No Fault Evictions {Merged}

Sarah1Mitty2

Yellowsub2000 said:

eddddy said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

This is where we will have to agree to disagree like gentlemen.

That sounds a bit like you're attempting a face-saving cop-out - and playing with words.

People sometimes come to this forum for advice. So I think it's important to be as accurate as possible.

If you think what I said was materially misleading, please point to specific clauses in the bill to support that. Maybe you've seen something that I missed.

Here's the bill: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0308/220308.pdf

The fact that there is a bill and changes coming in is why I disagree with you saying everything will be exactly the same as today.

im certain you are wrong about this, the scrapping of no fault eviction, the new ombudsman scheme which will cost the LL but free for tenants, the £25K fines for LLs if they are found to have been deceptive 

I could go on but there is no need

Exactly, the BTL model changed as soon as rates went up, more legislation means even more change, you are entirely correct the old model is gone, I think it is the pace of change which has shocked people though?

BikingBud

BungalowBel said:

[Deleted User] said:

This is good news. Landlords can't be trusted with no fault evictions.

It will take time but as they leave the market better landlords will take up, and prices will fall so renters can buy.

Combined with 100% mortgages accounting for rent payments, hopefully many will be able to buy the place they are already in at a nice discount.

Landlords like me will just sell up.  I am a good landlord who complies with all the legislation.  It will be landlords like me who suffer from these new rules.  If I can't get my property back for eighteen months  because a tenant won't leave, then I would rather not take the risk of renting it out.

Rogue landlords don't comply with the legislation anyway so new legislation won't make any difference to them.

But if you are a good landlord and happy providing a service for a fair rent what do you feel will changes that you feel the need to get your house back urgently?

Chrysalis

sevenhills said:

Chrysalis said:

What I have observed is my rent increase in the last 2 years combined is almost 35%, an absolutely massive increase, the scary thing is, this is happening city wide.

Large rent increases will be the new S21 by stealth, although S13 protects against that to a small degree.

Should a Government set maximum rent increases?
CPI inflation has been 14+% and some foods have increased by double that. Will increasing rents make renting more profitable and lead to more houses being built?

I dont think the private market can be fixed. Instead merely bandaged.

We either regulate heavily and a consequence is reduced supply.

Or we let LLs do what they want and the consequence will be higher rents anyway alongside rogue evictions etc.

In my opinion if we regulate it has to be alongside another plan, we have to start social house building again, or we just keep kicking the can down the road, but of course this will take many years to start to pay dividends.

In the mean time stricter regulation can be combined with a government buying program, where by if a LL decides they want out of the market, the government offers to buy the property of them so they can keep the tenant housed and the property available for rent.  A reversal of the horrible right to buy system.

It goes without saying right to buy needs scrapping as well.  In addition many of the public are not aware that currently is HA's selling housing stock direct to landlords with deals been made by councils where the tenant pays LHA level of rent, but the LL gets a top up from the council so they receive higher rents.  Instead the HA selling of stock needs to be terminated.  So much short termism happening right now.

I do think S21 abolishment is a good thing, although I also accept it will have perhaps some consequences, S8 has been strengthened though to compensate LLs for lack of S21 so they can e.g. evict tenants who are anti social.

I would scrap the S24 changes Osborne made and also either scrap or apply a very low cap to the cost of license for selective licensing.

The EPC system needs a rethink as well, they are going to bump the grade required, but the reality is it doesnt get enforced, and LLs if they pay to improve heat retention will want that back in higher rents.  The only solution to that is for the gov to pay for the upgrades or at least subsidise it.

Chrysalis

MultiFuelBurner said:

What LL in their right mind is going to let to those on universal credit or housing benefit?

If the housing departments default line is stay until a court order.

Its even worse then that, if you leave before an enforcement officer shows up to change the locks and boot you out, then its "intentionally homeless".

That nonsensical policy clearly needs banning.  It basically forces a longer period of no rent on a LL for no good reason other than for the council to kick the can down the road for a few extra weeks.

Chrysalis

ProDave said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

LegallyLandlord said:

Here’s a blog post about what the potential abolition of s21 means for landlords and renters alike. 

https://theindependentlandlord.com/section-21-abolition/

ending the abuse of “no fault”, or Section 21, evictions – a move that has wide support. Unscrupulous landlords have used the prospect of Section 21 to intimidate tenants into accepting substandard conditions – from damp and mould to other health hazards – or face losing their homes altogether.

There is a HUGE problem with the UK's old substandard housing stock.  I grew up as a child in an uninsulated 1930's house.  Condensation on the windows and in some places on the walls was considered normal, that was just how it was.  The laws of physics say moisture in the air, particularly if the house is cold, will condense on a cold surface.

Move on 50 years, cold damp and mouldy houses are no longer acceptable to tenants.  But physics has not changed, and most of these houses while they may have been "modernised" little if anything has been done to improve the fabric of the building so the same problems will be there.  You can keep on top of it by heating the property well enough and ventilating it properly and taking care with your lifestyle to minimise the moisture in the air.  But a poor tenant who can't afford to put the heating on much if at all, and who turns off the bathroom fan because it is too noisy and hangs the washing inside to dry because they can;t afford to use a tumble dryer etc will have damp issues in an old house.

These properties with mould and out of date insulation still exist, I  live in one of them, the windows are so bad, my landlord has been getting someone to pull out parts of the wooden frame that have rotted away too much and drill on new bits of wood in place, all that effort to avoid fitting PVC.

LLs dont need to sell because of this, because the EPC rules dont get actively enforced.

Only last week I pulled out some moss growing on the inside of my window.

BikingBud

Old inefficient housing needs to be demolished the same as post war pre-fabs were, they met a purpose but are long overdue demolition.
!!!!!! can HS2 as the part that would really provide the benefit, the trans-pennine link is not going to happen and put the money into a national house building programme. 

Yellowsub2000

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

eddddy said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

This is where we will have to agree to disagree like gentlemen.

That sounds a bit like you're attempting a face-saving cop-out - and playing with words.

People sometimes come to this forum for advice. So I think it's important to be as accurate as possible.

If you think what I said was materially misleading, please point to specific clauses in the bill to support that. Maybe you've seen something that I missed.

Here's the bill: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0308/220308.pdf

The fact that there is a bill and changes coming in is why I disagree with you saying everything will be exactly the same as today.

im certain you are wrong about this, the scrapping of no fault eviction, the new ombudsman scheme which will cost the LL but free for tenants, the £25K fines for LLs if they are found to have been deceptive 

I could go on but there is no need

Exactly, the BTL model changed as soon as rates went up, more legislation means even more change, you are entirely correct the old model is gone, I think it is the pace of change which has shocked people though?

Yes the speed of change has shocked so many this is evident by the perma prop bulls on here still in denial.

moving home with Charlie and other prop bears are speaking the truth about a 50% real term house price crash over the next five years and the perma prop bulls just can’t get their head round it

MultiFuelBurner

Chrysalis said:

ProDave said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

LegallyLandlord said:

Here’s a blog post about what the potential abolition of s21 means for landlords and renters alike. 

https://theindependentlandlord.com/section-21-abolition/

ending the abuse of “no fault”, or Section 21, evictions – a move that has wide support. Unscrupulous landlords have used the prospect of Section 21 to intimidate tenants into accepting substandard conditions – from damp and mould to other health hazards – or face losing their homes altogether.

There is a HUGE problem with the UK's old substandard housing stock.  I grew up as a child in an uninsulated 1930's house.  Condensation on the windows and in some places on the walls was considered normal, that was just how it was.  The laws of physics say moisture in the air, particularly if the house is cold, will condense on a cold surface.

Move on 50 years, cold damp and mouldy houses are no longer acceptable to tenants.  But physics has not changed, and most of these houses while they may have been "modernised" little if anything has been done to improve the fabric of the building so the same problems will be there.  You can keep on top of it by heating the property well enough and ventilating it properly and taking care with your lifestyle to minimise the moisture in the air.  But a poor tenant who can't afford to put the heating on much if at all, and who turns off the bathroom fan because it is too noisy and hangs the washing inside to dry because they can;t afford to use a tumble dryer etc will have damp issues in an old house.

These properties with mould and out of date insulation still exist, I  live in one of them, the windows are so bad, my landlord has been getting someone to pull out parts of the wooden frame that have rotted away too much and drill on new bits of wood in place, all that effort to avoid fitting PVC.

LLs dont need to sell because of this, because the EPC rules dont get actively enforced.

Only last week I pulled out some moss growing on the inside of my window.

And you put up with this state of affairs because..............

What are the reasons?

MultiFuelBurner

Chrysalis said:

MultiFuelBurner said:

What LL in their right mind is going to let to those on universal credit or housing benefit?

If the housing departments default line is stay until a court order.

Its even worse then that, if you leave before an enforcement officer shows up to change the locks and boot you out, then its "intentionally homeless".

That nonsensical policy clearly needs banning.  It basically forces a longer period of no rent on a LL for no good reason other than for the council to kick the can down the road for a few extra weeks.

You are right, that's why we are very picky now about who we let to. Rightly or wrongly certain groups of the population will not be able.to.rent from us in the future unless there is a bonafide guarantor.

Yellowsub2000

MultiFuelBurner said:

Chrysalis said:

MultiFuelBurner said:

What LL in their right mind is going to let to those on universal credit or housing benefit?

If the housing departments default line is stay until a court order.

Its even worse then that, if you leave before an enforcement officer shows up to change the locks and boot you out, then its "intentionally homeless".

That nonsensical policy clearly needs banning.  It basically forces a longer period of no rent on a LL for no good reason other than for the council to kick the can down the road for a few extra weeks.

You are right, that's why we are very picky now about who we let to. Rightly or wrongly certain groups of the population will not be able.to.rent from us in the future unless there is a bonafide guarantor.

I suspect you will have very long void periods where you just can’t find a tenant