Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dave Beans

Shapps Rejects Landlord Regulation Proposals..

Recommended Posts

Looks as if ASTs are here to stay..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/jun/10/landlord-regulation-proposals-scrapped

Landlords and letting agents will not be subject to greater regulation because this would introduce too much additional red tape, the government said today.

Speaking in parliament, housing minister Grant Shapps said he was rejecting the regulations proposed by the previous government following recommendations from the Rugg Review, a report into the private rented sector.

These included the establishment of a national register of landlords, regulation of letting and managing agents, and compulsory written tenancy agreements.

Shapps said: "With the vast majority of England's 3 million private tenants happy with the service they receive, I am satisfied that the current system strikes the right balance between the rights and responsibilities of tenants and landlords.

"So today I make a promise to good landlords across the country: the government has no plans to create any burdensome red tape and bureaucracy, so you are able to continue providing a service to your tenants."

Instead, Shapps said he expects councils to use the range of powers available to them to tackle "rogue landlords". These include requiring landlords to take action to rectify hazards in their property; where landlords resist, the ability to make and charge for improvements and to prohibit use of the affected parts of the property; and discretionary licensing powers to tackle areas blighted by poorly managed privately rented stock.

Earlier this week, in his first speech since becoming housing minister, Shapps said that aspiring homeowners would be at the heart of the government's housing strategy.

"I don't agree with my predecessors that reducing homeownership might be a good thing," he told a room of housing industry representatives on Tuesday. "Most people still want to own their own homes and I want people to know that this government will support them in that."

The Association of Residential Lettings Agents (ARLA) said it was "extremely disappointed" with today's announcement.

Operations manager, Ian Potter, said: "This move risks seriously hampering the improvement of standards in the private rented sector, the sector's reputation, and the fundamental role it plays in the wider housing market, as well as failing to protect the consumer who has nowhere to go when there is service failure or fraud.

"A minimum requirement must surely be consumer redress and protection of all funds taken from the public, not just tenants deposits."

He added: "Currently, any person or organisation can become a letting agent. Until that is changed via national regulation, unprofessional, unqualified and unethical operators will continue to exist to the detriment and expense of consumers and the market as a whole."

The government also confirmed that the annual rental threshold for assured and assured shorthold tenancies (ASTs), which cover the majority of rental agreements in the country, will rise from £25,000 to £100,000. At present, anyone paying rent of more than just over £2,000 a month cannot have their rental agreement covered by an assured shorthold tenancy, giving them less protection.

Only deposits paid under AST agreements are protected by one of the tenancy deposit protection schemes. The change will come into effect on 1 October.

There are 1 million landlords in England, nearly three-quarters of which are individuals who may be renting a single room out, according to government figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"There are 1 million landlords in England, nearly three-quarters of which are individuals who may be renting a single room out, according to government figures"

What a cop out. Most people don't consider "individuals who may be renting a single room out" as a Landlord so why decide on rules for "real" landlords because of them. If they think it's too much red tape for "lodgers", which it probably is, just exclude them from the rules. Simples

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a cop out. Most people don't consider "individuals who may be renting a single room out" as a Landlord so why decide on rules for "real" landlords because of them. If they think it's too much red tape for "lodgers", which it probably is, just exclude them from the rules. Simples

tim

and yet there are over 1 million BTL loans.....and thats the ones that have told their lenders.

that means each BTL has on average 4 loans....

EDIT: a source the CML http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2613

at the end of MArch the number of BTL mortgages in arrears was 1.56% or 19300, which, if my maths is any good puts the total number of BTL loans at 1,237,179.

Edited by Bloo Loo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tories are the party of private property.

If you are a renter in the private sector, 1) you are an individual who doesn't own property, therefore you don't matter and 2) your landlord is an individual who owns* the property you live in, and therefore does matter.

It's perfectly logical and consistent.

* Yes, I know lots of them have mortgages, but as far as the Tories are concerned, they are the owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shapps said: "With the vast majority of England's 3 million private tenants happy with the service they receive, I am satisfied that the current system strikes the right balance between the rights and responsibilities of tenants and landlords.

Has anybody actually asked those 3 million tenants, or is he just assuming?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and yet there are over 1 million BTL loans.....and thats the ones that have told their lenders.

that means each BTL has on average 4 loans....

That sounds like a lot. Do you have a source? The consensus last weekend when yet another debate about CGT was on the radio & Tv was that there were 250,000 ish 2nd home owners. And they won't all have a mortgage either.

Maybe this is a seperate issue to BTL.

Edited by deflation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like a lot. Do you have a source? The consensus last weekend when yet another debate about CGT was on the radio & Tv was that there were 250,000 ish 2nd home owners. And they won't all have a mortgage either.

Maybe this is a seperate issue to BTL.

yes, just BTL, and that was the number of mortgages for BTL...Ill look up a source...so many on this site.

these are NOT second homes, but businesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually asked those 3 million tenants, or is he just assuming?

The tenants are only here because they are suffered as guests, they are not actual members of society and so the opinions of the owners / hosts is morally sufficient (equivalent)

You don't ask pets about pet food, you ask the owners

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, just BTL, and that was the number of mortgages for BTL...Ill look up a source...so many on this site.

these are NOT second homes, but businesses.

the editor seems a bit pants today. Here is a source..Gawd bless the CML

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2613

I make that 1,237,179 BTL mortgages based on the 1.56% more than 1.5% in arrears ( how many months is that?) being 19300.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and yet there are over 1 million BTL loans.....and thats the ones that have told their lenders.

that means each BTL has on average 4 loans....

EDIT: a source the CML http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2613

at the end of MArch the number of BTL mortgages in arrears was 1.56% or 19300, which, if my maths is any good puts the total number of BTL loans at 1,237,179.

Averages mean little in this game - I know of one owner who has 700 properties in Brighton. There are those that saw the AST and reduced supply of council homes as the springboard to massive wealth. How right they were to go ahead 20 years ago! Now, you could not start with prices and rents which do not stack up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually asked those 3 million tenants, or is he just assuming?

I shouldn't think he or any of his staff have asked them. On Shelter's website http://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_issues/Improving_private_renting it says "45 per cent of homes in the private rented sector in England fail to meet the Government's Decent Home Standard", quoting CLG, English House Condition Survey 2007 Headline Report 2009.

Shelter also points out "The assured shorthold tenancy, widely used within the private sector provides tenants with little security. As a result, many tenants avoid complaining about disrepair and damp, for fear of eviction." So unless tenants are asked in confidence about their experiences, one won't get an accurate picture of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shelter also points out "The assured shorthold tenancy, widely used within the private sector provides tenants with little security. As a result, many tenants avoid complaining about disrepair and damp, for fear of eviction." So unless tenants are asked in confidence about their experiences, one won't get an accurate picture of the situation.

Which in a political power sense boils down to same point i'm making

Why would you ask tenants? it's not as if they have any right to be here anyway

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current government believe the "private sector" (BTL in other words) are critical providers of essential social housing. They want to expand it.

Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tenants are only here because they are suffered as guests, they are not actual members of society and so the opinions of the owners / hosts is morally sufficient (equivalent)

You don't ask pets about pet food, you ask the owners

You haven't met our cats. That sort of "eat what you are given" bs just doesn't wash in the D'oh household.

Nice to know that even our cats have the political consciousness ot stand up for their rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current government believe the "private sector" (BTL in other words) are critical providers of essential social housing. They want to expand it.

Go figure.

The current government won't be funding too many social housing units, will it?

1. A large proportion of the party which is the major partner in the coalition is idealogically opposed to the provision of housing by the public sector.

2. It can't afford it.

So where else is everyone who can't afford to buy a house going to live? The private rented sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have some costings for showing it's better for economy and govt to build a million council houses (not in back gardens though) than pay LHA to private landlords?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wakey! Wakey!

Did you really think the Tories would be any different? Duh!

the government is dead....long live the government!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think they were planning to change ASTs anyway.

The previous government's plans were just about adding more bureaucracy, which the country can not afford.

Note ARLA squealing about not being made the compulsory official body for all letting agents. This really is a vested interest. Trade and professional bodies are always lobbying to have their position enshrined in law, so that everyone has to join, and their role somehow becomes "official".

There is too much of this red-tape adding tendency, whereby you need some sort of a licence or permit to set up almost any business. It is unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The previous government's plans were just about adding more bureaucracy, which the country can not afford.

Note ARLA squealing about not being made the compulsory official body for all letting agents. This really is a vested interest. Trade and professional bodies are always lobbying to have their position enshrined in law, so that everyone has to join, and their role somehow becomes "official".

There is too much of this red-tape adding tendency, whereby you need some sort of a licence or permit to set up almost any business. It is unnecessary.

Absolutely. As well as increasing costs, compulsory registration would, at the margins, deter potential landlords from renting property thus reducing supply. More properties would be left empty rather than being made available as short-term lets (e.g. while the owner is working away or considering what to do with an inherited house).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. As well as increasing costs, compulsory registration would, at the margins, deter potential landlords from renting property thus reducing supply. More properties would be left empty rather than being made available as short-term lets (e.g. while the owner is working away or considering what to do with an inherited house).

Regulation of renting conditions is like a tax on the act of renting out; this has never imo produced good results, because in a rising real estate market owners can comfortably fail to rent out and still be enriched

A suitable tax on real estate corners owners into using their property or leaving the job to someone else. It also acts to prevent real estate inflation which further disempowers the owner

Edited by Stars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regulation of renting conditions is like a tax on the act of renting out; this has never imo produced good results, because in a rising real estate market owners can comfortably fail to rent out and still be enriched

A suitable tax on real estate corners owners into using their property or leaving the job to someone else. It also acts to prevent real estate inflation which further disempowers the owner

Of course we don't need regulation of renting conditions. If the tenants don't like their present billet, they're free to move to another let, of which there will be plenty, dragging their pathetic chattels and ragged dependants with them.

As for the fact that countries where renting is common and acceptable have regulation, well, why on earth should we follow the lead of the Frogs and the Krauts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 259 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.