/Parliament-Summer-400x310.jpg)
It looks as if the private rental sector will contract as a result of the threat of new regulations contained in the recent government White Paper.
The Fairer Rental Sector White Paper proposes the abolition of Section 21 evictions, as well as the removal of the blanket bans on renting with pets and to those with children or on benefits, and doubling notice periods for rent increases. All properties will also, eventually, have to abide by a Decent Homes Standard.
Now the latest survey of landlord sentiment by Total Landlord Insurance found that 60 per cent of landlords oppose the abolition of Section 21 evictions.
Fifty seven per cent also oppose tenants being permitted to rent with a pet unless they can reasonably refuse. Fifty nine per cent were also against plans to make a blanket ban on tenants renting with children or with the support of benefits illegal.
However, 60 per cent are in favour of giving tenants stronger powers to cease arbitrary rent review clauses such as unjustified rent increases. Fifty eight per cent also support plans to double notice periods when rent increases are justifiably implemented.
Most notably, 89 per cent were behind the creation of a new ombudsman to deal with rental market disputes.
Some 17 per cent of landlords say the latest changes would spur them to reduce the size of their portfolio.
Hamilton Fraser Group chief executive Eddie Hooker says: “We’ve waited with baited breath for three years to hear the detail of the government’s proposed rental market reforms and while it’s fair to say that their latest plans are rather tenant focussed, any attempts to improve the sector are extremely welcome and should improve standards for all stakeholders regardless of what side of the tenancy agreement they stand on.
“Despite this, our latest gauge on landlord sentiment shows that the vast majority are in favour of greater tenant protection and a fairer, more level playing field across the rental sector.
“However, while they are happy to see tenant welfare increase, they are also understandably protective of their investment portfolio and don’t want to be powerless when it comes to removing rogue tenants, or preventing potential damages to their properties.”
/ParliamentView-400x310.jpg)
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Are those numbers real? Would I trust Eddie Hooker, a government stooge?
I think more than 40% of landlords will exit the sector rather than 17% would think about it!
As a private landlord I I totally agree and have already started selling up my properties. The new regulations will cause a shortage of rental properties
Only 60% oppose the abolition of Section 21 without knowing what would replace it? Unbelievable.
If the section 8 mandatory order was accelerated allowing a later or post possession order off set against a counter claim even if the later counterclaim reduced the arrears to below two months this might be something. That would affect their legal aid. The sprit of the mandatory s7 order 'shall' only referred to the arrears. I know some clever lawyer will have a very different view but I expect the powers that be can create any rules that suite. They made up all the hoops needed to get a section 21 possession order how can this be any different. Except it works for the landlord to the detriment of the tenant. Ok shouldn't arrears run to the detriment of the tenant?
If my business relied on the continuity of having a large landlord community I might be tempted to spin spin spin the idea that all is ok even though it clearly is not. 'any attempts to improve the sector are extremely welcome etc' . I have no sympathy for the government in a few years down the line because they have been told but ignored all warnings about the betrayed of removing a section 21 the precise mechanism which opened the gates to the private sector in the first place. It says tenant focused, but in fact tenant focused is actually back door consequences as it takes two to tango. Dur 'it looks as though' no sir it already is.
Destroying the private sector as we know it is exactly what this Government want to do. Let me explain:
The people that the Government want to help are firstly their friends and family but then the large corporations. If you are a private landlord with 2, 3, 4, 5 properties, these and other changes, especially the tax ones and energy ones are a nightmare. If you are a corporation with thousands of properties, newly built then you never worry about individual problems, only the performance of the portfolio as a whole.
Unrentable, older stock will reduce in value and be available for the renters (probably most would prefer to carry on renting).
Renters will vote Tory, Defunct private landlords will probably still vote for the people that destroyed them and the corporations will massage the government.
You get a bigger gap in the rich / not-rich divide and that makes most people poorer and easier to control.
It's votes, money and power and nothing else. I know that sounds like the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist, but think about every recent and proposed legislative / tax change that impacts property and tell me it doesn't fit the mould.
James, l agree, but If you look back in history, most serious events are conspiracies. I think most tenants will vote Labour and landlords will abstain.
I certainly will not vote for this pseudo-conservative shower.
This incoming changes to minimum EPC ratings for rentals will drive more landlords out of the private rental sector than abolishing section 21’s ever will.
I don't understand why nobody is talking about scrapping of fixed term contract and moving everything to periodic.
No mention in this article either.
I think it's as big an issue as S21.
Imagine how many landlords will be messed around with people taking short term contracts. Leaving after a few months...
It could be monumental in the student market. It's a total f up. And nobody is talking about it. Weird.
Set to? That ship set sail 6 years ago, as some of us have been pointing out for about the same length of time.
Please login to comment