Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
If this is the case how can a landlord afford to pay for say 50 properties all at the same time. Why should it be per property rather than per landlord
The devil will be in the detail ?
Learn Change and Adapt ?????
All comments are for casual information purposes only. If you wish to rely on any advice I have given please ensure you obtain independent specialist advice from a third party. No liability is accepted for comments made.
It’ll be justified on the grounds that each property needs inspecting and registering, there wil be discounts on the checks into the landlord/manager that are not required , as for the cost there may be some stage payments, but the assumption will be that each property makes a profit and as such why should any property be treated differently. Plus you’ll have had notice of the proposals ( when they come) and if you’re professional will have made allowance for the costs. There will be those landlords that run rings round councils, absent/overseas/shell companies , but they’ll top of the list once the council has a bit of cash in the pot and have dedicated legal officers to deal with them.
In time property forfeiture will be a power given to councils for the really difficult cases.
Living in a London suburb where abuses of all kinds are the normal state of affairs I can see that there is a need. I fear though that as the local council is doing very little to address the sheds with beds, overcrowding, unlicensed HMOs, cash in hand, subletting etc now they will still fail to do so in the future.
Only the honest, who probably don't need regulation, will be affected.
Exactly, but it’ll stop nothing, round here we’re starting to get properties let on a TA to a “tenant” who then has “ extended family” move in a guests. These guests apparently pay no rent. So not much the council can / will do unless there are problems with antisocial behaviour , refuse issues , property conditions. A worldly wise landlord can get away with much and have little chance of being caught.
As in my first response, lots of councils will be watching to see if district wide licensing gets off the ground if it does they’ll all be on it. If it doesn’t get through for all properties it almost certainly will in the context of additional licensing and i’d guess the 1991 building regs requirement will soon get tightened.
in my view its the next angle of attack and will be on its way once section 24 is fully implemented in order to “ encourage” more landlords to exit the sector.
In the fullness of time, regulation will catch up with those that dodge all the rules with legislation covering something along the lines of property occupied by anyone other than the registered owner and that in such cases it will be treated as being rented even if the only gains are capital.