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!
New reforms to protect renters confirmed - including an Ombudsman for complaints and a ban on 'no fa
Comments
-
user1977 said:
By using one of the exceptions which will (almost certainly) still apply, similar to what already is in place in Scotland.Rumana03 said:
Yes thats the problem...how would they sell the property if they can't use section 21?jonnydeppiwish! said:
Then this is where people shouldn’t be landlords. They are offering a house to let - people who rent it have to be able to make it their home without having to worry about being turfed out for no reason.Rumana03 said:Sometimes landlords want their property back because they might need to sell their property (due to financial difficulties) or maybe so that they can purchase a home for themselves to live in. I think a lot of people have the misconception that all landlords are well off and have multiple properties which is just not the case.
If a potential LL can’t offer this then they need to leave the rental market and sell the property.
Even in Germany, often held up as the pinnacle of tenants' rights, you can evict a tenant in order to sell.
2 -
You can't really abolish something that doesn't exist. The same rules and regs apply to Joe Bloggs renting his old house out than to a landlord letting 20 houses. Some may be ignorant of the law, but it doesn't make it any less applicable. They're considered the same 'professionally'.SuseOrm said:As somebody who rented out the family home twice and regretted it twice I do actually think the accidental landlords just need to be abolished you’re either in it as a professional service or you’re not and if that means people have to sell their homes when they relocate etc will then so be it it needs to be made so unattractive a proposition that nobody wants to do it because it always ends in tears
Not sure how you'd differentiate. Can't say they need X numbers of properties as they've all got to start somewhere, nor can you say it must be their full time job.2024 wins: *must start comping again!*1 -
In that situation they could use AirBnB. So no tenancy would be created.theoretica said:jonnydeppiwish! said:
It’s a business, not a ‘I don’t want it for a few months, but now I do’.Sarah1Mitty2 said:
So what happens if the landlord wants or even needs to get the house back?sourpuss2021 said:
They are proposing abolishing Section 21 which is no fault. And no fault means no fault!Zoe02 said:Landlords are already been squeezed with increased regulations and costs.
When they say no fault, most times there are faults such as rent arrears, late payments etc
Many landlords will be even pickier and avoid potential problem tenants.
There is already a shortage of housing available at present.
If there is a fault like rent arrears, late payment, etc, then it would be a Section 8 eviction. And those are not being abolished.
Evicting tenants (England and Wales): Section 21 and Section 8 notices - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Though it seems to me that there should be a place for someone who is - say - going to be working away for some months to be able to rent out their home to someone who is happy/accepts it is a short term arrangement. Seems better for housing usage than having the property sit empty.1 -
I remember the 1960s, when there was a real prospect of tenants becoming protected sitting tenants, with a consequent reduction in the property value of 30-50%.Rents were sky high at the time, because of the risk. And, a lot of places were only available as company lets.It was Thatcher’s introduction of ASTs which led to the comparatively low rents we have today.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?1
-
GDB2222 said:I remember the 1960s, when there was a real prospect of tenants becoming protected sitting tenants, with a consequent reduction in the property value of 30-50%.Rents were sky high at the time, because of the risk. And, a lot of places were only available as company lets.It was Thatcher’s introduction of ASTs which led to the comparatively low rents we have today.You might know Ken Russell's documentary A House in Bayswater:
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.6K Spending & Discounts
- 245.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.7K Life & Family
- 259.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFZlBYJ0_uY