X

Sign Up

or

By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Sign Up

Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google

or


By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Log In

or


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Forgot Password

To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.


Already a PT member? Log In

Don't have an account? Sign Up

  • In the Spotlight

    Government announce dilution of Section 21

    Thanks as ever for the great site, Vanessa!!!

    I found the interview with Kate Faulkner particularly illuminating as she said she couldn't understand why the Government was being to all effects and purposes so bloody minded and incompetent (my paraphrasing).

    Surely people must understand that they are at war with landlords for political reasons and their "public consultations" are an exercise in public relations and an exercise in public relations only, at least to my mind.

    Ms Faulkner's point, namely IF homelessness is a result of section 21 notices, then what is the reason for their being served? Hence, the equation could well point to homelessness arising due to the fact that there is less housing stock in the PRS as a result of landlords giving up the ghost. But she might as well have saved her breath because it is obvious to me sitting on the sidelines that the government is simply not listening.

    Another excellent point was that the reforms in Scotland have a modicum of fairness to both sides and appear to be working. But the Scottish government is relatively stable and secure and is able to make relatively sensible decisions whereas ours is in a state of flux and chaos and primarily concerned with its own survival. Of course, peddling lies and distorting the truth is not going to help them in the long run, but they cannot even think that far ahead.

    Another thought is the role the landlord associations (one of which I am a member) are playing in all of this. They make out that they have a proactive relationship with government and I dutifully fill in all the surveys when asked, but whom are they kidding? The image in my head is of the government as a cat, allied to pond life organisations such as Shelter, playing with a wounded bird, "what can we do next to torture the parasites?" (No offence to cat lovers intended, but I have seen this scenario play out in my back garden).

    All kinds of organisations trumpet the opportunities that are now "going to arise in B2L".. Really? But here is some food for thoughts. Where would they be if all the landlords quit?

    Yours, in the hope I am not being too gloomy,

    Happy Landlord

    1
    0

    Thank you for your considered response Gideon and I hope you do not have to change your screen name to "UNhappy landlord" in the future!

    I suspect tenants may well start feeling glooming if this ever comes to pass. Sad

    See - End of Section 21 - "butterfly" effect

    0
    0

    Thanks for your reply, Vanessa.

    In the interview Kate mentions private landlords leaving the sector. This is, of course assuming they will not be prevented from doing so with tenants in situ if too many decide to throw in the towel.

    I know of course that 90% of all tenancies in the PRS are ended at the tenant's request. I just wonder what percentage of Section 21 notices/notices to quit are served by private landlords as opposed to Councils and Housing Co-ops and Associations (assuming they use AST's).

    In more than 12 years of being a landlord, I have NEVER issued a Section 21; my belief has always been that to do so is self-defeating unless the situation is dire, which so far, touch wood,, it never has been. But I fear that the next step is to turn us into social landlords, without of course, the resources and power that the public sector housing authorities have in their possession.

    I shall read Butterfly Effect tomorrow morning (have to space out the drama).

    Happy Landlord

    0
    0

    I've been a LL for 20 years and have never issued a S21 to any tenant of mine. on average my tenants stay for just under 3 yrs....and longest was 7.

    I can understand the pressure the Govt is under as a result of the leftist snowflakes however they broke the backbone of this sector by introducing S24 which by all principles of business is ridiculous - what they are now reacting to with trying to ban S21 is a downstream impact of that.

    It seems LL are easy targets, perhaps even easier than motorists - so I expect this battering to continue.

    0
    0

    While some of the press releases have been a bit vague about if S21 was being altered or removed - the "MHCLG April PRS Newsletter" which I got today says....

    "the Government is proposing to put an end to ‘no-fault’ evictions by repealing section 21 of the Housing Act 1988"


    0
    0

    DISCLAIMER just my personal opinion - for legal advice consult a qualified professional grown-up.

    Everyone reading this - PLEASE take the RLA Survey and help shape the future for landlords.

    0
    0

    Hmm I am watching this very closely as I find it very interesting, and yes I can see how landlords would feel about the dilution of section 21, it could and probably will cause a lot of aggravation for straight up honest landlords like yourselves but as with every system, it will always benefit one party or another, but life in general shows us you can never please all of the people all of the time, but please bear in mind as a tenant such as myself, it leaves us tenants in a very vunerable position, in my 30+ years as a tenant in various places, I have always tried to be a good, loyal and honest tenant, it's a matter of pride for some of us (tenants) that we don't wish any problems or hassles, just to quietly go about our lives paying our rent on time, and not bothering the landlord unless it is urgent.

    But I have also been victim of unscrupulous landlords that have evicted me for absolutely no reason, I am not a legal eagle but as far as I could tell at those particular times, due to landlords "selling" there properties, I had no option but to vacate said properties with very little notice, but as a man on a low income at the time I had to locate a landlord who was both caring and understanding, now as I am sure you can all relate, it's not easy to find a landlord that is willing to take a tenant on, on trust alone.

    Now I am not green enough not to appreciate you are all in business and not running free hostels, I get that, but the pressure of being forcefully evicted with no or little preparation time is extremely dangerous, but as I said there are some landlords who have taken full advantage of this loophole (is that the right word?) and as such provides zero security for good tenants who wish to not abuse the compassion a landlord may have for people who wish to start a "home" as opposed to a place to exist in, you cannot buy piece of mind.

    But I understand if you have a nightmare tenant(s) and I have witnessed a lot of them even in my current building, but as I said I am not a legal person, but as landlords do you not have access to certain legal help a tenant may not have access to?

    I understand with the dilution of 21 it will make things a lot more difficult for landlords given the stupidly slow times it is to prepare eviction paperwork and so fourth, but as a tenant of a rented property myself (for approximately 10 years) a little security would be most welcome to me particularly, and I am sure to people with families who have "dodgy" landlords.

    But I do understand how all you fine people must be feeling right now about the dilution of 21, but don't good tenant deserve a little added security?


    0
    0