End of No Fault Evictions?

seven-day-weekend

lookstraightahead wrote: »

My point is that it needs running like a business so what a landlord might do "even in their own home" is irrelevant. It's far too subjective and frankly of no concern to the tenant what the owner does in their own home. If there is no heating in the winter at my place of work, an emergency electrician is called out to try and avoid people having (under health and safety legislation) to be sent home. This is how landlords should run their businesses - with business skills. On the other hand, there should also be adequate procedures to protect landlords. People rent out their houses without any knowledge of what they are doing.

I think landlords should hold a qualification in being a landlord if I'm honest.

I certainly think that LLs should at least find out about the laws and other rules of renting.

But then again, I think most decent LLs do.

SouthLondonUser

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

But then again, I think most decent LLs do.

What's the point of this post? What does it add to the discussion?

Well, that's part of the definition of "decent landlord", isn't it? The point is what to do about those who aren't "decent".

If all landlords and all tenants were "decent", there would be nothing to discuss about, wouldn't there?

Crashy_Time

need_an_answer wrote: »

It going to certainly reduce the amount of properties that are for rent whilst a person decides what to do with them, eg you wont be able to rent a property out whilst perhaps living away for a few years due to a new job.

Maybe it will deter that band often called the reluctant landlord,although IMO theres nothing reluctant about what they do.


It will reduce housing stock and again probably put up rents as a result simply because of supply and demand.

It will take out a level of affordable housing that whilst may not be high quality is actually needing in the housing market for rental.

How does this reduce housing stock? Basically the government are desperate for votes to head off Corbyn (and Farage) so they are going to steal some of Corbyn`s playbook and tax multiple property owners until the pips squeak. Whether you have it empty, tenanted, or use it occasionally you will pay more tax in one way or another, with the objective of getting people to sell into a falling market to FTB`ers or sitting tenants. The houses don`t disappear, it just hurts more financially to hog more than your share of them. Won`t help the Tories though, they are already burnt toast thrown in the garden.

Crashy_Time

westernpromise wrote: »

Landlords don't determine mortgage lenders' deposit criteria.

Discussion going on over at HPC about how this could affect BTL lending criteria, although I am sure you have already read all this, if not actually contributed to it.

Crashy_Time

DoaM wrote: »

I blame Homes Under The Hammer for making people think BTL is a good thing for anyone.



:eek:

Gotta love typos.

It was good for bankers bonus pools, for a while, hence the reason it was so heavily promoted in the media.

phillw

Crashy_Time wrote: »

with the objective of getting people to sell into a falling market to FTB`ers or sitting tenants.

If the market falls then builders will stop building until the price recovers.

Crashy_Time

phillw wrote: »

If the market falls then builders will stop building until the price recovers.

It`s too late, they have already built more than they can sell at silly prices, and that is before freedom of movement winds down. When speculative demand cools (and it is cooling now) we will see what real demand for housing looks like, and the price point at which the market starts to function properly again. The best thing to get house prices back down to where they need to be could be Farage and Corbyn fighting for the heart and soul of the country, really not something that HPI lovers will look forward to though?

seven-day-weekend

If and when my tenant leaves, I don't think I will have another if it is going to be so difficult to evict them. I might just want my flat back, say, for a family member to live in, but iiuc, you won't be able to evict for that. I also might not want to sell it.

So I think I will just do AirBnB. The flat is only five years old, has two bedrooms (one with ensuite) and has good motorway links. According to a friend of mine, you don't have to live on the premises to do it.

onwards&upwards

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

If and when my tenant leaves, I don't think I will have another if it is going to be so difficult to evict them. I might just want my flat back, say, for a family member to live in, but iiuc, you won't be able to evict for that. I also might not want to sell it.

So I think I will just do AirBnB. The flat is only five years old, has two bedrooms (one with ensuite) and has good motorway links. According to a friend of mine, you don't have to live on the premises to do it.

Is it in a tourist area or near a big city/employer so that you’d get people wanting a short term rental in that location?

If not it might just get booked for parties or affairs!

AnotherJoe

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

If and when my tenant leaves, I don't think I will have another if it is going to be so difficult to evict them. I might just want my flat back, say, for a family member to live in, but iiuc, you won't be able to evict for that. I also might not want to sell it.

So I think I will just do AirBnB. The flat is only five years old, has two bedrooms (one with ensuite) and has good motorway links. According to a friend of mine, you don't have to live on the premises to do it.

Don't discount the costs of cleaning and tidying between short-term rentals, and how do you deal with check in and check out unless you live nearby and do it yourself ?