New Landlord Deposit Rules

barnaby-bear

mystic_trev wrote: »

http://money.independent.co.uk/property/homes/article2396841.ece

I suspect the reason a lot of LLs will stop having deposits is because the tenants deposit scheme is going to be a handy little register of BTL landlord's for the Inland Revenue, tax man will have good idea of the rent level and tax owable and all the landlord and property details.... so all the shonkier ones will be doing delboy acts to avoid such schemes and all the educated, decent tenants will be avoiding them, so I guess the dodgy LLs will get the dodgy tenants they deserve

Guy_Montag

barnaby-bear wrote: »

I suspect the reason a lot of LLs will stop having deposits is because the tenants deposit scheme is going to be a handy little register of BTL landlord's for the Inland Revenue, tax man will have good idea of the rent level and tax owable and all the landlord and property details.... so all the shonkier ones will be doing delboy acts to avoid such schemes and all the educated, decent tenants will be avoiding them, so I guess the dodgy LLs will get the dodgy tenants they deserve

I'd consider moving into a flat where the landlord had some dodgy scheme, then shop him after two or three months to get the end of my stay free.

Croak_2

Hi


Does this new rule apply to lodgers as well as AST tenancies?


thanks, Croak

Croak_2

Looks like it only applies to ASTs. And AFAIK ASTs are not compulsory, they are the default, so it appears a custom tenancy contract could be used, thus avoiding this extra work & cost.

But something tells me it aint that simple...


Croak

realwildone

DS - I'm sure I read a thread somewhere where the landlord was going to add a clause to the tenancy agreement to say that the tenant pays the insurance premium.

You cannot get round the law by putting a clause in a contract?

realwildone

I suspect the reason a lot of LLs will stop having deposits is because the tenants deposit scheme is going to be a handy little register of BTL landlord's for the Inland Revenue, tax man will have good idea of the rent level and tax owable and all the landlord and property details.... so all the shonkier ones will be doing delboy acts to avoid such schemes and all the educated, decent tenants will be avoiding them, so I guess the dodgy LLs will get the dodgy tenants they deserve

Absolutely. Expect this information to be used to catch a lot of BTL landlords out.

Generali

realwildone wrote: »

Absolutely. Expect this information to be used to catch a lot of BTL landlords out.

I suspect that it'll mean that LLs trying to evade tax to make their investment a bit more profitable will stop taking deposits and this make it riskier.

peter999

Generali wrote: »

I suspect that it'll mean that LLs trying to evade tax to make their investment a bit more profitable will stop taking deposits and this make it riskier.

That could be a good thing.

Over regulation, landlords taking large deposits & law being one sided towards Landlord has stifled flexibility in renting.

If landlords stop taking deposits, that could help in flexibility in renting.

peter999

meanmachine_2

Enjoying seeing all the landlords get uppity over this and repeatedly insist "oh well I'll just stick up the rent then".

Be my guest, but explain to me why yields have collapsed from 30% 10 years ago to sub 4% today if you could just "stick up the rent" whenever you felt like it.

"the market in my area will support an extra £15!" Doh. Then why aren't you already charging this extra money?

I like how this legislation is all about the landlord and how it's such a nuisance for them. Yeah yeah, EVERYTHING's about landlords isn't it?

For once a tiny piece of legislation in the tenant's favour and the LLs start moaning.

Jeez. You're providing a service to the public. You're a business. Business today comes loaded down with red tape. Welcome to New Labour.

Now you know what it's like for the rest of us.

Welcome to the 20th century. Maybe, after another 10 years of New Labour you'll be forced into the 21st century along with the rest of us.

donna1987

thesaint wrote:

Free to join, but not free to administer. Why should I as a landlord incur any expense to protect a tenants money.
I would be all for it if the tenant had to lodge it, and send me proof within 14 days. If they didn't, I should have 3 times the deposit awarded to me, or immediate termination of the tenancy, no possession notices, court cases etc. I would happily take all this benefit at no cost to myself.

in that case why should tennants take the time or expense to protect their landlords money???? would you like it if your tennant left their rent money on your doorstep in an envelope marked 'rent money'???? i think not. you expect them to take a little time to pay you your rent in a secure manner, so you should give them the same courtousy when it comes to their deposit money!