in the OP seem to make very little difference to tenant security, and at the same time not much difference to LLs either.

    The only thing that would change would be that a T cannot be asked to leave without a good reason (one of the 3 above). Are LLs really in the habit of randomly kicking people out at the end of their AST without legislation to prevent them doing so? Surely the only reason to do so would be to get rid of a bad tenant. Otherwise the LL would surely want the T to stay on long term? Perhaps I'm not in touch with other LL's practises!
  • out_of_cash
    out_of_cash Posts: 763 Forumite
    it would be a real good idea that whoever gets in goverment next spends about a £trillion on council housing for the whole of england as there is a huge problem,i live in the south east and there is a 7 year minimum wait if you want to have a council house for example and only if you have special criteria/circumstances private rents are huge even for a 1 bed apartment its absolutely ridiculous situation that if you cant afford to rent you will be in a shoe box under a bridge.As for the 6mths and more than likely your on your bike i totaly agree is mental but thats just how they have built the system in this country to much money spent on handouts to good causes and banks.lol.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.5K Life & Family
  • 261.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.