Right To Buy From Landlord (Labor Proposal)

davidmcn

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Lol, the Tories have only had a majority for 2 years in the last 9 that they’ve been in power and look what they’ve done with it!

Well, the hole we're currently in is because of the referendum they put through during those 2 years...

Kentish_Dave

If Labour get in then my two sets of tenants will regrettably be evicted.

They are great tenants, and are happy in their homes, but the threat of losing hundreds of thousands of pounds means that the homes will sit empty while Labour are in power.

onwards&upwards

Kentish_Dave wrote: »

If Labour get in then my two sets of tenants will regrettably be evicted.

They are great tenants, and are happy in their homes, but the threat of losing hundreds of thousands of pounds means that the homes will sit empty while Labour are in power.

Even if this comes in which it probably won’t there’ll be plenty of warning.

You’re just making idle threats with people lives.

Wanderingpomm

Kentish_Dave wrote: »

If Labour get in then my two sets of tenants will regrettably be evicted.

They are great tenants, and are happy in their homes, but the threat of losing hundreds of thousands of pounds means that the homes will sit empty while Labour are in power.

LL behaviour like this is exactly why they are getting rid of S21

Cakeguts

The problem is that people come up with these stupid ideas and they don't think it through. The same applies to the ending of section 21. About 4 miles from where we let most of our properties there is also a build to rent company that has been building semi detached houses to rent. Their properties are in less desirable areas and they are around £100 per month more than ours. Private landlords can afford to charge less than they do. The LHA is around £500 per month and their properties are letting for more than £700 per month so they are totally unaffordable for people relying on the LHA to pay their rent.



If you start to offer right to buy to private tenants, or end section 21 what will tend to happen is that the landlords in the middle, the ones offering well maintained properties in nice areas with good schools who don't charge the top rents will sell up. You will then be left with the landlords with badly maintained properties who don't care about them and the much more expensive properties in the build to rent sector. It is very similar to a town where suddenly all the independent little shops disappear and you are left with a charity shops, pound shops and 2 large supermarkets.



Because these ideas are never thought through or researched they don't realise that it won't actually hurt the good landlords with nice properties because they will just sell up and put their money into other investments that are less hassle. The people who it will hurt are the ones who can't get a mortgage or social housing and people who are getting divorced. The choice of rented property will be badly maintained housing owned by criminal landlords or very expensive build to rent and nothing much in the middle.



Once you start to reduce competition in a market you start to get prices that are all very similar. It is obvious to me that neither the politicians wanting to get rid of section 21 or the silly man with his Right to Buy have done any form of market research into what will happen. The people who it will affect most in both cases are the people who have to rent from a private landlord because they can't get social housing. Those that cannot get a mortgage.

Norman_Castle

[QUOTE=FreshFruit;76232877

McDonnell said that, should Labour win the next election, the party would bring in legislation allowing tenants to buy their rental home and not necessarily for the market price.

He told the Financial Times: “You’d want to establish what is a reasonable price, you can establish that and then that becomes the right to buy.

[/QUOTE]Reasonable price for who, the owner or the tenant? This is not Labour policy, it is just a suggestion touted to buy votes.

Comms69

Kentish_Dave wrote: »

If Labour get in then my two sets of tenants will regrettably be evicted.

They are great tenants, and are happy in their homes, but the threat of losing hundreds of thousands of pounds means that the homes will sit empty while Labour are in power.

Will that be via the courts, or will you take your own advice and boot them out with the help of 'baseball bill'

AnotherJoe

Kentish_Dave wrote: »

If Labour get in then my two sets of tenants will regrettably be evicted.

They are great tenants, and are happy in their homes, but the threat of losing hundreds of thousands of pounds means that the homes will sit empty while Labour are in power.

Odds are they would include legislation to enable purchasing empty properties and that would likely be popular.

edgex

1) It's 'Labour'
2) It's nowhere near a policy
3) How about an actual link to what you've copied
4) It seems to be the RLA paraphrasing another report, with obvious spin

edgex

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Odds are they would include legislation to enable purchasing empty properties and that would likely be popular.

Which already exists, but would benefit from strengthening & speeding up.

The EPC requirements could force some currently tenanted properties to become empty when current tenancies end, & with having to pay full council tax on empty properties...


I think more likely than tenants having the right to buy, is the state (via LAs & HAs) having the right to buy properties that dont meet the standards.