9

Landlords urge the Tory Leadership candidates to show more consideration towards the private rented sector, according to a recent press release from the Residential Landlords Association (RLA).

As well as airing the concerns of landlords, the RLA claims that the wishes of tenants have not been respected, as the Government has proceeded to introduce policies that reduce the supply of homes to rent.

Recent RLA research suggests that 10 per cent of landlords, who represented 18 per cent of all tenancies in the rental sector, intended to reduce the number of properties they own. Meanwhile, 5 per cent of landlords, representing 5 per cent of all tenancies, intended to leave the market altogether.

National Landlord Investment Show – MPU

Moreover, 46 per cent of landlords expressed the intention to sell some or all of their properties, according to the RLA.

This comes after several Conservative policies were introduced, dampening investment in the property market. The Government also oversaw the introduction of a tax on landlord investment in new rental housing. This means that landlords are confronted with a 3 per cent stamp duty levy when investing, according to the RLA.

The UK Government recently proposed to limit the ability of landlords to repossess homes, with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors warning that expectations for increasing rents have reached their highest levels for three years.

The five-point plan

The RLA urged the Tory leadership candidates to support its five-point plan for the rental sector. The plan includes pro-growth taxation, to ensure that enough homes to rent are meeting growing demand, as well as more support for “vulnerable” tenants, by eliminating the Local Allowance cap.

Moreover, the RLA’s five-point plan called on the Tory leadership candidates to help root out “criminal landlords”, by giving councils more resources to make better use of their existing powers.

The RLA called on the leadership contenders to reject all forms of rent controls as part of the plan, as the association is of the view that rent controls merely serve to decrease the supply of homes to rent. Decreasing supply reduces choice for tenants and increases overall rents, the RLA concluded.

The RLA also suggested a fairer system for the repossession of homes, which aims to protect tenants from unfair evictions, while retaining the right of landlords to repossess their properties, when legitimately needed.

David Smith, policy director of the RLA, commented: “The new Conservative Prime Minister needs to reconsider the approach to the private rented sector. Otherwise, the situation for tenants will just get worse, as they face less choice and higher rents because of a growing shortage of properties.”

Mr Smith concluded: “We need a raft of changes that will encourage more investment in high-standard homes, rather than efforts to scapegoat landlords for failures by successive governments to build enough homes.”

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to our weekly newsletter
Stay informed with our leading property sector news, delivered free to your inbox. 
Subscribe
Your information will be used to subscribe you to our newsletter and send you relevant email communications. View our Privacy Policy
Pia Subramaniam
Pia provides Property Notify readers with her insights into the UK property market, through her reporting on the social impact of various housing policies. She also specialises in covering the relationship between immigration and housing, as well as investigating loopholes in the market and concerns voiced by landlords and tenants.

Affordability and Attractive Yields Boost Northern Mortgage Market

Previous article

Bank of England Governor Warns of Trade War and No-Deal Brexit

Next article

You may also like

9 Comments

  1. The more restrictions placed on LL preventing them from managing their businesses the more LL will sell up.
    Eventually the restrictions return to as they were in the 60 and 70’s which saw a massive reduction in the scope of the PRS.

    There is nothing wrong with the S21 process.
    LL are not evicting tenants willy-nilly.
    Very few LL issue S21 without a reason
    It is IRRELEVANT if the tenant doesn’t like the reasons.
    It is for the LL to decide what happens at his property.
    If this facility is removed then LL will sell up which doesn’t assist tenants at all!!

    1. I have explained all this to my Ealing MP Rupa Huq (Labour). They mocked me, stating they doubt very seriously, landlords would sell up! But then they would wouldn’t they, until the SHTF, then they run around like headless chickens seeking ways to resolve the issue! By then its to late, as Landlords don’t want to re enter or trust the Politician with the PRS market. Took decades for any trust to return, after last debacle!

      1. Labour policy is to take property away from the PRS and bring in rent control. The good people of Ealing have voted!. MP’s (mine is James Brokenshire) really do not understand what they are doing but will cry when they loose power. Your MP is as niaeve. You are right, anyone old enough and having been in the property profession and dealt with the Rent Act 1977 will know that property were slums where landlords could not afford repairs, where rents were a pittance (£6-£15.00 pw in London circa 1980 cost of small roof repair circa £35.00 at the time). There were no properties to rent so it was council waiting list, or buy. There was no mobility of labour as you could not easily move for work from north to south for eg. We have NO plausible political party worthy of power. Abolition of S21 is the most foolish proposal from a desperate conservative government trying to buy votes; which will loose them as many as they may gain. Impotantly it takes away the tool landlords can use to prevent anti-social behavior. When I explain this to my rental property neighbours they look worried! and so they should be! It certainly put the con into conservative!

  2. After 49 years in the business of being a Landlord, I believe if all the new legislation goes through it will seriously affect the rental market. If going back to the 60 & 70s is progress, then I will opt out.
    I have never used a Section 21 but I don’t see anything wrong with this process.
    I have had tenants stay 6/7 years. No Landlord would take eviction lightly.

  3. I have still got 2 b2l having lost one as move out and evicted one as arrears.. there’s no way I’d re let an existing owned Property as a single tenancy and air bnb is not that great.

    As for acquiring more under current situation … hmm .. no need to say anything.

  4. Yes I agree the private rental sector is heading back to the 60s and 70s when it was very pro tenant and landlords opted out .
    I’ve been a landlord for 30 years and I’m considering selling up due to all the new legislation.
    Most landlords are reasonable committed and responsible. It’s a huge investment being a landlord and most people don’t enter into it lightly.
    It is the governments responsibility to provide adequate housing for the rental sector which they haven’t done . They are now passing the responsibility to the private landlord who probably have scrimped and saved to afford a second or third property to rent out for income for themselves.
    The government should be supporting and encouraging the landlord (not penalising them )as they are the ones providing the accommodation . Most landlords and mortgage companies are realising currently that the risks and responsibilities required are not worth it and I predict that the private rental market will contract substantially. This is then going to spark an even bigger housing crisis and the government will give a knee jerk reaction by starting to offer incentives to landlords. Unfortunately it’s a slow expensive business becoming a landlord and I think once landlords sell they won’t go back into the market due to lack of trust.
    Let’s hope the new PM will be more commercially minded!!

  5. The issue is housing stock levels versus demand. If landlords sell up, as many threaten, this will make not a jot of difference to total housing stock and the vacated property may well be sold to an owner occupier. So please spare us the “i’m offering a valuable service” line.
    There is something utterly immoral with the current system where the well connected can obtain mortgages for considerably less monthly outlay than tenants pay rent, whilst offering a legal minimum service. Fat cats whinging that it’s not as easy anymore to make money and who have failed to supply a single property to the nation’s housing stock, are exactly why we need more legislation. We need more competition. If a tenant can afford your rent, they can afford to pay less on a mortgage, and should be given the opportunity, that becomes easier when there are fewer buy to let investors.

    1. Whilst I understand you view I might point out that many who rent will never become owner occupiers and restricting supply with less available to rent will have an impact and possibly higher rents for those in the worst position. At present a lot of renters are sharers so minus one rent house does not necessarily equate to plus one owner occupier. It might be one more person without a roof over their head. Purchase price/mortgage is only part of the equation so to quote mortgage costs/rent is not so simple as you seem to think. There is a place for both ownership and rental. It is an open market if you don’t want to rent go and buy – if only it were that simple! There are as many whinging tenants as whinging landlords as you put it.

    2. There is something immoral where someone can afford to buy a house and I can’t..There is something immoral that I can’t buy a Rolls Royce and others can.
      There is something immoral that I can’t afford holidays in the best places in the world and others can.
      LL provide a service.
      Very few tenants can afford to buy otherwise they would have mostly done so.
      Other aspirant buyers can’t afford to buy most because they need a large deposit which they haven’t got for whatever reasons.
      LL add to the overall service of the economy by providing rental accommodation which would otherwise be vacant.
      LL capital provides a great service that is much in demand.
      Without it there would be mass homelessness
      Rigsby do you realise how ridiculous you sound!!??

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in News