Landlords' Lament, the end of Section 21

Hasbeen

bris wrote: »

In Scotland there has to be at least 3 months rent arrears so you cant use section 8 if they are paying rent.
T

3 month rent arrears at, in local areas £500 min so £1500 then all the legal work £1000 then a further 3 months to take it to local court?

So far, to evict the broken contract non paying renters its cost the landlord circa £4000? from an expected income of £6000.

So £2000, less tax, less gas safety certs, boiler cover, building insurance, maintenance, redecoration, etc etc,

These are not big businesses. but local people with perhaps a late parents property that looked for some income in their retirement etc

As someone previously posted big business will eventually move in and raise prices as there will then be an acute shortage of supply, and charge accordingly.:(

chucknorris

Arklight wrote: »

Just because they aren't asking for longer contracts doesn't mean they are "happy" with Assured Shorthold Tenancies.

I never said they were! I'd be really !!!!ed off if that was my future. Why would you assume that I think they are happy with AST's?

Rich2808

Jackmydad wrote: »

Majority of households in the England own their own home. 63% according to this.
https://fullfact.org/economy/do-most-people-own-one-house/

We need some social housing, but the reality is that it's expensive to build and run, so governments are glad to have private landlords.

Also remember that the idea that the rental market is all lower end is very much mistaken. There is everything from one bed flats in inexpensive areas to manor houses in the home counties in the rental sector.

Yes - HOUSEHOLDS not people.

An elderly lady living on her own in a 4 bed house which she owns is one household. The four twenty somethings renting the house next door are also one household.

So that's 50% of households who own in this sample but only 20% of voters. Renters are more likely to be young, live in homes of multiple occupation, have kids etc. Owners are most likely to be elderly - and thus be in smaller households (e.g. a single or couple).

It would be interesting to see a stat on what proportion of the population 'own' a home - not the proportion of households. I expect it is a lot lower and will keep falling amongst those under 45. In 1996 54% of households led by someone aged 18-34 were owner occupied - its now barely 30%.

If the Tories don't do something to help private renters and get them into home ownership - and frankly that means making becoming a buy to let landlord less attractive (thus freeing up more homes for FTB ownership) they are finished as a party of government. In the end BTL are unlikely to vote for Corbyn - the millions of young renters probably will.

The Tories rely on people getting older, accumulating assets and not wanting to change the system - and thus moving towards voting Conservative. If you have nothing and nothing to lose you are unlikely to back them!

Jackmydad

Rich2808 wrote: »

Yes - HOUSEHOLDS not people.

An elderly lady living on her own in a 4 bed house which she owns is one household. The four twenty somethings renting the house next door are also one household.

So that's 50% of households who own in this sample but only 20% of voters. Renters are more likely to be young, live in homes of multiple occupation, have kids etc. Owners are most likely to be elderly - and thus be in smaller households (e.g. a single or couple).

It would be interesting to see a stat on what proportion of the population 'own' a home - not the proportion of households. I expect it is a lot lower and will keep falling amongst those under 45. In 1996 54% of households led by someone aged 18-34 were owner occupied - its now barely 30%.

If the Tories don't do something to help private renters and get them into home ownership - and frankly that means making becoming a buy to let landlord less attractive (thus freeing up more homes for FTB ownership) they are finished as a party of government. In the end BTL are unlikely to vote for Corbyn - the millions of young renters probably will.

The Tories rely on people getting older, accumulating assets and not wanting to change the system - and thus moving towards voting Conservative. If you have nothing and nothing to lose you are unlikely to back them!

But then you have a friend of mine who rents his single occupancy flat, and then owner households who have several people living there, so I suspect the whole thing may well tend to balance out.

The Tories this, the Tories that.
Labour never do any better, and usually a lot worse.
It's useless relying on governments of any persuasion to "do something"

I personally know several young people who have taken the plunge and bought houses. rather than waiting for something to happen.
You multiply that up across the country and they make a fair number, who might well balance out the renters.

As they all work, and own their own homes, they won't be voting for a socialist heaven now that they have "something to lose"

Rich2808

Jackmydad wrote: »

But then you have a friend of mine who rents his single occupancy flat, and then owner households who have several people living there, so I suspect the whole thing may well tend to balance out.

The Tories this, the Tories that.
Labour never do any better, and usually a lot worse.
It's useless relying on governments of any persuasion to "do something"

I personally know several young people who have taken the plunge and bought houses. rather than waiting for something to happen.
You multiply that up across the country and they make a fair number, who might well balance out the renters.

As they all work, and own their own homes, they won't be voting for a socialist heaven now that they have "something to lose"

Did I say no young people were buying - no. But are there a lot fewer home owners proportionately amongst the under 40s than 20 years ago - most definitely looking at the data. And the decline has been most evident in London and the south east where house prices are much higher relative to wages - the latter being the Tories strongest source of support.

I am not saying the alternative has any solution - but if you have no stake and think you have nothing to lose you might well try it.

Perhaps the Government has woken up to these new realities - even if you haven't.

AG47

MobileSaver wrote: »

Do you think landlords selling up will benefit the majority of renters who actually want to rent? As is often the case, be careful what you wish for...

Who will they sell to?

If they sell to owners who want to live there instead of Btlers then who is going to live in the homes they moved out from?

We keep coming back t o the same point that the homes are still there. It's a mute point to say there will be less rental properties on the market now becaus the prices are going down.

The homes are still there, what else can be done with them apart from rent them out for lower rents.

Yes many landlords may want to sell now, but then what will happen to the homes? Think about it.

Jackmydad

London and the SE, isn't the be all and end all in this country.
Despite what those who live there would like to think.

"New realities" or theories?
It really is anybody's guess.
I don't know about "woken up to realities"
"Realities" are so often what someone would like them to be.

I'm well aware of the possibilities though.

Arklight

Jackmydad wrote: »

But then you have a friend of mine who rents his single occupancy flat, and then owner households who have several people living there, so I suspect the whole thing may well tend to balance out.

The Tories this, the Tories that.
Labour never do any better, and usually a lot worse.
It's useless relying on governments of any persuasion to "do something"

I personally know several young people who have taken the plunge and bought houses. rather than waiting for something to happen.
You multiply that up across the country and they make a fair number, who might well balance out the renters.

As they all work, and own their own homes, they won't be voting for a socialist heaven now that they have "something to lose"

The Tories have been in power for 9 years and things most certainly were better under Labour by several orders of magnitude.

Since the Conservatives have been in power:

Real incomes no higher than they were in 2005 More added to the national debt than every other post war government combined Inequality higher Homelessness up by 200% Schools, underfunded Police, underfunded NHS, underfunded Social services, underfunded Brexit, Crime, up Tuition fees tripled Food bank use, off the charts. Yes food poverty is back under the Tories Bedroom tax, disabled people killing themselves in despair

Incidentally, your "several young people" count themselves among a grand total of about 16% of their demographic who will still vote Tory.

Jackmydad

Arklight wrote: »

The Tories have been in power for 9 years and things most certainly were better under Labour by several orders of magnitude.

Since the Conservatives have been in power:

Real incomes no higher than they were in 2005 More added to the national debt than every other post war government combined Inequality higher Homelessness up by 200% Schools, underfunded Police, underfunded NHS, underfunded Social services, underfunded Brexit, Crime, up Tuition fees tripled Food bank use, off the charts. Yes food poverty is back under the Tories Bedroom tax, disabled people killing themselves in despair

Incidentally, your "several young people" count themselves among a grand total of about 16% of their demographic who will still vote Tory.

I can only speak of the people I know. As always you have to wait for a GE to see what the real votes and hence results will be.
And we don't know what Labour would or wouldn't have done had they been in power while the Conservatives have this time.
More debt is usually the way it goes, for little real benefit to the country, leading to the books needing to be balanced when they go.

It's all very well and good saying things are "underfunded", most public services are virtually bottomless pits into which to drop money. If they are allowed to keep spending unchecked.

But we're not going to agree, and it all has little to do with the new rules for letting property. . .

shirlgirl2004

Pleased to say I have rent guarantee insurance if my tenants don't pay or trash the place the RGI will pay me the rent, pay for repairs and pay eviction costs. No doubt the cost of insurance will go up but then so can the rent. Not a problem for me although I guess the tenants won't be chuffed.