@@Petejoeoliver exactly my thoughts, everyone in the media seems to have a theory as to what Labour are ‘plotting’. Let them get 100 days at the very least jeez
The problem to my eye's is there is no market pressure to push prices down. Denmark taxes at a higher rate unoccupied rental property for this reason, so that landlords have to lower prices to respond to the market rather than keeping rents artificially high.
@@clownofthetimes6727there only out of the goverments control while legislation doesn't exist to penalise the owners for removing then from the market. Doubling Council tax on properties empty for more than 6 months should do it.
@@jimthompson9370 To rent for a higher price, we have twice the empty housing stock than people in temporary accommodation and homeless combined. Do your own research.
@@jimthompson9370 entitled landlord mindset. Middlemen skimming money off a worker so they have a place to live. The banking system (with interest) and landlords should never have existed. Anyone involved with either should be ashamed of themselves.
You were so so close to the answer when you said increased pressures upon landlords will cause them to sell leading to less houses available to rent. Completely failing to see that this would mean that there's one more property on the market, available for people to buy to live in rather than rent from someone else.
Ofcourse everyone has got a fat deposit in their savings and mortgages are affordable but not enough houses because the landlords are the issue Liebour are deluded and don’t be surprised when they start building 15 milion houses on the paper in the next year and half
@@alr68First thoughts on that (so not thought through thoroughly)- interesting idea, then 2 issues came to mind. 1. Could people start changing their “family” set up to allow their “family unit” to own more houses. Eg divorce, claimed estrangement from relatives etc 2. More administrative costs for government to monitor what family units there are.
So, how can a landlord pay their mortgage if a tenant doesn’t pay rent for three months? And then have to wait months to get a court date. It doesn’t make sense at all
How about declaring "war" on idiotic presenters stirring up trouble and fear mongering by using inflammatory language... My question for you, Mr Presenter, is... how many rental properties do you have in your investment portfolio ?
I let a young family stay on my property without rent during the pandemic, and I received a call from the police after six months that they had converted my property into a marijuana farm. They could not be arrested even after three years. I had £50k bill to pay to repair, paid empty property high council tax. I had to borrow and take a second job. I had to pay the mortgage. The insurance does not cover this cost, but I spent a lot of money on them all these years. This bill will not harm big players, but it will force small landlords to sell their properties to rich Tory and Labour supporters. In this economic situation, young Brits can never buy a property; their salaries will not afford any mortgage available there. So, ask who will benefit from this.
@@R2D2C3POSKYWALKER Yeah so as I expected the scenario you first described didn't happen. Its not that the police couldn't arrest them after 3 years of knowing they were farming marijuana in the property. Its that when they tried to arrest them 2 out of 3 got away.
@@Khalkara The case was closed after three years. The perpetrators did not pay anything for the damage. They even took power illegally from the main point. Anyway, I am disappointed with the insurance and the criminal justice system. They ran to Europe and there weren't enough resources to catch them. As I understand, this is happening to many property owners.
It's not a dichotomy, there are a wide variety of landlords and properties, some are already responsible, professional and fair and those would be least affected by regulation. Haven't we spent long enough suffering the joys of a low-regulation pootopia?
Get the fair rents officers back. The council's would save a fortune because slum landlords wouldn't be able to charge what they like, it'd be about what the house is worth again and not protecting Landlords who make an absolute fortune. Rents were much fairer when we had the fair rents commissioners.
@Roadrunner_1000I wouldn’t even bother trying to talk to these people, if you can’t even understand simple supply and demand they can’t understand anything 😂
There's a homelessness crisis, a housing crisis and empty homes. If landlords don't wanna do their bit then the government should intervene. People's welfare and the national economy is more important than one person's wealth or portfolio
Landlords make an investment - not to be condescending, but that comes with work. You are not entitled to profit from that investment, just like any other investment. I could not care less about landlords moaning that their investment isn’t profitable enoiugh.
My landlord just increases my rent by 28% in a month and for less than 15 months moving in, my landlord has increased my rent by 48% of the original rent price. How is this fair on me
The landlord isn’t obliged to think about you before their own interests . Costs have gone up alot . These are privately owned properties so why should they hi out of their way for you ? They aren’t your councils
@@amirraza7706and that is why tougher rules are required. landlords are investors, investments go up and down. landlords seems to be only interested on the up
Blame the gov not the Landlord. I'm one just talk to us. I haven't hiked up because my mortgage is fixed for now but unfortunately when it becomes variable I too will have to hike. I don't want to but I have to otherwise I would be under water.
@Roadrunner_1000 But that logic doesn't follow. The landlord can take on a loss, or even sell the property. You are assuming that he needs to be able to keep borrowing at this rate you cite. Morally speaking, they shouldn't be able to raise rents like that. Period.
Decent and fair landlords need not worry about this legislation, why should they? I'm a landlord, I welcome it. I want my tenants to feel secure in the place they live. Why is everything a 'war' by certain commentators? War on motorists, war on woke, war on landlords....it's a nonsense. It's called a fair deal for all.
Because it would cost a lot of money to house people who don't pay their rent and generally trash houses. Councils are either bankrupt or approaching it. There isn't an insurer in the land that would touch them as it's pretty clear they will be paying out no end.
The Grantham witch started the process of selling of social housing cheaply and disallowing councils from replacing the stock. Changes could be made there, end the right to buy especially with massive discounts obviously someone (the taxpayers) is funding that discount. Then replace the social housing stock.
The idea that getting landlords to follow minimum standards reduces housing stock is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. If houses were more affordable to owners and not scalper landlords the housing stock would go UP for normal people. 🤦♂️
What your saying is one of the reasons that we saw the chaos over the weekend. Housing is a problem and lots of people don't want it to be solved becuase it'll mean their property protfolio will be worth less because more home are available. Instead they'll blame immigration numbers, when the issues are actually just that the country hasn't built enough houses or made it easy enough for people to get on the property ladder. That and the underfunding of the nhs, benifts and employment is why people are actually angry, and they are getting redirected by the malicious or useful idiots to blame everything on immigration becuse we can't have them notice who is actually to blame.
@Roadrunner_1000 if there's ten families renting, and two new renters need homes, how many homes do we need? Now, if we have 5 renters and 5 owner-occupiers, and two new renters need homes, how many homes do we need?
My friend who is a land lord , and is loosing £400 a month, she will loose her house if she does not sell! And why should landlords have to subsidise the government when they are heavily taxed already, MOST land lords and making very very little as they are so heavenly taxed .
Labour are cinically getting the votes of under 50s with this crackdown on landlords and giving Renters more rights. Mate Tories were doing the same thing with over 55s trying to introduce Triple Lock Plus but nobody wants to talk about that now. To the presenter if you are going to have these conversations you need to have a genuine discussion about the issues rather than what seems to be his presenting style of being contrarian just because or in this case because as I can assume he has skin in the game and has at least one rental property on his portfolio.
If landlords decide they 'can't be bothered with it' and sell up, to whom are they going to sell? Either the people who need housing, in which case landlords will have to bring the price down to meet the demand, or they will sell to other landlords, who feel they are able to adapt to the new requirements. Free market at its best.
Landlords won’t sell the price reduced unless there is a saturation in the market (tonnes of properties in the area goes on sale), which makes it competitive in the buyer’s favour if they want to buy a property cheaper. This could happen, but not sure by how much. I don’t think any landlords who have been benefiting for decades would care though, their properties are still worth lots more even if there was a price dip, it’ll still be more than when they bought it. And many who have been playing the system who are being targeted are probably not even registered, and may still exploit tenants who don’t know their rights.
Owning your own home is part of our social contract. We work to be in our own property. Without out, people are disenfranchised. Frankly, it's a human right to own the roof that is over your head. Landlords hoard and exploit the housing system for nothing but profit. Renting costing more than a mortgage monthly is outright criminal.
Going to leave my properties empty out of spite. Mortgage & Council Tax is £3k a year. Property going up by more than double that. Already got all tenants under eviction. And they are all complaining that the rents on their new homes will be more than what I charge Told them to blame Labour.
Makes a change from picking on pensioners and the disabled which were their first targets. Now if they could only get around to actually making businesses and the ultra wealthy pay a fair share.
You and I clearly have completely different definitions of war on Landlord's. Landlords have had it way too easy for way too long. These slight policy changes is just fiddling with numbers. Alot tougher stance is needed when dealing with landlords.
Oh no, won’t you think of the landlords.. If we have less landlords as a result of this then the demand for houses on the market goes down both reducing some of the cost for houses and free up more choice for the market for buyers.. This is exactly what we want, not a rent economy for the working class while the middle class get to make extra thousands by buying up all the houses.. thank you very much..
I am honestly trying to figure this out, so how will the landlord pay their mortgage, if tenants are told to stay in the property, even though they can’t afford the rent, until the landlord goes bankrupt and the house get repossessed. 🤔
It is only cowardly people that side with landlords over tenants, when there is a long history of landlords abusing and using their power over their tenants. None of the proposed rules remove safe guards for landlords in cases where the tenants are being unruly. If a landlord doesn't like to play by the rules, they should sell their investment.
That’s what bad tenants always say . At the end of the day the property belongs to the landlords. It’s a basic right that one has total control of their possessions. If you don’t like it then buy your own house .
Landlords are businesspeople . The while point is to earn an income . They aren’t here to provide tenant with council type houses . And they a rent there to pick up for the local councils .
16 weeks no rent before people can be evicted? Is this guy aware that landlords have mortgages ? If your rent is 1000 a month, the landlord isnt making a 1000 a month. waiting 16 weeks means most landlords will have the property taken from the bank.
People don't understand that most landlords are barely, BARELY breaking even on their properties even with the high rental costs. They just focus on their own money as usual, whine about landlords, yet would become one in a heartbeat if it meant making money. Hypocrisy from the public as usual.
@@Dynasty1818Read back what you just typed. If a system puts *that* much pressure on, let’s be frank, lower middle class people to upcharge people even further down the ladder than them, is that not a sign that the system (landlordism) is fundamentally broken?
Less landlords, Less rentals, Those that left can charge what they like. Id also say if you own something you can charge what you want. I dont see anything to stop Supermarkets being forced to lower costs or the energy companies.
One thing that seems to be missed. Is that if landlords exit. Then those homes will be avaliable to buy increasing housing stock for buyers and therefore reducing price of housing. Eliminating alot of the need for renting culture. I don't see a downside really
Empty houses, not everyone wants to buy. I don’t think they’ve considered if councils or authorities can even afford to take on properties to rent out, still talking about a lot of money.
There’s always a conversation about landlords but what the general public don’t understand is there are specialist build to rent corporations that are essentially private companies that are planning on taking over the sector. Wake up, landlords are not the problem. Government interference is the problem
Or, and I think you may want to sit down for this, they are both problems? What about the last 14 years suggests to you that less regulations is better? I mean the proof is literally in the pudding. Forgive me for not crying tears over individual landlords losing out on all the juicy profits from renters to big corporations. They might not do as much total harm to renters as the conglomerates and associations, but they are still enemies of the working class.
@@TomCL-vb6xc just pay your rent to the big corporations like a lemming. It’s the equivalent of supporting Tesco’s over your local grocery store. You need to have abroad understanding of finances to appreciate the mechanism of how it works but it may be beyond you
@@CROSSNSHOOT Or - and again, you may want to sit down - we remove both? Perhaps housing - which is a fundamental human right and shouldn’t be grossly equated to groceries - should not be interlinked with business or profiteering whatsoever? I’m talking no big business or small business, or in other words, shifting the focus of housing to ensuring accessability for as many people as possible rather than profits; whether it be corporations or individual landlords. I don’t understand what part of my comment suggested to you that I’m somehow in favour of big businesses profiteering off of housing. In even simpler terms; landlords bad, housing corporations also bad.
A relative rented out a flat. She didn’t pay the rent for 3 months but complained when the boiler broke down ( it was then fixed within 1/2 days). Where is the balance ? Rental accommodation is going to get more expensive and deposits much larger
People can't afford the prices maybe she should lower the price of rent so the renter doesn't struggle why does she need a 2nd home can't she sell the property? I think 2nd home owners should be taxed there's a house shortage that's stopping a family from growing.
Understandable. I've properties in Scotland and there are rent increase limits, fair enough, but the limit was set at 0% for 2+ years in Covid. Tenants can quit at any time, Landlords can't evict unless they're moving in themselves or redeveloping the property. The pendulum has swung too far.
I had a professional landlord in the 80s. The second that the government abolished rent controls. I got a notice to quit but could stay at a higher rent. That happened every year after that. Landlord have been doing well since although bad tenants can cost dear
Landlords are selling their houses to banks and hedge funds. They own the government and dictate policy. Once they own all the stock, renters will really feel the pinch as their is no longer a "little guy" landlord to beat up and strawman.
Yeh and Instead of having an extra property for a pension purposes let’s force people to invest their money in private pensions that fund asset management firms who buy up thousands of properties and further drive up property prices and rent. I’m sure tenants really enjoy having a massive corporation as their landlord rather than an individual with one or two extra properties that they personally oversee and take care of.
It really depends on how far Labour goes. If a tenant is protected because they can't/won't pay rent then that is a huge risk to landlords. Using Grenfell tower though was a bad example because the rules were already there when the cladding was put up but it was ignored.
I've got a number of similar mortage free houses in the same area. I raised the rent from £900 to £1300 on all of them in preparation for the coming changes.
Labour's landlord proposals will hasten an existing trend : small private rented sector landlords quitting the 'buy to let' market. This will further reduce the housing stock available to rent at a time of rising demand for rental properties. This is of no benefit whatsoever to tenants!
Yup, we can pay 7k to upgrade our scottish 1 bedroom flat let (inheritance purchase to hopefully give us a pension ) to have it raise to a C from an E in the EPC chart or we can sell it at a massive loss (less than half the purchase price) . Given that we were letting it out for £400 a month, it was a no brainer and it is being sold. It never reached an income where tax was payable in all the years we owned it and many years we operated at a loss but wanted to keep it going as affordable housing due to all the homelessness in the area.
I privately rent and I have fantastic landlord who charges me very reasonable as they are glad to have a tenant who looks after their home and can pay rent as previous tenants didn’t and they nearly lost their home as they aren’t as well off as people assume just because they have a second property… if they bring in certain measures landlords are just not going to rent out their properties and the homelessness and housing crisis will just increase. I support no fault evictions but saying they can’t evict a tenant who would be at risk of being homeless well isn’t that everyone who is renting who is unable to buy?! Who would rent out their property and then not legally be able to get a tenant out. Landlords will stop renting.
Hi again, This isn't really true tho. Landlords will continue to rent out properties so long as it is profitable. These changes do not make it unprofitable for pretty much everyone. Landlords always make threats of leaving the market if a new rule comes in, but rarely do, and if individuals do, new ones come in. It was the same when the Tories proposed pulling back for of the landlord provisions that where there in the past. But if something is making a 70% profit and a new policy makes it a 65% profit, they won't like it but they arent gonna sell up. There is no evidence to suggest these changes will affect a landlords bottom line very much at all.
Honestly I believe that people shouldn't be allowed to own more than one home, that all landlords should be forced to divest their property at market rate to the state and the state can then use those properties as rent to buy council housing.
Small time landlords are selling up. Large investors like Lloyds are building more build to rent properties, they will be picky and choose the best of the crop. Moreover they are not replacing enough properties sold by small time landords, hence why Rents have rocketed. Moreover on average more people are displaced when a rental is disposed of, especially a HMO, as most are bought by a single person or a couple first time buyers. Be careful what you wish for.
@Roadrunner_1000 Luckily I already own my property and have no desire to rob from anyone else or need a 2nd once. Also, theres no such things as sins, only terrible people..... Weirdly enough it's usually the people who call things "sins".
Would have been a better discussion if you had a landlord on your show. The way to get cheaper rents is to have more houses available to rent. The Government action is likely to reduce the number of houses in the Private Rental Sector without adding a single house to the Social Housing Sector. Less houses to rent forces rents up.
They’d have to afford one to live in first which is next to impossible so I think the interesting thing is why someone might have a problem with protecting people from becoming homeless.
I wish they’d make landlords contribute to shared building costs. I’ve paid to have shared gutters cleaned for 20 years. When I asked them to contribute half, I got a flat no! 😡
I used to rent and i am an accidental landlord. I house 5 people who are all going to be evicted in the next 6 months as i cant be bothered to deal with their personal problems, increased mortgage interest and the raft of regulations and obligations. They all pay well below market rate so its going to be a big shock for them to adjust to labours new world. A world where they will all be living in a HMO with a refugee on benefits, ex convict and 3 dogs 😂
Portfolio landlords have been the main driver of high house prices and rents. We have needed a hard reset for many years now. These proposed reforms plus a social housing expansion wiil lower inflation and improve employment figures.
All these NEW conditions , already in scotland and all the landlords and myself are selling up , and the rents are souring! Last flat i advertised i had over 300 applicants!
Labour are making it harder for landlords AND tenants coz no council houses. Been like this for years but now..more lost promises to build more council houses and still selling them off so make it harder for landlords to evict a bad tenant..oh..and all the raising costs by councils and governments fall onto tenants..way more than a council house..but..none. x
If a landlord decides it’s no longer worth it and sells up and moves on this does not remove the house from the housing stock. The house is still there. It will either be bought by a owner occupier or a new landlord. The house doesn’t disappear. Landlords do not add to the housing stock unless they have actually built the house. The only way it would be removed from the housing stock is if it was allowed to stand empty or used as a second or third home both of which should be heavily taxed.
it gets sold to corporations that are trying to monopolise all housing stock. Once they do, they can artificial raise prices because there'll be no competition.
You are missing the point. If a landlord sells to a owner occupier that property is no longer available for a family that has no choice but to rent because they have no money to buy. Its clutching at straws to think that another landlord will take up the mantle in this present war on landlord labour led country
@@johncremin9488 I get the point that landlord’s buying property on buy2rent mortgages have increased demand on the housing market which has inevitably led to house prices rising beyond the scope of the average family. But the basic fact remains that if a family only rents or buys one property (ie to live in) then housing stock is not reduced by any house changing between the two markets. In coastal towns often as much as half the houses are second homes or airBnB which reduces the houses available to live in. In Salcombe there is a 80% rate of housing being second homes, it is now the most expensive place to live in the country. Private landlords buying properties is the real reason housing is so expensive both to buy and rent. Landlords are the problem not the solution.
@@TopazDr the solution is to tax houses when used as second homes and airBnB or owned by corporations unless they are those run by charities such as Circle 33 or Crown Estates who have no profit incentive to raise rents.
Makes sense to better look after tenants when there are bad landlords and definitely support tenant rights to have pets, tenants remain responsible as they would their kids and themselves - but they have to be careful with the way such a bill works as it can also affect tenant ability to rent if landlords see them as a liability. There are also still tenants who either still can’t afford, or don’t want to invest nor commit to be a homeowner even if this leads to landlords selling up, so you can still end up with empty properties and no ability to house as I doubt the council would have the ability to foot up the bill, hence why private landlords are also used. I think in genuine cases though if such hardship happens, there should also support to provide the tenant’s rent to a reasonable amount in these circumstances, because equally it’s not fair the landlord is responsible for paying for someone else’s hardship, they can maybe support some security but it will be something the state need to be financially responsible to support the tenant.
So the usurious banks should also shoulder some of the responsibility…let the usurious banks lower the usurious interest rates when a private landlord has a tenant has cancer or will lose his job. Down with usury! Down with usury?
How about selective licensing ? And all the other penalties on landlords ? Why shouldn’t one who owns a property not have the right to evict who they what ? It’s their property .
When rogue tenants stop paying rent, which is the main reason why evictions happen, it is essentially theft from the majority who are decent landlords, and it should be treated as such. The landlord still has to pay huge mortgages, costs, etc..., how in the world is it fair on the landlord to become bankrupted if rogue tenants stop paying rent?
@@akosiamarilloThat is total nonsense, theft is theft. Tenants consistently or purposely not paying rent is like shoplifting from shops, it is theft and is wrong.
Storing up problems for the future? That said from a person who doesn’t live in squalid conditions. These problems have been stored up over decades and it’s just not acceptable. What are the odds on this presenter being a buy to let landlord?
boiler broken 2 years then when the landlord got me a new boiler i had to fit it myself 2 years later still not paid for putting the new boiler in also mold in down stairs toilet had to live with it on-sweet toilet leaking for a year and i had to sort that problem out and now i owe 2 months rent.
I do wish we have a country agreement re relationship with rent. I wonder if there could be rules / caps re putting up rent payments, when morgage on home already paid, so above that all prifit minus upkeep of home. Also, could there be a means tested rent requirement. Finally, if you are a single occupant, could there be a 25% decrease as in council tax to reflect this. Thanks just curious if any of above been considered.
my own situation was being on UC and having my rent go from £425 to £475 with the max rental cover by housing benefit being £425 - for a few months I had to find the esta 50quid myself - no negotiation...just a straight up 50 hike. all because the owner anted to make the flats sale more attractive to a potential buyer. some extra protections would have been very welcome.
It's not ridiculous to put up rent by 25% if you haven't put it up for 5 or 10 years!! I'm putting a property rent up by 40% because I've been undercharging 60% for last 3 years because I was doing a hard up tenant a favour! He's not hard up now and my costs including mortgage have gone up!!
It's not unreasonable to charge market rate when your costs and expenses are charged to you at market rate. Their can be genuine grievances about the state of UK housing, but demands for landlords to simply run the rental sector at a loss are ridiculous
So you are buying property you can't afford and making someone else pay the whole cost. Ignoring the profit you have in assets. Monthly in and out costs ignore the fact that you are gaining asset ownership throughout the rental period.
I do wish the media would stop using the word "war". It's just ridiculous.
War in short for We Are Right.
This guy is really trying to whip up a storm, isn't he?
He called it a plot rather than a plan as well. I imagine he’s got vested interest and trying to save a few quid on bringing his portfolio up to code.
The media knows more than one definition of war, the media owns a Britannica.
@@Petejoeoliver exactly my thoughts, everyone in the media seems to have a theory as to what Labour are ‘plotting’. Let them get 100 days at the very least jeez
Why ignore the 1million empty homes in the UK? No shortage, just a serious greed and money laundering problem.
Those homes are in areas like Middlesbrough - where riots are full swing!
The problem to my eye's is there is no market pressure to push prices down. Denmark taxes at a higher rate unoccupied rental property for this reason, so that landlords have to lower prices to respond to the market rather than keeping rents artificially high.
@@clownofthetimes6727there only out of the goverments control while legislation doesn't exist to penalise the owners for removing then from the market. Doubling Council tax on properties empty for more than 6 months should do it.
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Why would a LL keep somewhere empty? That would make no sense.
@@jimthompson9370 To rent for a higher price, we have twice the empty housing stock than people in temporary accommodation and homeless combined. Do your own research.
Decent landlords need not worry.
And landlords are leeches anyways
@@SamWilkinsonnand tenants are vermin.
Decent landlords are the ones which typically give leeway to broke tenants. So they should be very worried.
@@SamWilkinsonn wrong way around.
@@jimthompson9370 entitled landlord mindset. Middlemen skimming money off a worker so they have a place to live. The banking system (with interest) and landlords should never have existed. Anyone involved with either should be ashamed of themselves.
You were so so close to the answer when you said increased pressures upon landlords will cause them to sell leading to less houses available to rent. Completely failing to see that this would mean that there's one more property on the market, available for people to buy to live in rather than rent from someone else.
If they can only afford to rent how will they get a deposit and buy a house. Prices won't crash.
The argument is that house will just be snapped up by a wealthier landlord. There needs to be a cap on the number of properties a family unit can own.
Ofcourse everyone has got a fat deposit in their savings and mortgages are affordable but not enough houses because the landlords are the issue
Liebour are deluded and don’t be surprised when they start building 15 milion houses on the paper in the next year and half
All the HMOs that get sold won't help the housing market.
@@alr68First thoughts on that (so not thought through thoroughly)- interesting idea, then 2 issues came to mind. 1. Could people start changing their “family” set up to allow their “family unit” to own more houses. Eg divorce, claimed estrangement from relatives etc 2. More administrative costs for government to monitor what family units there are.
So, how can a landlord pay their mortgage if a tenant doesn’t pay rent for three months? And then have to wait months to get a court date. It doesn’t make sense at all
Work. Landlord shouldn't be a job.
@@cosmosadorabilis7677you couldn’t afford a mortgage anyway
Sell. We need homes on the market and money in the stock market benefiting the economy. Landlords are parasites
What doesn't make sense is tenants buying their landlords' properties for them
If you have a mortgage you don't own the property, simple as
War on landlords ?? Brilliant. They've had it too easy for far too long .
Yeah 25 percent minimum deposits, 28% CGT, 40% IHT and higher mortages and SDLT is easy to handle, that's why anyone can do it in rent free heads
They’ve got those property’s for free
Unlucky you 😎
@@comparecards5688Who got properties for free? Why make stuff up?
@@SamS-uv2ql you understand sarcasm?
Literally been a war on tenants for the last few decades.
Renters need more protections from bad landlords and especially slum landlords.
They could just move 😂😂
@Roadrunner_1000 let me get the worlds smallest violin
@@stopthetories you might respect your property but believe me there are lots of renters dont
How about declaring "war" on idiotic presenters stirring up trouble and fear mongering by using inflammatory language...
My question for you, Mr Presenter, is... how many rental properties do you have in your investment portfolio ?
I let a young family stay on my property without rent during the pandemic, and I received a call from the police after six months that they had converted my property into a marijuana farm. They could not be arrested even after three years. I had £50k bill to pay to repair, paid empty property high council tax. I had to borrow and take a second job. I had to pay the mortgage. The insurance does not cover this cost, but I spent a lot of money on them all these years.
This bill will not harm big players, but it will force small landlords to sell their properties to rich Tory and Labour supporters.
In this economic situation, young Brits can never buy a property; their salaries will not afford any mortgage available there. So, ask who will benefit from this.
This!!!! I honestly think landlords need to unionise and lobby the government about this. I don’t think most people understand this issue.
There's no way that this is real. If the police found out they were actively farming they would immediately get arrested & get several years in jail.
@@Khalkara huh!! They escaped from the back door. They could arrest only one of the three.
@@R2D2C3POSKYWALKER Yeah so as I expected the scenario you first described didn't happen.
Its not that the police couldn't arrest them after 3 years of knowing they were farming marijuana in the property. Its that when they tried to arrest them 2 out of 3 got away.
@@Khalkara The case was closed after three years. The perpetrators did not pay anything for the damage. They even took power illegally from the main point.
Anyway, I am disappointed with the insurance and the criminal justice system.
They ran to Europe and there weren't enough resources to catch them. As I understand, this is happening to many property owners.
It's not a dichotomy, there are a wide variety of landlords and properties, some are already responsible, professional and fair and those would be least affected by regulation.
Haven't we spent long enough suffering the joys of a low-regulation pootopia?
Get the fair rents officers back. The council's would save a fortune because slum landlords wouldn't be able to charge what they like, it'd be about what the house is worth again and not protecting Landlords who make an absolute fortune. Rents were much fairer when we had the fair rents commissioners.
@Roadrunner_1000I wouldn’t even bother trying to talk to these people, if you can’t even understand simple supply and demand they can’t understand anything 😂
There's a homelessness crisis, a housing crisis and empty homes.
If landlords don't wanna do their bit then the government should intervene.
People's welfare and the national economy is more important than one person's wealth or portfolio
what about tenants who don't pay there rent or destroy the house? WHERE iS THE PROTECTION FOR THE LANDLORD?
It's called a deposit a guarantor and insurance. There are plenty of products available to landlords to protect themselves from bad tenants
Landlords make an investment - not to be condescending, but that comes with work. You are not entitled to profit from that investment, just like any other investment. I could not care less about landlords moaning that their investment isn’t profitable enoiugh.
Its called welfare. If your tenants don't pay, you can sell the property and get welfare.
My landlord just increases my rent by 28% in a month and for less than 15 months moving in, my landlord has increased my rent by 48% of the original rent price. How is this fair on me
That's not legal in Scotland. Move there.
The landlord isn’t obliged to think about you before their own interests . Costs have gone up alot . These are privately owned properties so why should they hi out of their way for you ? They aren’t your councils
@@amirraza7706and that is why tougher rules are required. landlords are investors, investments go up and down. landlords seems to be only interested on the up
If it's a bad deal you can simply move to a property that better reflects the market rate.
Blame the gov not the Landlord. I'm one just talk to us. I haven't hiked up because my mortgage is fixed for now but unfortunately when it becomes variable I too will have to hike. I don't want to but I have to otherwise I would be under water.
Won't landlords just pass on such challenges to tenants in the form of increased rent. Rent is so high nowadays.
Not if they also implement a limit on how much landlords can raise rent. Which they probably are going to.
@Roadrunner_1000 I don't know what point you're making.
@Roadrunner_1000 But that logic doesn't follow. The landlord can take on a loss, or even sell the property. You are assuming that he needs to be able to keep borrowing at this rate you cite.
Morally speaking, they shouldn't be able to raise rents like that. Period.
Decent and fair landlords need not worry about this legislation, why should they? I'm a landlord, I welcome it. I want my tenants to feel secure in the place they live. Why is everything a 'war' by certain commentators? War on motorists, war on woke, war on landlords....it's a nonsense. It's called a fair deal for all.
Why doesn't the councils build council houses and rent to the bad tenants cheaply. Then the private landlords will not have to put them up.
They did. Right to own in the 80's they were sold.
Can you define 'bad' tenants?
@@Paul_W_Tudorpeople who don't pay their rent and act antisocially to the misery of their neighbours.
Easy thing to define. Need anymore help?
Because it would cost a lot of money to house people who don't pay their rent and generally trash houses. Councils are either bankrupt or approaching it.
There isn't an insurer in the land that would touch them as it's pretty clear they will be paying out no end.
The Grantham witch started the process of selling of social housing cheaply and disallowing councils from replacing the stock. Changes could be made there, end the right to buy especially with massive discounts obviously someone (the taxpayers) is funding that discount. Then replace the social housing stock.
With any luck, they'll also tackle the dental and vetanary industries. Nothing but crooks.
The idea that getting landlords to follow minimum standards reduces housing stock is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. If houses were more affordable to owners and not scalper landlords the housing stock would go UP for normal people. 🤦♂️
Telegraph isn’t a reputable source, so if that’s your singularity for reporting it makes you no better than a fox “news” presenter
The Telegraph said it safe effective stops transmission and fully tested
What your saying is one of the reasons that we saw the chaos over the weekend. Housing is a problem and lots of people don't want it to be solved becuase it'll mean their property protfolio will be worth less because more home are available.
Instead they'll blame immigration numbers, when the issues are actually just that the country hasn't built enough houses or made it easy enough for people to get on the property ladder. That and the underfunding of the nhs, benifts and employment is why people are actually angry, and they are getting redirected by the malicious or useful idiots to blame everything on immigration becuse we can't have them notice who is actually to blame.
I’m not a landlord but this is just ridiculous. Why is a landlord responsible if someone becomes ill and falls on hard times ?
Cuz shelter is a human right.
F the landlords
If they sell up, the house is still there !!!!!!!!!
No it isn't, did you know that they can dig them up and take them with them?
Im hoping for this. Decrease house values down to something vaguely affordable.
@Roadrunner_1000but every renter who can now afford to buy is one less renter in the rental market 🙄
@Roadrunner_1000 if there's ten families renting, and two new renters need homes, how many homes do we need?
Now, if we have 5 renters and 5 owner-occupiers, and two new renters need homes, how many homes do we need?
My friend who is a land lord , and is loosing £400 a month, she will loose her house if she does not sell! And why should landlords have to subsidise the government when they are heavily taxed already, MOST land lords and making very very little as they are so heavenly taxed .
Oh poor landlords.
Labour are cinically getting the votes of under 50s with this crackdown on landlords and giving Renters more rights. Mate Tories were doing the same thing with over 55s trying to introduce Triple Lock Plus but nobody wants to talk about that now.
To the presenter if you are going to have these conversations you need to have a genuine discussion about the issues rather than what seems to be his presenting style of being contrarian just because or in this case because as I can assume he has skin in the game and has at least one rental property on his portfolio.
If landlords decide they 'can't be bothered with it' and sell up, to whom are they going to sell? Either the people who need housing, in which case landlords will have to bring the price down to meet the demand, or they will sell to other landlords, who feel they are able to adapt to the new requirements. Free market at its best.
Landlords won’t sell the price reduced unless there is a saturation in the market (tonnes of properties in the area goes on sale), which makes it competitive in the buyer’s favour if they want to buy a property cheaper. This could happen, but not sure by how much. I don’t think any landlords who have been benefiting for decades would care though, their properties are still worth lots more even if there was a price dip, it’ll still be more than when they bought it. And many who have been playing the system who are being targeted are probably not even registered, and may still exploit tenants who don’t know their rights.
If landlords did sell up, it would be a great thing to rebalance the wealth inequality by getting some of the finite assets back in the market
Owning your own home is part of our social contract. We work to be in our own property. Without out, people are disenfranchised. Frankly, it's a human right to own the roof that is over your head. Landlords hoard and exploit the housing system for nothing but profit. Renting costing more than a mortgage monthly is outright criminal.
What fairy land do you live in? Of course landlords are doing it for profit. They're landlords not charities. Ask your local council to build housing.
Going to leave my properties empty out of spite. Mortgage & Council Tax is £3k a year. Property going up by more than double that.
Already got all tenants under eviction. And they are all complaining that the rents on their new homes will be more than what I charge
Told them to blame Labour.
Exactly!!
After seeing so many rogue renter TV programmes, landlords need to educate themselves and know what they could be in for.
Makes a change from picking on pensioners and the disabled which were their first targets. Now if they could only get around to actually making businesses and the ultra wealthy pay a fair share.
How were pensioners and the disabled targeted exactly?
being a (housing) land lord is not a job it is an ethical crime
Nonsense. No landlords no rentable housing stock. The council isn't going to build
@@neale3871hold my beer
Something that lives off another lifeform is called a parasite
@@Michael-yq2ut much better description
You and I clearly have completely different definitions of war on Landlord's. Landlords have had it way too easy for way too long. These slight policy changes is just fiddling with numbers. Alot tougher stance is needed when dealing with landlords.
So "easy" that they are all selling their properties to the banks because there is no profit in it anymore?
Wake up mate.
Oh no, won’t you think of the landlords..
If we have less landlords as a result of this then the demand for houses on the market goes down both reducing some of the cost for houses and free up more choice for the market for buyers..
This is exactly what we want, not a rent economy for the working class while the middle class get to make extra thousands by buying up all the houses.. thank you very much..
So tenant says he cant afford to pay and will become homeless. They will end up staying for free.
I am honestly trying to figure this out, so how will the landlord pay their mortgage, if tenants are told to stay in the property, even though they can’t afford the rent, until the landlord goes bankrupt and the house get repossessed. 🤔
This will simply rid the sector of bad landlords and chancers. The housing supply doesn't magically disappear along with bad landlords.
It is only cowardly people that side with landlords over tenants, when there is a long history of landlords abusing and using their power over their tenants. None of the proposed rules remove safe guards for landlords in cases where the tenants are being unruly.
If a landlord doesn't like to play by the rules, they should sell their investment.
Not just cowwrdly people. Landlords also side with landlords.
Hence why the Torygraph is claiming it’s a “war on landlords”
That’s what bad tenants always say . At the end of the day the property belongs to the landlords. It’s a basic right that one has total control of their possessions. If you don’t like it then buy your own house .
Landlords are businesspeople . The while point is to earn an income . They aren’t here to provide tenant with council type houses . And they a rent there to pick up for the local councils .
Sure the landlords should lease a car for you and pay your holidays as well your take ways and nights out maybe some Charlie too?
16 weeks no rent before people can be evicted? Is this guy aware that landlords have mortgages ? If your rent is 1000 a month, the landlord isnt making a 1000 a month. waiting 16 weeks means most landlords will have the property taken from the bank.
People don't understand that most landlords are barely, BARELY breaking even on their properties even with the high rental costs. They just focus on their own money as usual, whine about landlords, yet would become one in a heartbeat if it meant making money. Hypocrisy from the public as usual.
@@Dynasty1818Read back what you just typed. If a system puts *that* much pressure on, let’s be frank, lower middle class people to upcharge people even further down the ladder than them, is that not a sign that the system (landlordism) is fundamentally broken?
@@TomCL-vb6xcyep - the UK economy is a pyramid scheme, and it's going to crash hard sooner or later 🙁
Less landlords, Less rentals, Those that left can charge what they like. Id also say if you own something you can charge what you want. I dont see anything to stop Supermarkets being forced to lower costs or the energy companies.
One thing that seems to be missed. Is that if landlords exit. Then those homes will be avaliable to buy increasing housing stock for buyers and therefore reducing price of housing. Eliminating alot of the need for renting culture. I don't see a downside really
Empty houses, not everyone wants to buy. I don’t think they’ve considered if councils or authorities can even afford to take on properties to rent out, still talking about a lot of money.
There’s always a conversation about landlords but what the general public don’t understand is there are specialist build to rent corporations that are essentially private companies that are planning on taking over the sector. Wake up, landlords are not the problem. Government interference is the problem
This!!! 💯💯💯
Or, and I think you may want to sit down for this, they are both problems? What about the last 14 years suggests to you that less regulations is better? I mean the proof is literally in the pudding. Forgive me for not crying tears over individual landlords losing out on all the juicy profits from renters to big corporations. They might not do as much total harm to renters as the conglomerates and associations, but they are still enemies of the working class.
@@TomCL-vb6xc just pay your rent to the big corporations like a lemming. It’s the equivalent of supporting Tesco’s over your local grocery store. You need to have abroad understanding of finances to appreciate the mechanism of how it works but it may be beyond you
@@CROSSNSHOOT Or - and again, you may want to sit down - we remove both? Perhaps housing - which is a fundamental human right and shouldn’t be grossly equated to groceries - should not be interlinked with business or profiteering whatsoever? I’m talking no big business or small business, or in other words, shifting the focus of housing to ensuring accessability for as many people as possible rather than profits; whether it be corporations or individual landlords. I don’t understand what part of my comment suggested to you that I’m somehow in favour of big businesses profiteering off of housing. In even simpler terms; landlords bad, housing corporations also bad.
A relative rented out a flat. She didn’t pay the rent for 3 months but complained when the boiler broke down ( it was then fixed within 1/2 days). Where is the balance ? Rental accommodation is going to get more expensive and deposits much larger
People can't afford the prices maybe she should lower the price of rent so the renter doesn't struggle why does she need a 2nd home can't she sell the property? I think 2nd home owners should be taxed there's a house shortage that's stopping a family from growing.
Liar
@@alr68is that you Blair ?
Investments have risks and landlords are finding that people who are on average wages unable to afford average rent increases that risk.
@@oldboygaragewhy should they ? They haven’t got any obligation to provide cheap housing just for you 😂
I'm been a landlord for over 30 years with a small property portfolio and I am now getting out, I've had enough. It's just not worth it anymore.
Understandable. I've properties in Scotland and there are rent increase limits, fair enough, but the limit was set at 0% for 2+ years in Covid. Tenants can quit at any time, Landlords can't evict unless they're moving in themselves or redeveloping the property. The pendulum has swung too far.
Allow me to play a sad song on the worlds smallest violin
@@eveningstar7812haha😂
I had a professional landlord in the 80s. The second that the government abolished rent controls. I got a notice to quit but could stay at a higher rent. That happened every year after that. Landlord have been doing well since although bad tenants can cost dear
How does landlords selling their houses reduce the housing stock? They not likely to convert the house into a pair of shoes.
Landlords are selling their houses to banks and hedge funds. They own the government and dictate policy.
Once they own all the stock, renters will really feel the pinch as their is no longer a "little guy" landlord to beat up and strawman.
Expecting the landlord to bear the burden instead of the council is ridiculous.
Why not? They chose to fill the role previously done by the council
Why should landlords pick up the burden of the local councils ?
because they volunteered to be responsible for thr nation's housing?
Best if you leave the property empty and just go for the profits in the investment without excessive mantain costs.
Landlords will sell their properties and buy rent to let properties abroad, therefore creating lack of rented accommodation in UK.
Too many rented properties anyway
I can just see the increases in my rent going forward 😒🙄
I think people shouldn't own more than 1 property unless they have a legitimate reason, and not for profit.
Jeez lets have a communist state
Yeh and Instead of having an extra property for a pension purposes let’s force people to invest their money in private pensions that fund asset management firms who buy up thousands of properties and further drive up property prices and rent. I’m sure tenants really enjoy having a massive corporation as their landlord rather than an individual with one or two extra properties that they personally oversee and take care of.
100% agreed.
@@TheWelshman50honest answer? I don't want pure communism, but housing communism makes a _lot_ of sense
One thing to say - as a Landlord I quit !! I've provided nice quality homes at low rent for 26 years - but NO MORE IM GONE !!
More houses will be taken off the market, less choice, higher costs and extremely tougher entry conditions for tenants will be the consequence
It really depends on how far Labour goes. If a tenant is protected because they can't/won't pay rent then that is a huge risk to landlords.
Using Grenfell tower though was a bad example because the rules were already there when the cladding was put up but it was ignored.
I've got a number of similar mortage free houses in the same area. I raised the rent from £900 to £1300 on all of them in preparation for the coming changes.
Labour's landlord proposals will hasten an existing trend : small private rented sector landlords quitting the 'buy to let' market. This will further reduce the housing stock available to rent at a time of rising demand for rental properties. This is of no benefit whatsoever to tenants!
Yup, we can pay 7k to upgrade our scottish 1 bedroom flat let (inheritance purchase to hopefully give us a pension ) to have it raise to a C from an E in the EPC chart or we can sell it at a massive loss (less than half the purchase price) . Given that we were letting it out for £400 a month, it was a no brainer and it is being sold. It never reached an income where tax was payable in all the years we owned it and many years we operated at a loss but wanted to keep it going as affordable housing due to all the homelessness in the area.
I privately rent and I have fantastic landlord who charges me very reasonable as they are glad to have a tenant who looks after their home and can pay rent as previous tenants didn’t and they nearly lost their home as they aren’t as well off as people assume just because they have a second property… if they bring in certain measures landlords are just not going to rent out their properties and the homelessness and housing crisis will just increase. I support no fault evictions but saying they can’t evict a tenant who would be at risk of being homeless well isn’t that everyone who is renting who is unable to buy?! Who would rent out their property and then not legally be able to get a tenant out. Landlords will stop renting.
Hi again,
This isn't really true tho. Landlords will continue to rent out properties so long as it is profitable. These changes do not make it unprofitable for pretty much everyone.
Landlords always make threats of leaving the market if a new rule comes in, but rarely do, and if individuals do, new ones come in. It was the same when the Tories proposed pulling back for of the landlord provisions that where there in the past. But if something is making a 70% profit and a new policy makes it a 65% profit, they won't like it but they arent gonna sell up.
There is no evidence to suggest these changes will affect a landlords bottom line very much at all.
They taking properties out from the market putting prices out. It should be limited how many properties they have and money thay should charge.
Implement EPC grade c at the cost of thousands to landlords the only way it's getting paid is by increasing the tenants rent
Honestly I believe that people shouldn't be allowed to own more than one home, that all landlords should be forced to divest their property at market rate to the state and the state can then use those properties as rent to buy council housing.
Small time landlords are selling up. Large investors like Lloyds are building more build to rent properties, they will be picky and choose the best of the crop. Moreover they are not replacing enough properties sold by small time landords, hence why Rents have rocketed. Moreover on average more people are displaced when a rental is disposed of, especially a HMO, as most are bought by a single person or a couple first time buyers. Be careful what you wish for.
Oh no, think of the poor landlords owning property they don't need.
@Roadrunner_1000 Luckily I already own my property and have no desire to rob from anyone else or need a 2nd once.
Also, theres no such things as sins, only terrible people..... Weirdly enough it's usually the people who call things "sins".
When a landlord moves on, what happens to the status of the home? Does it get demolished or returned to the market at a lower rate?
All landlords should avoid this solicitor like the plague 😂
Would have been a better discussion if you had a landlord on your show.
The way to get cheaper rents is to have more houses available to rent.
The Government action is likely to reduce the number of houses in the Private Rental Sector without adding a single house to the Social Housing Sector.
Less houses to rent forces rents up.
These landlords are holding on to hundreds of properties, mortgages payed by tenants
hahaha pomr landlords, if they cant afford t look after there tenents and property they shudnt be landlords
Keep scaring landlords into selling, more passive money in my pocket when the market rents go up due to less supply and more consumer demand.
Interesting to read some comments. Be curious to see what renters would think if they did own a house to rent out….
They'd be all for free market forces. It's just human nature
They’d have to afford one to live in first which is next to impossible so I think the interesting thing is why someone might have a problem with protecting people from becoming homeless.
This is a waste of air time tbf everybody knows it needs to be fair ...Cover damp problems and rising rents instead is my advice
I inhereted 2 houses from my late grandmother
I wish they’d make landlords contribute to shared building costs. I’ve paid to have shared gutters cleaned for 20 years. When I asked them to contribute half, I got a flat no! 😡
So you’re paying service charges essentially? I thought that’s usually what the landlord pays or includes in rent. Bills are usually separate
I used to rent and i am an accidental landlord. I house 5 people who are all going to be evicted in the next 6 months as i cant be bothered to deal with their personal problems, increased mortgage interest and the raft of regulations and obligations.
They all pay well below market rate so its going to be a big shock for them to adjust to labours new world.
A world where they will all be living in a HMO with a refugee on benefits, ex convict and 3 dogs 😂
Portfolio landlords have been the main driver of high house prices and rents.
We have needed a hard reset for many years now.
These proposed reforms plus a social housing expansion wiil lower inflation and improve employment figures.
Truss back I want more interest rates for UK bonds and higher mortgage rates
Does this approach work in France? If so, why would it not work in UK? If not, why would the government wish to implement it here?
From the way you talk about them, it sounds like the landlords are the only things keeping the houses from burning down.
All these NEW conditions , already in scotland and all the landlords and myself are selling up , and the rents are souring!
Last flat i advertised i had over 300 applicants!
Labour are making it harder for landlords AND tenants coz no council houses. Been like this for years but now..more lost promises to build more council houses and still selling them off so make it harder for landlords to evict a bad tenant..oh..and all the raising costs by councils and governments fall onto tenants..way more than a council house..but..none. x
If a landlord decides it’s no longer worth it and sells up and moves on this does not remove the house from the housing stock. The house is still there. It will either be bought by a owner occupier or a new landlord.
The house doesn’t disappear.
Landlords do not add to the housing stock unless they have actually built the house. The only way it would be removed from the housing stock is if it was allowed to stand empty or used as a second or third home both of which should be heavily taxed.
it gets sold to corporations that are trying to monopolise all housing stock. Once they do, they can artificial raise prices because there'll be no competition.
You are missing the point. If a landlord sells to a owner occupier that property is no longer available for a family that has no choice but to rent because they have no money to buy. Its clutching at straws to think that another landlord will take up the mantle in this present war on landlord labour led country
@@johncremin9488 I get the point that landlord’s buying property on buy2rent mortgages have increased demand on the housing market which has inevitably led to house prices rising beyond the scope of the average family. But the basic fact remains that if a family only rents or buys one property (ie to live in) then housing stock is not reduced by any house changing between the two markets. In coastal towns often as much as half the houses are second homes or airBnB which reduces the houses available to live in. In Salcombe there is a 80% rate of housing being second homes, it is now the most expensive place to live in the country. Private landlords buying properties is the real reason housing is so expensive both to buy and rent.
Landlords are the problem not the solution.
@@TopazDr the solution is to tax houses when used as second homes and airBnB or owned by corporations unless they are those run by charities such as Circle 33 or Crown Estates who have no profit incentive to raise rents.
Makes sense to better look after tenants when there are bad landlords and definitely support tenant rights to have pets, tenants remain responsible as they would their kids and themselves - but they have to be careful with the way such a bill works as it can also affect tenant ability to rent if landlords see them as a liability. There are also still tenants who either still can’t afford, or don’t want to invest nor commit to be a homeowner even if this leads to landlords selling up, so you can still end up with empty properties and no ability to house as I doubt the council would have the ability to foot up the bill, hence why private landlords are also used. I think in genuine cases though if such hardship happens, there should also support to provide the tenant’s rent to a reasonable amount in these circumstances, because equally it’s not fair the landlord is responsible for paying for someone else’s hardship, they can maybe support some security but it will be something the state need to be financially responsible to support the tenant.
So the usurious banks should also shoulder some of the responsibility…let the usurious banks lower the usurious interest rates when a private landlord has a tenant has cancer or will lose his job. Down with usury! Down with usury?
I just want my rent to go down to be honest living on my own, why are they complicating it?
How about selective licensing ? And all the other penalties on landlords ? Why shouldn’t one who owns a property not have the right to evict who they what ? It’s their property .
Won't somebody please think of the poor struggling Landlord's!
When rogue tenants stop paying rent, which is the main reason why evictions happen, it is essentially theft from the majority who are decent landlords, and it should be treated as such. The landlord still has to pay huge mortgages, costs, etc..., how in the world is it fair on the landlord to become bankrupted if rogue tenants stop paying rent?
Risk and reward. Investments may go up and down.
@@akosiamarilloThat is total nonsense, theft is theft. Tenants consistently or purposely not paying rent is like shoplifting from shops, it is theft and is wrong.
@@omd4229 Haha that is the *fundamental* rule of investment. Just because it doesn’t suit your argument, doesn’t make it nonsense.
About time, too many section 21 notices.
Storing up problems for the future? That said from a person who doesn’t live in squalid conditions. These problems have been stored up over decades and it’s just not acceptable. What are the odds on this presenter being a buy to let landlord?
8 month up
Front deposit. Then put rent up
By 30% to be inline with inflation.
2 Tier Kier is declaring war on British people
boiler broken 2 years then when the landlord got me a new boiler i had to fit it myself 2 years later still not paid for putting the new boiler in also mold in down stairs toilet had to live with it on-sweet toilet leaking for a year and i had to sort that problem out and now i owe 2 months rent.
Do you remember council housing stock.
I wonder why that scheme was stopped?
No private sector profits perhaps.
Get your MP’s to deal with this
Funny how some people think fixing a problem created in the last 14 years , is about the future,
More houses on market, more people can afford to buy as prices push down, people buy, people decorate, people spend and help build the economy.
only problem can be less houses to rent, higher rents
I do wish we have a country agreement re relationship with rent. I wonder if there could be rules / caps re putting up rent payments, when morgage on home already paid, so above that all prifit minus upkeep of home. Also, could there be a means tested rent requirement. Finally, if you are a single occupant, could there be a 25% decrease as in council tax to reflect this. Thanks just curious if any of above been considered.
my own situation was being on UC and having my rent go from £425 to £475 with the max rental cover by housing benefit being £425 - for a few months I had to find the esta 50quid myself - no negotiation...just a straight up 50 hike.
all because the owner anted to make the flats sale more attractive to a potential buyer.
some extra protections would have been very welcome.
It's not ridiculous to put up rent by 25% if you haven't put it up for 5 or 10 years!! I'm putting a property rent up by 40% because I've been undercharging 60% for last 3 years because I was doing a hard up tenant a favour! He's not hard up now and my costs including mortgage have gone up!!
It's not unreasonable to charge market rate when your costs and expenses are charged to you at market rate.
Their can be genuine grievances about the state of UK housing, but demands for landlords to simply run the rental sector at a loss are ridiculous
So you are buying property you can't afford and making someone else pay the whole cost.
Ignoring the profit you have in assets.
Monthly in and out costs ignore the fact that you are gaining asset ownership throughout the rental period.