‘So one-sided’: Readers divided over whether Labour’s rental reforms go too far
L.abour’s controversial Tenants’ Bill of Rights has sparked a fierce debate between Independent readers – landlords warned the reforms would drive responsible landlords out of the market, while others argued stronger protections for tenants were long overdue.
Reacting to landlord Rebecca Tidy’s plea to overturn no-fault evictions, many readers who own rental properties said the changes unfairly penalized “good landlords” and made it much harder to remove disruptive, antisocial or non-paying tenants.
Many insisted they had strong relationships with long-term tenants, kept rents reasonable and handled repairs quickly; but they now felt increasingly pushed out of the industry by tighter regulations, rising costs and financial risk.
Many predicted that small landlords would be sold out entirely, rental supply would shrink and rents would rise even higher for the people Labor said it wanted to help.
But other readers, including parents whose children rent in London, argued that the current system leaves tenants vulnerable to poor conditions, unresolved maintenance issues and sudden evictions.
Here’s what you need to say:
Perfect evacuations are not the real problem
Choose “no-fault evictions” and forget about the hassle of getting rid of errant tenants and complying with the countless new or relatively new regulations that landlords must comply with. These are the main reasons landlords go out of business, not “no-fault evictions.”
PeterRealistic
Risk increases for homeowners
Loss of perfect drains increases risk for homeowners. It was the nuclear weapon that allowed a major problem to be solved, although it potentially took a long time. With the loss, many people no longer want to take risks and leave the market. The result will be higher rents for tenants and the collateral damage of a class warfare tactic based on the idea that bad tenants are few and far between. Really?
Ender’s Shadow
Throwing the baby out with the bath water
The changes proposed under the Tenants’ Rights Bill were intended to address the small minority of truly poor landlords (probably no more than 2-5 per cent of the sector); but the unintended consequence was that the vast majority who were already operating professionally and responsibly were punished.
Yesterday, while I was at a clinic in Parsons Green, I spoke to a technician; She said she and her boyfriend spent more than four months trying to find an apartment to rent, but the supply was significantly reduced, with poor quality options and little price variation. When I explained how the reforms were designed to target bad landlords, he summed it up perfectly: “They’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” This is feeling more and more true.
Many homeowners are selling because the industry has become financially and emotionally unrewarding and responsible homeowners feel they are being treated unfairly, as if they are part of the problem.
I really feel sorry for the tenants. I have two apartments with long-term tenants and we have strong relationships based on trust; rents are moderate and rarely increase, repairs are made quickly, and tenants take care of the houses as if they were their own. This is not unusual; It reflects how most landlord-tenant relationships actually work. Unfortunately, the rental industry has generally been demonised, despite the successful co-existence of most landlords and tenants.
Labor has been warned that the Tenants’ Bill of Rights risks reducing supply and worsening conditions for tenants, and that appears to be exactly what is happening now. Those who will suffer the most from this situation are not the landlords, but the tenants themselves.
drstrangelove
Bad tenants drive landlords out
Things have become so one-sided in favor of tenants that this is why small private landlords are selling. There’s no point in renting when it takes months or years to evict non-paying or disruptive tenants; especially when landlords are burdened with many additional burdens such as reduced deposits, security certificates, insurance and pets. It might not be so bad for welfare recipients to have their housing benefit paid directly to their landlords to reduce their rent delinquency, but the government has messed up even that!
The whole problem is with bad tenants, and small landlords can no longer afford the long, complicated story of removing them, compensating for the damage, and hoping they don’t get more. Enough has clearly become more than enough!
OlTom
A start against bad landlords
There will always be bad landlords and there will always be slum landlords, but this bill is a start. Having seen how my children have had to deal with much worse accommodation than I rented in London with much less reasonable landlords (such as a Section 21 eviction because the landlord’s princess daughter finished her post-university travels and needed somewhere to live) and the landlords not being able to fix anything, I would like to add one more sanction: if you cannot fix things within a reasonable time at your expense, the property will be seized and the property will become joint ownership. tenants and the local council. No if. But no. You lose it and you can’t treat it like a capital gains tax write-off. Yes, Tory MPs will scream and whine, but it just shows who benefits.
dj55
Less rent will increase rents
If a private landlord finds it difficult to evict problem tenants, or is forced to keep tenants’ pets on the property, they become even more likely to sell their home and leave the market. This means affordable rental properties will become even less available, thus increasing demand and rents.
Most private landlords are individuals who invest their pensions or inheritances to provide income in their old age, not pantomime villains. Therefore, it is in their interest to be bound by the law to protect their property to protect their investment and also to ensure that they are safe. The affordable housing shortage will only be solved by massive government investment, but this still looks slow…
hayneman
A good rental market is important for the economy
Having a good rental market for housing is important for the economy. Why don’t local authorities guarantee income to the property owner while paying for wear and tear repairs for 15 percent of the rental payment? Thus, the risk of the property owner arising from bad tenants is eliminated. 15 percent is not set in stone, but it should be enough to get 50 percent of owners to sign up for it. Or is this just a one-sided set of rules?
Kevin
Staying in the market is very risky
I was a homeowner until November. I have not evicted any tenants. All my tenants were completely happy with their arrangements. I have always had maintenance issues resolved and no complaints.
But the Tenants’ Rights Act makes renting a property too risky for me. I currently make 25 percent more by depositing the proceeds into a high-interest offshore savings account. No hassle, no risk.
Good luck though. I hope it will be beneficial for both tenants and homeowners. It’s not for me anymore.
YetAnotherName
Tax changes push homeowners out
Homeowners are selling primarily due to the increase in income tax levied directly on homeowners and the inability to claim mortgage interest as a cost.
If a tenant stops paying rent, you now have to take them to court and pay to take them to court; This is another set of bills at a time when your income is less. Of course, this is also very bad for the tenant because a CCJ will be issued against them. Good luck finding a nice place to live with it!
CSGQ
Some of the comments in this article have been edited for brevity and clarity.
I want to share your opinions? To log in or register simply click ‘sign in’ or ‘sign up’ in the top right corner. Once you sign up, you can comment on the day’s top stories to showcase your views.
Want your voice to stand out? Independent Bonus Subscribers have priority in featured comments. Subscriber Here.
Be sure to follow our community guidelines, which you can find at. Here. For a complete guide on how to comment, Click here.
