Some private Landlords are simply a symptom of the growing inequalities in British Society. Yes it's good to look at renters rights but the real issue here is the vastly unequal distribution of wealth in the country. Until that is resolved this is just a sticking plaster.
@@LUNAJH559 Private landlords are a symptom of unaffordable housing. A situation which has been deliberately created by New Labour and the Tories importing a population the size of Belgium in as little as 27 years let alone any serious attempt to build enough homes to keep up.
They need to address shared ownership landlords. As you can own 25% but be responsible for 100% of problems. They don't share the responsibility if the boiler breaks or if the roof needs a repair, etc but they still charge you rent like a traditional landlord with 0 responsibilities. It's kind of evil genius sell them a measly portion and then just collect money forever more while doing nothing.
I've lived in a number of private rentals and never lived in or known anyone who has lived in one without black mould. This comparison may be true, but it's basically whataboutism. Not to mention, properly funded council hosing schemes could prevent this if combined with giving people the right to withhold rent if they live in a council house with black mould, forcing the councils to deal with the problem.
Landlords are housing providers. Given the sell off of social housing and the inadequate building of houses, we fill the gap. How many families have you housed? I work with local authorities to house those on their 'at risk of homelessness' list. How many derelict houses have you returned to being habitable dwellings?
I wish people would stop talking about housing supply. Sure, build more. but those will just get bought by more landlords. The problem is all the housing is owned by people that have no interest in living in it
Personally I don't think that would be the case. Generally a landlord isn't prepared to offer as much when buying a house as someone who would want to live in it. Even if what you said were to happen, more houses owned by landlords would mean rent prices would begin to drop. Also not all the housing is owned by people who don't want to live in it. Private landlords make up around 20% of total houses. What do you reckon?
This ban on rent in advance seem poorly thought through. As a renter who does not have regular income (I’m self employed) I rely on the ability to pay my rent in advance to prove affordability. This removes an option for the landlord to give an opportunities for those who cannot prove affordability eg overseas students or professionals relocating to the UK or those relocating to find work. With the removal of section 21 the landlord is going to be even more cautious and are less likely to take the risk on people in my or similar situations. The main issue is supply and demand. Simply provide more homes that are available to rent, this give tenants more choice so they can vote with their feet. When there so little rental accommodation available renters are given little choice but to just put up with what ever is available.
tbf I'd say that you can also help the supply/demand problem by severly limiting the profitablility of buying to let. Housing prices will fall, so more people will buy to occupy and fewer people will be stuck renting, which reduces demand and lowers the profitability of renting and so on. This could lead to affordable housing alongside a much, much smaller rental market intended for short-term occupation, since people who want to live somewhere for a few years will be able to afford to buy.
@@CenitopiusThe government has already done this by significantly increasing taxation and regulation on the private landlords. Landlords are now selling up and leaving the sector in record numbers. This has only made the problem worse as the housing shortage means that these houses are being mostly bought by owner occupiers not other landlords as it is no longer an attractive investment so this is further reducing rental stock supply and pushing rents even higher.
@@CoLivingCreators government / mp's don't give a shit abt renters. mp's have sold out to bankers, Israeli lobby. eg Palestine - genocide. do tenants really think government cares abt them. you want another example speed camera its just another way of taxing people. when will the tenants wake up and realise all this is cash crab on landlords. who will pay in the end. renters when supply decrease and rents go up. remember tenants aren't going to be renters for ever. eventually some of them will save up and buy properties and rent them out. who in the will all lose out. it will be all of us. think before you vote for unjust bills / laws. stupid people. fools
Clearly he does not understand the legislation or the ramifications: NO the landlords CAN NOT ask for a "larger Deposit" where rent up front is required (because the prospective tenant has a poor credit rating or employment status). A Deposit will be capped at 6 weeks rent. So you are wrong! Those Tenants will have that option denyed them and be TOTALLY excluded from the PRS.
Yeh really poor answer he gave on that. He's basically creating a law that will mean that many people will become homeless. Even those who do have an income and could afford to pay will be as you've said "excluded" because a landlord can't take the risk. Also talking about potentially banning guarantors, they don't understand that landlords need more certainty not less.
Completely agree with you both. Reduced certainty means increased risk which will nudge up rents. I understand the sentiment for wanting to limit rent in advance but feel a more sensible option would be to provide conditions for when rent in advance or a guaranotor can be asked, i.e. If the tennant fails standard affordability test/has no employment/No credit history (overseas student) then you can ask for a UK guarantor, if no guarantor then you can ask for rent in advance.
My rent has increased by 50% in the last 20 months - before this it was a manageable 5 to 10% pa. As a local government worker, my pay has increased by 1 to 3% pa (we're not civil servants). It's a struggle for sure, especially as I live alone.
@@chester6343 yeah - between them and the city they gamble with our money and look for constant "growth". Our homes are not worth the money the money markets make up believe..
I wonder what his thoughts are on Jas Athwal? It must be challenging to champion rent reform when one of your party peers is an notorious conniving slumlord.
What makes me sad is that stuff like this happens all the time. There are a tonne of MPs (from all parties, shocker!) who are really good advocates for their constituents and are fighting for issues they care about. The problem is most of the public aren't informed enough, and don't care to be.
There will be no property left to rent soon. Tightening the screws just accelerates it and people are too stupid to realise as they are so busy vilifying landlords with no commercial awareness. I lost 16k on my property last year as it is mortgaged but I’m taxed as if I earned 11k. So that’s another 5k on the loss. I’m selling. Where are people meant to live when starting out when there will be nothing left to rent?
What do you mean? If the price has dropped on your home, then someone who couldn't afford your rent may be able to afford the mortgage! The property isn't going to disappear when you sell up...
Can you be clearer about in what way you lost 16K? I ask because if you spent, say 30K on the mortgage for the property and recieved 14K in rent, you'll retain a lot of the mortgage payment in the form of the stake in the property you bought with that payment. The mortage I'm getting right now is such that I keep about half the value I pay for the house, so when I've paid 10K I'll own a 5K stake in the property (supposing prices remain stable). Since you're selling, I'm confused as to whether you mean that you'll have lost 16K after you sell, or that your bank account is 16K poorer than it was when you started renting (in which case when you sell you'll probably turn a profit overall)
@@pipancla people need rental property available when starting out. These people will not be buying it. The root cause is lack of supply and too many people coming to the country (as our birth rate is below replacement) however the government likes to blame landlords for their policy failure and useful idiots lap it up having watched a RUclips video on Marxism and rentierism.
@@Cenitopius I lost 16k for 23-24 tax year having it fully occupied at market rate 2.5k pm. Quite an expensive property with 45% non repayment mortgage and needed to replace boiler at 6k (which is offsettable). Also agency fees. The yield is terrible even if it wasn’t mortgaged I’d be lucky to get 1-2%. You can earn more in a money market fund and none of the hassle. Perhaps other areas have better yields than London. Anyway I’m out - when Osborne removed mortgage interest relief he killed it. Good luck to future tenants the only owners will be blackrock etc who will only buy whole buildings. The individual flats and houses are not scaleable for large companies.
@@Cenitopius He's talking about section 24, where rent is taxed on personal ownership based on the gross rather than net (after costs). This means many landlords are under water who own properties in their own name. Take the risks, deal with the hassle, be totally vilified and lose large amounts of money.
My family are getting evicted next month. Been living in a flat for 9 years. Always paid our rent. Valued in the local community. Ironically have put up with a massive social housing block being built 50 yards from our living room window. All allocated. I'm 62, the trauma and upheaval of moving is an endurance I'd rather not go through.
@@Sam88-l4kexcept it's diminished and not available to the vast numbers who desperately need it. And in most cases it's owned by some demonic quango and the local authority has little to do with it. Honestly, the shenanigans going on in metropolitan areas around land and development, well, let's say it's a racket, and somewhere along the line there is Robert Jenrick type.
I am nearly 80 in the same situation, the trauma and cost of moving is horrendous. I was offered a long lease and after two years given a section 21 but I’m not well enough and don’t have the money to move so I am just staying here as apparently the courts are bogged down for a couple of years and would you believe it they are now offering me a new lease so my landlord was not selling the property after all! Namaste 🙏
I’m a landlord. Knowing all these rights are on the horizon, I increased all my tenants’ rents by £350 over two years. I hadn’t increased rents for 6+ years plus before this. Keep the new regulations coming and restrictions coming…I’ll keep passing the increase to my tenants.
Black mould is caused by damp, unless the roof is leaking damp is in every home that is not dried by heating and ventilation. No amount of maintenance will make it go away. Better insulation means less heat energy, but you still need to remove the moisture generated by living, using heat and ventilation. Its simplistic to blame the property, its more about how it is used.
If you think black mould is caused by people putting their washing on a clothes horse in the depths of winter because they can't afford either a tumble dyer or electricity to heat the home, then you truly have lost all sense of the reality of renting from a home scalper, especially the Tory voting homescalpers, they're the ones who need imprisoning the most by supporting a terrorist organisation
Then why are so few homes that are bought to occupy suffering from the black mould problem that seems to effect an enormous number of rental properties? If it's simply a consequence of living in a home, or of poor people who can't afford heating living in a home, then it should be appearing in something like 90% of homes or both 90% of homes owned by poor people *and* 90% of homes rented by poor people. In my experience, and from what I hear from others, it's almost exclusive to the rental market.
@@Cenitopius Damp and mould is not exclusive to the rental sector. Yes it can be caused by the fabric of the building, but it's also true that it can be caused by the tenants themselves. Many people who don't own their own homes are frankly oblivious to general house maintenance. I have to explain to all my tenants about opening windows and not drying clothes inside. I've already tackled any cold spots to minimise issues, but if people can't do the basics then excessive moisture in the air will condense on surfaces.
Section 21 is normally used instead of section 8 as it’s easier not to “prove” the case. So there won’t be any less evictions, just a different process which now means courts and legal fees. Sorry tenants, but now you will have a ccj and debt order. Good luck finding another landlord to accept you
"If you are a private renter this will make a huge difference to your life" 100% - Half of private renters will be evicted. Landlords are bailing out. If you want to help these people build more social housing. When a similar policy was adopted in Ireland in 1998, rents increased by almost 50% over the subsequent three years. A "huge difference" - you are not kidding.
All kinds of standards can be imposed on landlords (including rent caps and safe standards that can be assessed annually with severe penalties if infringed on) but what is really needed is a 90% tax rate on any 2+ residential properties owned and a ban on commercially owned or rented residential property. We need to scale rentals way back, caps on home value and rents, offer no-interest mortgages for first time buyers and a lot more. Theres no excuse not getting everyone into houses! When people own they are invested and that investment is a huge driver for community building and support.
My last flat before leaving London was a nightmare for black mould. We ended up moving partly because the landlord/letting agent tried to make us leave all windows open, all day every day, in mid-January, with a literal newborn in the flat. They then wanted to charge us the better part of a grand to repaint the walls that their own damp inspectors told us to scrub weekly (and not weakly!) with bleach.
Timestamps (Powered by Merlin AI) 00:04 - Legislation aims to protect tenants from exploitative landlord practices. 02:10 - Labour MP introduces measures to protect students from early rental pressures. 05:56 - Proposal for government-backed guarantor scheme to protect tenants and improve access to housing. 07:51 - New legislation aims to limit landlord exploitation of tenants. 11:36 - MP addresses the need to regulate landlords for tenant health and fair housing. 13:33 - Addressing landlord exploitation and empty properties to improve housing availability. 17:36 - Labour seeks to address housing challenges for young tenants amid the cost of living crisis. 19:39 - Addressing court delays affecting landlord-tenant disputes. 23:07 - Debate on rent regulation and parliamentary procedures in landlord-tenant legislation. 24:47 - Discussion of landlord regulations and tenant protection measures.
Yes and thanks to Labour my tenant has now a section 21. I'm not going to put up with late payments every month, not allowing my agent entry, not allowing contractors in, missing Xmas rent, 4 years of this but POOR TENANT HEY. POOR LANDLORD I THINK
they are trying to do both in all fairness, just because this bloke is focusing on one aspect of the problem doesn't mean the other aspects are being ignored
Yes, second homes is an issue, but he deflected onto that rather than answering the question about empty, mostly derelict, urban housing, space above shops, conversion of surplus shops, etc.
Oh! But there is someone in the council that does that, but the renter has to call them in. Then the problem is, they may say that the house is unfit to live in, and you end up homeless, or you can be evicted under some reason or another. And if the landlord owns lots of houses, good luck on renting one of them, you may also find that agents, in that area, may not be willing to deal with you either. Yes in a big city you maybe able to move to another area, but in small towns, that becomes a problem.
My landlord pays 10% of my hard earned rent payments to a bunch of incompetent parasites who give me nothing but grief and break the law .....let's hope the new bill will result in a wave of letting agents retraining in different industries as they will have even less to do for the 10% the landlord might also question why
@vvwalker7261 i don't want to upset the support , social and business networks that come with living a decade in the same area , absolutely nothing available to buy or rent without doubling my outgoings in the short term ....I expect most of that went over your head of compression. A secure affordable home is a foundation on which you build a society , it shouldn't be an opportunity for a load of free lunching parasites
@@vvwalker7261 To... where? Another home let out by a landlord via an estate agent that breaks the law? I don't agree with the implication by @dolphine675 that estate agents are the only villain here, but it's clear that their point is that it's hard to find properties where this isn't the case.
Once again the gov has zero idea about the world. Financial penalties for advance rent. These won't prevent the practice as there is a limited supply with lots of competition. It'll make student poorer as these penalties will be added to the rent. So the students not the landlord will be paying
Not sure why this channel hates landlords 😂 As a landlord I can't stand tenants who complain. It's a rental, it's not your house. If you don't like it, just leave.
It baffles me. I'm a responsible landlord, and I maintain my property to a high standard. All problems are taken care of swiftly, and nothing is allowed to crumble or not be replaced. It's the tenants, usually students, who take the proverbial. They don't treat the property well; leave a mess without cleaning. Even in a professional let, I had problems from a foreign couple who put the heating up to the hughest degree and used electrical heaters, so it would remind them of home...who had to cover the extra..us. Even their fellow tenants had issues with them. We need the ability to evict individuals like this, but now we can't evict problem tenants without strict conditions.
A large percentage of tenants are very irresponsible and entitled. This category has little or no sense of responsibility and will never be able to maintain a mortgage even if the house costs a pound. They will readily turn even a brand new house into a dump and expect compensation and a pat on the back in return.
I own land, and you own nothing - therefore you must work for me or one of my chums who also owns things, so you can pay me rent. Or, if you want a shorter version: I own land, and you own nothing, so I own you. Shorter yet: "I have, therefore I am owed." - The perfect definition of a sense of entitlement. And we still have "The House of Lords". So, not much progress has been made away from the bonds of serfdom.
what's fair? good quality social housing, divorced from any notions of 'market rate'. anything else is rearranging patio furniture on the bibby stockholm.
He needs to have a word with his slumlord colleague, the Labour MP for Ilford South. Why is Labour de-selecting honest MPs like Sam Tarry - who show solidarity with working people on the picket line and replacing them with MPs like this who are renting out numerous properties infested with ants and black mould? When challenged he blames the letting agent he uses. Either he’s a full-time MP, working for his constituents OR he is a responsible landlord (of 19 properties). He should be taking ownership of maintaining his properties himself - not sub-contracting it out to cowboy letting agents. He can’t responsibly have the time to do both. What’s worse, no sanctions are imposed on him by the Labour whip / leadership, whereas the Campaign group MPs are suspended from the party whip for voting against the 2 child benefit cap. Complete hypocrisy.
I'm centre left on most topics and slightly to the right on others. Certainly not the demographic Politics Joe probably targets. That said, I have to say, this was a brill interview and I find it absolutely disgusting that landlords have so much control and tenants so much lack of control. My parents were landlords and their justification was always absolute bullshit.
When great necessity or situations of emergency face the country (eg HS2) the government buys private property by compulsory purchase; a 'reasonable' amount is paid to the owner but not necessarily market value. It's a given that housing in Britain is in dire emergency so why doesn't the government give landlords considering selling up the single option of compulsory purchase? That way they'd sell up and walk away with a reduction in their planned profit(eering) and the houses can join the social renting register thereby fixing the problem from both ends. Then tighten the rules further on existing landlords with higher hurdles for corporate rentiers. Serious problems require radical solutions.
Well confidence would collapse in the housing market if you did that. Those without properties may well be happy in a drop in prices, but the banks certainly wouldn't be happy as they would have a load of mortgages in negative equity. It would be like 2008 mark 2 and the banks would stop lending. You would then have mortgage prisoners who can't move house and can't afford to sell, lets hope they can keep up with their payments.
Do you know what the cause of that is? Is there an obvious problem with the fabric of the building? Leaking roof, gutters? Is it ground floor? Solid walls with no cavity?
A large percentage of renters are irresponsible and entitled. This category has little or no sense of responsibility and will never be able to maintain a mortgage even if the house costs a pound. They will readily turn even a brand new house into a dump and expect compensation and a pat on the back in return. Landlords will keep passing any additional costs arising from any one sided legislation targeting them. Renters will always be at the reciving end.
You see a boon for insurance products to allow tenants who present greater risk (poor credit, bad previous landlord reference etc, patchy employment). Otherwise they will have difficulty in accessing decent accommodation and get pushed to slum areas.
just ban landlords, as simple as that. the govt should provide quality social housing in the heart of cities and countries. just tax the mega rich, super rich and oridnary rich hardworking working class. punish anyone with ambition and aspiration into the housing ladder.
"punish anyone with ambition and aspiration into the housing ladder" what does that mean? Are you suggesting that anyone with ambition should be punished?
I've worked for what I've got get out there and work. Has far has renters are concerned do what your legally obliged to do like landlords or DONT CHOOSE TO LIVE IN MY HOUSE simples. ALL ONE SIDED POOR TENANT. Some landlords are decent Shame some tenants arent
Increase public housing supply, enact vacancy taxes, land value taxes, sticter rent controls at a maximum of 5% rate hikes per annum, decrease beaurocratic planning delays, decrease deposit and fowarded costs, etc Give out more grants and loans for increasing residential energy efficiency, etc Housing is a policy issue and it's a national disgrace, landlords want to make as much money as possible irregard of the public good whilst construction and land costs are over the moon due to nonsensical planning regulation and market speculation
These Landlords, they increased prices when and how their muscles wanted,,brought so much poverty to minimum wage workers in the economy.. the only joy after a year of work is not to remain homeless, how not to get mentally ill😢
Like schools and care homes, many housing associations are really private companies. Rochdale Boroughwide Housing is a "tenant and employee co-owned mutual housing society".
Less home scalpers = more home buyers. Everyone wins, except for the parasitic home scalper who will have to find someone else to con their way out of doing a day's work.
fewer landlords can only happen if they sell. If they sell, two things happen to the market - house prices go down because the market is saturated with ex-rentals, and renting as a percentage of population goes down because more people can afford to buy. That drives rental prices down because there's less demand, which leads to fewer landlords feeling like they can turn a profit, etc. etc. etc. - it's the opposite of the housing bubble. Rent won't just "go up" because there are fewer landlords, that assumes that no-one can buy to occupy, and people can only buy to rent. You have a foolish understanding of the market.
I want to know why they didn't include ways for tenants to protect themselves from mentally ill housemates? I know someone who lives in shared house with someone who is a danger to the entire house and the landlord says that she can't do anything cause it would be too expensive and time consuming to evict. The mentally ill house mate even shouted at the landlord on the phone and the landlord now fears the tenant as well. My friend is living in fear, scared for her life and has to stay with another friend until she can find a new place. This is beyond horrible and there should be something a landlord can do to protect housemates tenants that doesn't take months. If you want to make places so unaffordable that they can't live alone anymore at least you could make the conditions liveable in shared homes.
15:00 this is a bizarre situation she is describing. When a scheme isn't private, it cannot be bought by investors. Also, the response !!! Clueless. Investors make money by keeping properties empty...these aren't the boon times for ever increasing capital values. There's no benefit to acquiring assets, simply to hold them for an increase in value which is simply not being realised. BTL investors as the name might suggest, buy the properties for rental income.
Compulsory purchase of home scalper properties at below market rates (measured by their profits from home scalping in the last 5 years being deductible) and conversion to social housing ought do it.
This is all very nice but I have letter's from the previous PM & the current PM stating that thay will not enforce the current laws even though this goes against government guidance & both houses of parliament & i have a crime number issued against a barraness in the lord's also MPs & councilors are actively supporting criminal landlords involving exstaush
Frankly not too clever. This whole subject is framed as an "us vs them" issue. Landlords in the most part are stepping in to provide a service that the state no longer does. Most landlords only own 1 rental property and they'll make about £200 to £300 a month gross profit. That profit is then taxed and many will end up making next to nothing, and some may well make a loss. Look up section 24 if you want more information on that. The issue is that not enough properties are being built, and yes I agree that landlords shouldn't be buying new builds. Quite often the ones that will are the massive commercial entities like Blackrock and Lloyds Bank, however if they've also developed those properties then you can't really blame them for holding on to them afterwards.
@@marklewis3023 sorry you are misinterpreting those stats - most own one (40 percent) , but when around 20 percent of them own 5 or more (many considerably more) the multi landlords outshine the single ones on a per property basis. i agree we need to build more but at the same time no person should own 10 or more houses and work together with other people with 10 or more houses to make owning a property a pipe dream for regular people.
@deadadam666 Do you believe that people should be able to rent properties? If the answer is yes then who do you think should provide that service? Because the government don't seem to want the hassle and actively outsource the problem. So you either have private landlords or large corporations, and the latter is currently winning that battle. So, soon there will be little choice for tenants, and let's hope they don't get blacklisted by the big corps, because they'll be defacto homeless with no where to go. In China they have social credits, and there's an underclass of people that have no rights and can't access basic services. We'll end up sleep walking into that position if we're not careful.
Have you got proof of investor buying homes and leaving them empty to sell later. At present house prices are not going anywhere, your get more money in stocks and shares and they easier to sell.
Great, cap mortgage payments as well and any other housing costs. Most landlords have come off fixed rate mortgages of say 3% and the rates have jumped to 6% with the interest rate rises. You also add in the tax increases landlords have had, that has then obviously lead to rent rises. Action, Reaction.
Basically Landlords can do what they like and tenants have to join the queue at underfunded Charities only to be told after a year of waiting they don’t have the resources or don’t do casework. CAB do their best but Shelter, in name only!
@NeonVisual need to prove antisocial behaviour. That's a conviction for knifing someone, etc. Bad behaviour is someone kicking in a door, shouting and screaming 5 times a night. So can't use s.5
Proven wrong in many countries. The removal of the home scalper allows renters to become owners. That trend continues right up until there are less than 10% private homescalpers. You're speaking out of your tory voting rear, again.
@@NeonVisual It's amazing how obvious this is to anyone who can think in terms of a market that's capable of shifting. 1.Restrictions make landlording unprofitable. 2. Fewer landlords means more homes on the market. 3. More homes on the market is an increase in supply, which causes a reduction in prices. 4. A reduction in prices causes more people to buy rather than rent. 5. Fewer renters means less demand. 6. Less demand means (slightly) lower prices. 7. Lower prices feeds into point 3, but also makes landlording more profitable. 8. The spiral stablizes at a lower percentage of the population renting when landlording is profitable again at a significantly lower house price because the decrease in price in point 6 is less and less each cycle. Ergo, you just need to provide enough restrictions that landlords are being paid only a reasonable wage for the time they invest into making the houses livable and safe. That way they work for a living like everyone else (I know that they absolutely don't have to right now because my family are landlords and I see how little they do and how much they rake in, and I know several other landlords who are exactly the same personally, and no landlords who aren't doing that - even ones who don't use an estate agent). The restrictions can come as a rent cap, but done as a percentage of the expected market value of the house I could imagine that leading to the above cycle becoming too recursive and collapsing even a reasonable and fair rental market that only takes up 2% or so of housing, so I'd probably use a different measure than the house price. Aside from that, it's pretty clear how it works.
I complained about repairs and then was given 2 section 21 s. I have fought them to stay in my home 🏡 and we are going to court as I have been harassed, told to leave, and lived with vermin and a leak. How can that be right that I have panic attacks and have to take meds to deal with living in my home. I have been here for 10 years. A national scandal we are expected to live like Victorian Britain.
This is very detrimental to tenants. Your destroying the private rental sector I speak from direct experience. Every policy has a direct impact on tenants. You haven’t even got your facts right 🤯
Less home scalpers = more home buyers = less renters. We should be aiming for single digit private rentals, like most other countries, and like the UK was before the Tories turned homes into cash cows. Your days are numbered sunshine.
How about the tenants that claim benefits ,pocket said benefits, meant to pay rent ?theft,fraud?!or the tenants that trash a property so bad it needs 20-30k spent on it ,criminal damge,!?? Why these youtubers only show one side and get away with it boggles me ,there are issues with landords but also tenants, be fair ,have honesty ,integrity, instead of your one sided discussion
Making all landlords as villains is not right. There are good people on both sides. The law needs to protect both groups to ensure we have a way forward. This act will increase problems by pushing good land lords out. My worry all that will be left will be corporations and landlords who are not mum and pop outfits who will seek profits and greed.
Those things you mention are very much the minority of private renters. Why should all of us normal tenants who obey the law (the majority) be punished by these horrendous practises because of a few bad tenants?
@abstractdrumz totally agree but landlord puts up price to compensate the loss ,while it should be the bad tenant who pays ,damage,no. payment of rent ,but the law let's this behaviour repeat itself ,bad tenants move to a new rental and repeat!!
Well it would be a good start if the benefits given actually covered the rent. But due to your abject greed, people are now using their extremely limited sustenance money on top of the housing benefit to keep you from getting a job and pulling your own weight in life.
Meh, pretty typical for Pol Joe but as a tradey most tenants I tend to deal with genuinely live like animals, the correlation between the house being a dump and not owning it is hard to argue with. The issue is the rent is paid by UC.. they don't care because It's not their money.
@abstractdrumz when the system has been cultivated by the bad apples everyone loses out. Yes you should have some rights as a good tenant of course, but some of the people I've seen in my life genuinely don't deserve any with regards to housing. I'm talking about locking dogs in rooms and letting them shit and piss everywhere being quite a common occurrence.. end of the day it's virtually free housing and they treat it like crap. What do people expect landlords to do, they can't just evict them because of the rights they have, sorry but I don't have sympathy for them, cleanliness is a choice.
You can't get out of paying HMO license fees; you'll be investigated and fined. No landlord in their right mind would avoid paying £600 for their HMO renewal, with the risk of facing criminal prosecution..
@@Lostmissionary without landlords you will have no options at all. Unless you have good credit for a mortgage? Well paid job? Deposit? Along with the ability to manage ownership of a property
We need more interviews like this that explain what happens and how legislation passes through Parliament.
Some private Landlords are simply a symptom of the growing inequalities in British Society. Yes it's good to look at renters rights but the real issue here is the vastly unequal distribution of wealth in the country. Until that is resolved this is just a sticking plaster.
@@LUNAJH559
Private landlords are a symptom of unaffordable housing. A situation which has been deliberately created by New Labour and the Tories importing a population the size of Belgium in as little as 27 years let alone any serious attempt to build enough homes to keep up.
@@gregoryjames165 Are you seriously suggesting that stopping immigration will magically make slum landlords go away?
@@gregoryjames165 bingo
The people that should own the wealth are those who created the wealth.
@@danziegnerBusiness owners think of themselves as wealth creators, but they would have no business without workers. Who creates the wealth?
They need to address shared ownership landlords. As you can own 25% but be responsible for 100% of problems. They don't share the responsibility if the boiler breaks or if the roof needs a repair, etc but they still charge you rent like a traditional landlord with 0 responsibilities. It's kind of evil genius sell them a measly portion and then just collect money forever more while doing nothing.
Black mould exists with council rentals much more than private rentals
I've lived in a number of private rentals and never lived in or known anyone who has lived in one without black mould. This comparison may be true, but it's basically whataboutism. Not to mention, properly funded council hosing schemes could prevent this if combined with giving people the right to withhold rent if they live in a council house with black mould, forcing the councils to deal with the problem.
Housing supply is down cos affordable is being used as second homes and Airbnb hotels. Do a Spain and 💯 tax 2nd homes
How much tax would that be?
@ whatever puts people off hogging the housing and living abroad while doing it!
@@garymole819 💯
Landlords provide housing in the same way ticket touts provide entertainment
Please explain?
@@Mr1971mccarthy They buy the housing stock (tickets) and sell it back for more money, adding nothing of value
@@Mr1971mccarthyit exists without them, they just make it cost more by holding it.
@@Mr1971mccarthythink of the extortionate charges ticketmaster slap on top of your tickets purchase.
Landlords are housing providers. Given the sell off of social housing and the inadequate building of houses, we fill the gap. How many families have you housed? I work with local authorities to house those on their 'at risk of homelessness' list. How many derelict houses have you returned to being habitable dwellings?
I wish people would stop talking about housing supply. Sure, build more. but those will just get bought by more landlords. The problem is all the housing is owned by people that have no interest in living in it
Aye, that needs fixing first. Otherwise we'll just carry on putting the cart before the horse.
Personally I don't think that would be the case. Generally a landlord isn't prepared to offer as much when buying a house as someone who would want to live in it. Even if what you said were to happen, more houses owned by landlords would mean rent prices would begin to drop. Also not all the housing is owned by people who don't want to live in it. Private landlords make up around 20% of total houses. What do you reckon?
We need a super high tax rate for anyone with more than one residential home…
This ban on rent in advance seem poorly thought through. As a renter who does not have regular income (I’m self employed) I rely on the ability to pay my rent in advance to prove affordability. This removes an option for the landlord to give an opportunities for those who cannot prove affordability eg overseas students or professionals relocating to the UK or those relocating to find work. With the removal of section 21 the landlord is going to be even more cautious and are less likely to take the risk on people in my or similar situations.
The main issue is supply and demand. Simply provide more homes that are available to rent, this give tenants more choice so they can vote with their feet. When there so little rental accommodation available renters are given little choice but to just put up with what ever is available.
tbf I'd say that you can also help the supply/demand problem by severly limiting the profitablility of buying to let. Housing prices will fall, so more people will buy to occupy and fewer people will be stuck renting, which reduces demand and lowers the profitability of renting and so on. This could lead to affordable housing alongside a much, much smaller rental market intended for short-term occupation, since people who want to live somewhere for a few years will be able to afford to buy.
@@CenitopiusThe government has already done this by significantly increasing taxation and regulation on the private landlords. Landlords are now selling up and leaving the sector in record numbers. This has only made the problem worse as the housing shortage means that these houses are being mostly bought by owner occupiers not other landlords as it is no longer an attractive investment so this is further reducing rental stock supply and pushing rents even higher.
@@CoLivingCreators government / mp's don't give a shit abt renters. mp's have sold out to bankers, Israeli lobby. eg Palestine - genocide. do tenants really think government cares abt them. you want another example speed camera its just another way of taxing people. when will the tenants wake up and realise all this is cash crab on landlords. who will pay in the end. renters when supply decrease and rents go up. remember tenants aren't going to be renters for ever. eventually some of them will save up and buy properties and rent them out. who in the will all lose out. it will be all of us. think before you vote for unjust bills / laws. stupid people. fools
Clearly he does not understand the legislation or the ramifications: NO the landlords CAN NOT ask for a "larger Deposit" where rent up front is required (because the prospective tenant has a poor credit rating or employment status). A Deposit will be capped at 6 weeks rent. So you are wrong! Those Tenants will have that option denyed them and be TOTALLY excluded from the PRS.
Yeh really poor answer he gave on that. He's basically creating a law that will mean that many people will become homeless. Even those who do have an income and could afford to pay will be as you've said "excluded" because a landlord can't take the risk.
Also talking about potentially banning guarantors, they don't understand that landlords need more certainty not less.
Completely agree with you both. Reduced certainty means increased risk which will nudge up rents. I understand the sentiment for wanting to limit rent in advance but feel a more sensible option would be to provide conditions for when rent in advance or a guaranotor can be asked, i.e. If the tennant fails standard affordability test/has no employment/No credit history (overseas student) then you can ask for a UK guarantor, if no guarantor then you can ask for rent in advance.
My rent has increased by 50% in the last 20 months - before this it was a manageable 5 to 10% pa. As a local government worker, my pay has increased by 1 to 3% pa (we're not civil servants). It's a struggle for sure, especially as I live alone.
Bank of England to blame unfortunately
@@chester6343 yeah - between them and the city they gamble with our money and look for constant "growth". Our homes are not worth the money the money markets make up believe..
@@saintuk70 also huge change in regulations and taxation
Did you use your right to challenge the rent increase? If not, why not?
just move to a cheaper area. don't feel the monster landlord. you deserve better.
I wonder what his thoughts are on Jas Athwal? It must be challenging to champion rent reform when one of your party peers is an notorious conniving slumlord.
Alex Sobel (my MP) repping a key issue nationally that is so keenly felt here in Leeds. Great to see actual issues being addressed in policy.
What makes me sad is that stuff like this happens all the time. There are a tonne of MPs (from all parties, shocker!) who are really good advocates for their constituents and are fighting for issues they care about. The problem is most of the public aren't informed enough, and don't care to be.
There will be no property left to rent soon. Tightening the screws just accelerates it and people are too stupid to realise as they are so busy vilifying landlords with no commercial awareness. I lost 16k on my property last year as it is mortgaged but I’m taxed as if I earned 11k. So that’s another 5k on the loss. I’m selling. Where are people meant to live when starting out when there will be nothing left to rent?
What do you mean? If the price has dropped on your home, then someone who couldn't afford your rent may be able to afford the mortgage! The property isn't going to disappear when you sell up...
Can you be clearer about in what way you lost 16K? I ask because if you spent, say 30K on the mortgage for the property and recieved 14K in rent, you'll retain a lot of the mortgage payment in the form of the stake in the property you bought with that payment. The mortage I'm getting right now is such that I keep about half the value I pay for the house, so when I've paid 10K I'll own a 5K stake in the property (supposing prices remain stable). Since you're selling, I'm confused as to whether you mean that you'll have lost 16K after you sell, or that your bank account is 16K poorer than it was when you started renting (in which case when you sell you'll probably turn a profit overall)
@@pipancla people need rental property available when starting out. These people will not be buying it. The root cause is lack of supply and too many people coming to the country (as our birth rate is below replacement) however the government likes to blame landlords for their policy failure and useful idiots lap it up having watched a RUclips video on Marxism and rentierism.
@@Cenitopius I lost 16k for 23-24 tax year having it fully occupied at market rate 2.5k pm. Quite an expensive property with 45% non repayment mortgage and needed to replace boiler at 6k (which is offsettable). Also agency fees. The yield is terrible even if it wasn’t mortgaged I’d be lucky to get 1-2%. You can earn more in a money market fund and none of the hassle. Perhaps other areas have better yields than London. Anyway I’m out - when Osborne removed mortgage interest relief he killed it. Good luck to future tenants the only owners will be blackrock etc who will only buy whole buildings. The individual flats and houses are not scaleable for large companies.
@@Cenitopius He's talking about section 24, where rent is taxed on personal ownership based on the gross rather than net (after costs). This means many landlords are under water who own properties in their own name. Take the risks, deal with the hassle, be totally vilified and lose large amounts of money.
Great video. Would be good to get Labour MPs on more regularly to talk through their legislation.
This was such a great interview, I understand more about renters bill now.
My family are getting evicted next month. Been living in a flat for 9 years. Always paid our rent. Valued in the local community. Ironically have put up with a massive social housing block being built 50 yards from our living room window. All allocated. I'm 62, the trauma and upheaval of moving is an endurance I'd rather not go through.
No issue with social housing is there? 🤔
@@Sam88-l4kexcept it's diminished and not available to the vast numbers who desperately need it. And in most cases it's owned by some demonic quango and the local authority has little to do with it. Honestly, the shenanigans going on in metropolitan areas around land and development, well, let's say it's a racket, and somewhere along the line there is Robert Jenrick type.
I am nearly 80 in the same situation, the trauma and cost of moving is horrendous. I was offered a long lease and after two years given a section 21 but I’m not well enough and don’t have the money to move so I am just staying here as apparently the courts are bogged down for a couple of years and would you believe it they are now offering me a new lease so my landlord was not selling the property after all! Namaste 🙏
I’m a landlord. Knowing all these rights are on the horizon, I increased all my tenants’ rents by £350 over two years. I hadn’t increased rents for 6+ years plus before this.
Keep the new regulations coming and restrictions coming…I’ll keep passing the increase to my tenants.
Black mould is caused by damp, unless the roof is leaking damp is in every home that is not dried by heating and ventilation. No amount of maintenance will make it go away. Better insulation means less heat energy, but you still need to remove the moisture generated by living, using heat and ventilation. Its simplistic to blame the property, its more about how it is used.
If you think black mould is caused by people putting their washing on a clothes horse in the depths of winter because they can't afford either a tumble dyer or electricity to heat the home, then you truly have lost all sense of the reality of renting from a home scalper, especially the Tory voting homescalpers, they're the ones who need imprisoning the most by supporting a terrorist organisation
Then why are so few homes that are bought to occupy suffering from the black mould problem that seems to effect an enormous number of rental properties? If it's simply a consequence of living in a home, or of poor people who can't afford heating living in a home, then it should be appearing in something like 90% of homes or both 90% of homes owned by poor people *and* 90% of homes rented by poor people. In my experience, and from what I hear from others, it's almost exclusive to the rental market.
@@Cenitopius Damp and mould is not exclusive to the rental sector. Yes it can be caused by the fabric of the building, but it's also true that it can be caused by the tenants themselves. Many people who don't own their own homes are frankly oblivious to general house maintenance.
I have to explain to all my tenants about opening windows and not drying clothes inside. I've already tackled any cold spots to minimise issues, but if people can't do the basics then excessive moisture in the air will condense on surfaces.
Section 21 is normally used instead of section 8 as it’s easier not to “prove” the case.
So there won’t be any less evictions, just a different process which now means courts and legal fees.
Sorry tenants, but now you will have a ccj and debt order. Good luck finding another landlord to accept you
Typical home scalper nonsense.
How about you get imprisoned for harrasment?
@@NeonVisual how about you pay your rent like a good boy
"If you are a private renter this will make a huge difference to your life"
100% - Half of private renters will be evicted. Landlords are bailing out. If you want to help these people build more social housing. When a similar policy was adopted in Ireland in 1998, rents increased by almost 50% over the subsequent three years. A "huge difference" - you are not kidding.
@@spiritualdeath101 👏👏👏👏👏
Tell us you're a home scalper without telling us you're a home scalper.
@ not anymore. I sold out to foreign investors
@Mr1971mccarthy yeah right 😂
@@NeonVisual home owner; ex-private tennent 1995-2005. gov. doesnt understand needs of renters or landlords. they'll just make it worse.
All kinds of standards can be imposed on landlords (including rent caps and safe standards that can be assessed annually with severe penalties if infringed on) but what is really needed is a 90% tax rate on any 2+ residential properties owned and a ban on commercially owned or rented residential property. We need to scale rentals way back, caps on home value and rents, offer no-interest mortgages for first time buyers and a lot more. Theres no excuse not getting everyone into houses! When people own they are invested and that investment is a huge driver for community building and support.
My last flat before leaving London was a nightmare for black mould. We ended up moving partly because the landlord/letting agent tried to make us leave all windows open, all day every day, in mid-January, with a literal newborn in the flat. They then wanted to charge us the better part of a grand to repaint the walls that their own damp inspectors told us to scrub weekly (and not weakly!) with bleach.
@@SideshowFras that’s what happens when you don’t ventilate your home. Was it the landlord that made you pregnant?
what a lovely man
Timestamps (Powered by Merlin AI)
00:04 - Legislation aims to protect tenants from exploitative landlord practices.
02:10 - Labour MP introduces measures to protect students from early rental pressures.
05:56 - Proposal for government-backed guarantor scheme to protect tenants and improve access to housing.
07:51 - New legislation aims to limit landlord exploitation of tenants.
11:36 - MP addresses the need to regulate landlords for tenant health and fair housing.
13:33 - Addressing landlord exploitation and empty properties to improve housing availability.
17:36 - Labour seeks to address housing challenges for young tenants amid the cost of living crisis.
19:39 - Addressing court delays affecting landlord-tenant disputes.
23:07 - Debate on rent regulation and parliamentary procedures in landlord-tenant legislation.
24:47 - Discussion of landlord regulations and tenant protection measures.
Another level headed Labour MP that answers questions. Really good 👍
Yes and thanks to Labour my tenant has now a section 21. I'm not going to put up with late payments every month, not allowing my agent entry, not allowing contractors in, missing Xmas rent, 4 years of this but POOR TENANT HEY. POOR LANDLORD I THINK
Making it harder for landlords doesn't fix the actual problem of building more houses, it's putting a plaster on a deeper problem
There would be enough homes if not stolen by the previous generation for a life of lazy home scalping.
they are trying to do both in all fairness, just because this bloke is focusing on one aspect of the problem doesn't mean the other aspects are being ignored
Yes, second homes is an issue, but he deflected onto that rather than answering the question about empty, mostly derelict, urban housing, space above shops, conversion of surplus shops, etc.
I don't understand why housing benefit is paid out, without someone checking that houses are fit for living in.
@@bernieburrows3731 I don't understand how benefit for housing is claimed but not paid to landlord,isn't that theft of taxpayers money
@@nancyhood8395 or paid to people illegally subletting council houses
@@nancyhood8395 Because the amount doesn't cover the housing the home scalper is trying to get away with.
Oh! But there is someone in the council that does that, but the renter has to call them in.
Then the problem is, they may say that the house is unfit to live in, and you end up homeless, or you can be evicted under some reason or another. And if the landlord owns lots of houses, good luck on renting one of them, you may also find that agents, in that area, may not be willing to deal with you either. Yes in a big city you maybe able to move to another area, but in small towns, that becomes a problem.
or who is living in it !
My landlord pays 10% of my hard earned rent payments to a bunch of incompetent parasites who give me nothing but grief and break the law .....let's hope the new bill will result in a wave of letting agents retraining in different industries as they will have even less to do for the 10% the landlord might also question why
Move then
@@vvwalker7261Thoughtless comment.
@vvwalker7261 i don't want to upset the support , social and business networks that come with living a decade in the same area , absolutely nothing available to buy or rent without doubling my outgoings in the short term ....I expect most of that went over your head of compression. A secure affordable home is a foundation on which you build a society , it shouldn't be an opportunity for a load of free lunching parasites
@@vvwalker7261 To... where? Another home let out by a landlord via an estate agent that breaks the law? I don't agree with the implication by @dolphine675 that estate agents are the only villain here, but it's clear that their point is that it's hard to find properties where this isn't the case.
The root of the problem is the commodification of housing, people buy partly to live but mostly as an investment, that in itself is the problem
Big up DJ Sobel
I LIKE THE BEHIND THE SCENES MOMENT AT THE END
Once again the gov has zero idea about the world.
Financial penalties for advance rent.
These won't prevent the practice as there is a limited supply with lots of competition.
It'll make student poorer as these penalties will be added to the rent.
So the students not the landlord will be paying
Not sure why this channel hates landlords 😂
As a landlord I can't stand tenants who complain. It's a rental, it's not your house. If you don't like it, just leave.
It baffles me. I'm a responsible landlord, and I maintain my property to a high standard. All problems are taken care of swiftly, and nothing is allowed to crumble or not be replaced. It's the tenants, usually students, who take the proverbial. They don't treat the property well; leave a mess without cleaning. Even in a professional let, I had problems from a foreign couple who put the heating up to the hughest degree and used electrical heaters, so it would remind them of home...who had to cover the extra..us. Even their fellow tenants had issues with them. We need the ability to evict individuals like this, but now we can't evict problem tenants without strict conditions.
A large percentage of tenants are very irresponsible and entitled. This category has little or no sense of responsibility and will never be able to maintain a mortgage even if the house costs a pound. They will readily turn even a brand new house into a dump and expect compensation and a pat on the back in return.
I own land, and you own nothing - therefore you must work for me or one of my chums who also owns things, so you can pay me rent.
Or, if you want a shorter version: I own land, and you own nothing, so I own you.
Shorter yet:
"I have, therefore I am owed." - The perfect definition of a sense of entitlement.
And we still have "The House of Lords".
So, not much progress has been made away from the bonds of serfdom.
@samseal8611 do you take reward for your Labour, I’m assuming you work
Banks make a fat profit from doing nothing but owning things and owning IOUs , its such a clever illusion
@ Well, you know what they say about assume.
@samseal8611 I was being kind. I doubt you do
what's fair? good quality social housing, divorced from any notions of 'market rate'. anything else is rearranging patio furniture on the bibby stockholm.
He needs to have a word with his slumlord colleague, the Labour MP for Ilford South. Why is Labour de-selecting honest MPs like Sam Tarry - who show solidarity with working people on the picket line and replacing them with MPs like this who are renting out numerous properties infested with ants and black mould? When challenged he blames the letting agent he uses. Either he’s a full-time MP, working for his constituents OR he is a responsible landlord (of 19 properties). He should be taking ownership of maintaining his properties himself - not sub-contracting it out to cowboy letting agents. He can’t responsibly have the time to do both. What’s worse, no sanctions are imposed on him by the Labour whip / leadership, whereas the Campaign group MPs are suspended from the party whip for voting against the 2 child benefit cap. Complete hypocrisy.
I'm centre left on most topics and slightly to the right on others. Certainly not the demographic Politics Joe probably targets. That said, I have to say, this was a brill interview and I find it absolutely disgusting that landlords have so much control and tenants so much lack of control. My parents were landlords and their justification was always absolute bullshit.
I think centrists and socialists are demographic honestly. So you fit the centrist mould then (mind the pun)
When great necessity or situations of emergency face the country (eg HS2) the government buys private property by compulsory purchase; a 'reasonable' amount is paid to the owner but not necessarily market value.
It's a given that housing in Britain is in dire emergency so why doesn't the government give landlords considering selling up the single option of compulsory purchase? That way they'd sell up and walk away with a reduction in their planned profit(eering) and the houses can join the social renting register thereby fixing the problem from both ends. Then tighten the rules further on existing landlords with higher hurdles for corporate rentiers.
Serious problems require radical solutions.
Well confidence would collapse in the housing market if you did that. Those without properties may well be happy in a drop in prices, but the banks certainly wouldn't be happy as they would have a load of mortgages in negative equity. It would be like 2008 mark 2 and the banks would stop lending. You would then have mortgage prisoners who can't move house and can't afford to sell, lets hope they can keep up with their payments.
Energy rating C is the sustainable energy level. My bedroom is E. The bedroom is wet.
Do you know what the cause of that is? Is there an obvious problem with the fabric of the building? Leaking roof, gutters? Is it ground floor? Solid walls with no cavity?
Jas Atwal? Why is Labour so hypocrotical.
A large percentage of renters are irresponsible and entitled. This category has little or no sense of responsibility and will never be able to maintain a mortgage even if the house costs a pound. They will readily turn even a brand new house into a dump and expect compensation and a pat on the back in return. Landlords will keep passing any additional costs arising from any one sided legislation targeting them. Renters will always be at the reciving end.
You see a boon for insurance products to allow tenants who present greater risk (poor credit, bad previous landlord reference etc, patchy employment). Otherwise they will have difficulty in accessing decent accommodation and get pushed to slum areas.
just ban landlords, as simple as that. the govt should provide quality social housing in the heart of cities and countries. just tax the mega rich, super rich and oridnary rich hardworking working class. punish anyone with ambition and aspiration into the housing ladder.
"punish anyone with ambition and aspiration into the housing ladder" what does that mean? Are you suggesting that anyone with ambition should be punished?
Trying to work out if you're joking. I'm thinking you probably are.
@ The tax system, yes. I'd rather earn less than being taxed 5 out of 10 GBP I can earn.
I've worked for what I've got get out there and work. Has far has renters are concerned do what your legally obliged to do like landlords or DONT CHOOSE TO LIVE IN MY HOUSE simples. ALL ONE SIDED POOR TENANT. Some landlords are decent Shame some tenants arent
Increase public housing supply, enact vacancy taxes, land value taxes, sticter rent controls at a maximum of 5% rate hikes per annum, decrease beaurocratic planning delays, decrease deposit and fowarded costs, etc
Give out more grants and loans for increasing residential energy efficiency, etc
Housing is a policy issue and it's a national disgrace, landlords want to make as much money as possible irregard of the public good whilst construction and land costs are over the moon due to nonsensical planning regulation and market speculation
Britain performs the worst among the European countries.
@@seawavechau In what regard?
These Landlords, they increased prices when and how their muscles wanted,,brought so much poverty to minimum wage workers in the economy.. the only joy after a year of work is not to remain homeless, how not to get mentally ill😢
Awaabs landlord was a housing association
Like schools and care homes, many housing associations are really private companies. Rochdale Boroughwide Housing is a "tenant and employee co-owned mutual housing society".
More regulation = less landlords = higher rents = more complaining from Joe Politics, completely unaware that they are pouring gasoline on the fire
Less home scalpers = more home buyers.
Everyone wins, except for the parasitic home scalper who will have to find someone else to con their way out of doing a day's work.
fewer landlords can only happen if they sell. If they sell, two things happen to the market - house prices go down because the market is saturated with ex-rentals, and renting as a percentage of population goes down because more people can afford to buy. That drives rental prices down because there's less demand, which leads to fewer landlords feeling like they can turn a profit, etc. etc. etc. - it's the opposite of the housing bubble.
Rent won't just "go up" because there are fewer landlords, that assumes that no-one can buy to occupy, and people can only buy to rent. You have a foolish understanding of the market.
Social housing, those that can afford to buy shouldn’t be living in them and should free up to allow others who need them
I want to know why they didn't include ways for tenants to protect themselves from mentally ill housemates? I know someone who lives in shared house with someone who is a danger to the entire house and the landlord says that she can't do anything cause it would be too expensive and time consuming to evict. The mentally ill house mate even shouted at the landlord on the phone and the landlord now fears the tenant as well. My friend is living in fear, scared for her life and has to stay with another friend until she can find a new place. This is beyond horrible and there should be something a landlord can do to protect housemates tenants that doesn't take months. If you want to make places so unaffordable that they can't live alone anymore at least you could make the conditions liveable in shared homes.
You go to the police, moron.
15:00 this is a bizarre situation she is describing. When a scheme isn't private, it cannot be bought by investors. Also, the response !!! Clueless. Investors make money by keeping properties empty...these aren't the boon times for ever increasing capital values. There's no benefit to acquiring assets, simply to hold them for an increase in value which is simply not being realised. BTL investors as the name might suggest, buy the properties for rental income.
the problem is the market, this softens the blow but isnt enough. Social homes are fundamental
Compulsory purchase of home scalper properties at below market rates (measured by their profits from home scalping in the last 5 years being deductible) and conversion to social housing ought do it.
@@NeonVisual we would need leaders with balls/ovaries to fucking do that though , and they clearly wont
This is all very nice but I have letter's from the previous PM & the current PM stating that thay will not enforce the current laws even though this goes against government guidance & both houses of parliament & i have a crime number issued against a barraness in the lord's also MPs & councilors are actively supporting criminal landlords involving exstaush
the only way to fix this is to tax them so hard it becomes unprofitable. while they can print money by holding the country to ransom they will
Frankly not too clever. This whole subject is framed as an "us vs them" issue. Landlords in the most part are stepping in to provide a service that the state no longer does. Most landlords only own 1 rental property and they'll make about £200 to £300 a month gross profit. That profit is then taxed and many will end up making next to nothing, and some may well make a loss. Look up section 24 if you want more information on that.
The issue is that not enough properties are being built, and yes I agree that landlords shouldn't be buying new builds. Quite often the ones that will are the massive commercial entities like Blackrock and Lloyds Bank, however if they've also developed those properties then you can't really blame them for holding on to them afterwards.
@@marklewis3023 sorry you are misinterpreting those stats - most own one (40 percent) , but when around 20 percent of them own 5 or more (many considerably more) the multi landlords outshine the single ones on a per property basis. i agree we need to build more but at the same time no person should own 10 or more houses and work together with other people with 10 or more houses to make owning a property a pipe dream for regular people.
@deadadam666 Do you believe that people should be able to rent properties? If the answer is yes then who do you think should provide that service? Because the government don't seem to want the hassle and actively outsource the problem.
So you either have private landlords or large corporations, and the latter is currently winning that battle. So, soon there will be little choice for tenants, and let's hope they don't get blacklisted by the big corps, because they'll be defacto homeless with no where to go. In China they have social credits, and there's an underclass of people that have no rights and can't access basic services. We'll end up sleep walking into that position if we're not careful.
Have you got proof of investor buying homes and leaving them empty to sell later. At present house prices are not going anywhere, your get more money in stocks and shares and they easier to sell.
He don’t want to restrict housing supply but he don’t know why landlords are selling .
Less home scalpers = more home owners.
@ so what happens to renters then
Rent is way to high. Rent should be capped until the market has normalised. Then make empty homes cost more money.
Great, cap mortgage payments as well and any other housing costs. Most landlords have come off fixed rate mortgages of say 3% and the rates have jumped to 6% with the interest rate rises. You also add in the tax increases landlords have had, that has then obviously lead to rent rises. Action, Reaction.
Basically Landlords can do what they like and tenants have to join the queue at underfunded Charities only to be told after a year of waiting they don’t have the resources or don’t do casework. CAB do their best but Shelter, in name only!
If you own multiple properties you should be heavily taxed.
The more properties you own the higher the tax you have to pay.
How are we addressing problem or difficult tenants?
The same section 5 you've always been able to use.
@NeonVisual need to prove antisocial behaviour. That's a conviction for knifing someone, etc. Bad behaviour is someone kicking in a door, shouting and screaming 5 times a night. So can't use s.5
The landlords that stay will put up rents just incase rent controls are made law.
Sorry tenants as once again you loose.
Proven wrong in many countries. The removal of the home scalper allows renters to become owners. That trend continues right up until there are less than 10% private homescalpers.
You're speaking out of your tory voting rear, again.
@@NeonVisual It's amazing how obvious this is to anyone who can think in terms of a market that's capable of shifting.
1.Restrictions make landlording unprofitable.
2. Fewer landlords means more homes on the market.
3. More homes on the market is an increase in supply, which causes a reduction in prices.
4. A reduction in prices causes more people to buy rather than rent.
5. Fewer renters means less demand.
6. Less demand means (slightly) lower prices.
7. Lower prices feeds into point 3, but also makes landlording more profitable.
8. The spiral stablizes at a lower percentage of the population renting when landlording is profitable again at a significantly lower house price because the decrease in price in point 6 is less and less each cycle.
Ergo, you just need to provide enough restrictions that landlords are being paid only a reasonable wage for the time they invest into making the houses livable and safe. That way they work for a living like everyone else (I know that they absolutely don't have to right now because my family are landlords and I see how little they do and how much they rake in, and I know several other landlords who are exactly the same personally, and no landlords who aren't doing that - even ones who don't use an estate agent).
The restrictions can come as a rent cap, but done as a percentage of the expected market value of the house I could imagine that leading to the above cycle becoming too recursive and collapsing even a reasonable and fair rental market that only takes up 2% or so of housing, so I'd probably use a different measure than the house price. Aside from that, it's pretty clear how it works.
this guy is absolutely clueless - this will only raise rents on stretched tenants. cant wait for farage to come in and sort this out.
I complained about repairs and then was given 2 section 21 s. I have fought them to stay in my home 🏡 and we are going to court as I have been harassed, told to leave, and lived with vermin and a leak. How can that be right that I have panic attacks and have to take meds to deal with living in my home. I have been here for 10 years. A national scandal we are expected to live like Victorian Britain.
OLD PEOPLE HAVE HAD IT WAY TOO GOOD - WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT A LOGANS RUN TYPE SYSTEM
No, you need to legislate against guarantor requirements, his half measure is still deeply discriminatory
This is very detrimental to tenants.
Your destroying the private rental sector
I speak from direct experience.
Every policy has a direct impact on tenants.
You haven’t even got your facts right 🤯
Less home scalpers = more home buyers = less renters.
We should be aiming for single digit private rentals, like most other countries, and like the UK was before the Tories turned homes into cash cows.
Your days are numbered sunshine.
How about the tenants that claim benefits ,pocket said benefits, meant to pay rent ?theft,fraud?!or the tenants that trash a property so bad it needs 20-30k spent on it ,criminal damge,!?? Why these youtubers only show one side and get away with it boggles me ,there are issues with landords but also tenants, be fair ,have honesty ,integrity, instead of your one sided discussion
Get out, landlords are parasites, they didn't build the property and exploit millions every day, we have no sympathy for them.
Making all landlords as villains is not right. There are good people on both sides. The law needs to protect both groups to ensure we have a way forward. This act will increase problems by pushing good land lords out. My worry all that will be left will be corporations and landlords who are not mum and pop outfits who will seek profits and greed.
Those things you mention are very much the minority of private renters. Why should all of us normal tenants who obey the law (the majority) be punished by these horrendous practises because of a few bad tenants?
@abstractdrumz totally agree but landlord puts up price to compensate the loss ,while it should be the bad tenant who pays ,damage,no. payment of rent ,but the law let's this behaviour repeat itself ,bad tenants move to a new rental and repeat!!
Well it would be a good start if the benefits given actually covered the rent.
But due to your abject greed, people are now using their extremely limited sustenance money on top of the housing benefit to keep you from getting a job and pulling your own weight in life.
A good policy for a change.
For who?
Meh, pretty typical for Pol Joe but as a tradey most tenants I tend to deal with genuinely live like animals, the correlation between the house being a dump and not owning it is hard to argue with. The issue is the rent is paid by UC.. they don't care because It's not their money.
So those of us who don't 'live like animals' should have no rights?
@abstractdrumz when the system has been cultivated by the bad apples everyone loses out. Yes you should have some rights as a good tenant of course, but some of the people I've seen in my life genuinely don't deserve any with regards to housing. I'm talking about locking dogs in rooms and letting them shit and piss everywhere being quite a common occurrence.. end of the day it's virtually free housing and they treat it like crap. What do people expect landlords to do, they can't just evict them because of the rights they have, sorry but I don't have sympathy for them, cleanliness is a choice.
@@abstractdrumzWhere did he say that?
Give this man a 🎤
Typical home scalper think.
Get out of our lives you parasite, before an enslaved tenant does something you may not live to regret.
The slimy rats will just rent to lodgers without paying hmo license fees. Lodgers have no rights whatsoever for some strange reason.
You can't get out of paying HMO license fees; you'll be investigated and fined. No landlord in their right mind would avoid paying £600 for their HMO renewal, with the risk of facing criminal prosecution..
Rent caps
Show me an example where rent controls have ever been effective. Price fixing doesn't work at all as was proven in Berlin.
He explains why rent caps won't work in the video.
Could he tell us why tenants move into a dwelling with black mold
Desperation to have a roof or live on the street. For some it's not an option.
Because they have no other choice apart from homelessness
You heard of being homeless mate?
@@Lostmissionary without landlords you will have no options at all.
Unless you have good credit for a mortgage? Well paid job? Deposit?
Along with the ability to manage ownership of a property
mp what a parasite - smug sob. renters reform bill completely one sided bill.
This was such a great interview, I understand more about renters bill now.
This was such a great interview, I understand more about renters bill now.