Renters rights bill

Landlord Discussion
88

The process side will become worse under RRB. I think we can assume that the number of uncontested notices will remain roughly the same, ie the majority, although the Governments promise to give greater legal aid to tenants to challenge evictions may mean that more will take a punt.

For the contested evictions, at present the courts only usually have to deal with section 8 cases, which must have a court hearing. Most s21 cases are usually “accelerated”, which is a desk based exercise with no hearing. Once s21 is scrapped, all contested evictions will require a court hearing, which I suspect will overwhelm the courts and double the time from notice to bailiffs to up to 2 years. Added to this, the threshold for rent arrears is increasing from 2 months to 3 and the notice period is also increasing. There is a very real possibility of landlords facing well over 2 years of no rent if tenants stop paying. If you link this to my point in your other thread about tenants wholly dependent on UC/housing benefit or on v low incomes having no ability to repay the debt, then some landlords are likely to be very severely impacted by the RRB.

1 Like
89

You really do not know how some people live.

In another of my roles, I visit many people in their homes, and many are kept simply disgusting.

Accepting any tenant is a gamble, but those earning hopefully have more money if you end up having to sue them for damages.

2 Likes
90

Property has… but renting that property never has… except by the hopelessly naive.

91

ah… a classic case of overgeneralising a trend from a statistically limited data set which is skewed to typically be ‘disgusting’.

I wonder what your role might be. Imagine if you were a cleaner, would that make your observation valid?

92

Im sorry I’m not sure why there is always this assumptions why UC WILL NOT PAY RENT? Just because someone receives UC, housing benefit why does that mean they wont pay? Im not getting the connection other than prejudice?

93

The regulation is long overdue and if you don’t want to do things fairly and legally well don’t be a landlord, it’s as simple as that.

We are over it! Move on and let decent landlord’s take over if you can t take the heat.

94

how about simply basic maths @Louise66? In any given pool of tenants there will be some who fall on hard times and fall behind on rent. If they have nothing to cushion the blow, they will be a far greater risk for a LL than others.

If you were to accuse people on this forum of not being fair and legal, I don’t think David122 would be on the shortlist from the many hundreds of posts of his I’ve read.

1 Like
95

I’m not sure if you are a tenant or landlord
The reality is benefits can’t cope with rent rises
My tenants left because they could not cope with the rent rise in 2022 after the war in Ukraine and Truss tanking the economy ( it was only £50 pcm)
The RRB will help a tenants a lot but rent rises will be introduced before then
With the new MEES proposals I guarantee you no landlord will foot £15 k per property before they are exempt from further work
I’m ready but now face the harsh realisation I may need to spend more because they are changing calculations The government are doing stuff to tick boxes
There is no pragmatism and it’s a nuclear bomb of detritus waiting to explode ?
You cannot treat all properties the same so how are they applying a one fits all rule ?
Some of what they suggest doesn’t work .
16 years ago the LA externally insulated Victorian terraces made up of engineering brick .
They ripped it off six months later because it causes mould .
Now they are telling us to do it again.
They need to do the groundwork ( pardon the pun) and look at the housing stock and not just come up with hare brained ideas that were plucked like rabbits out of a hat .
No industry is expected to carry infrastructure cost out of their own pocket apart from the private rental sector
It’s ludicrous .
So ,market prices will increase and push people even farther away from their goal

Not to worry though if you buy Rachel reeves some flowers or champagne you may earn some favours ……

96

Stats tell us that those on UC and on low income are far more likely to default on rent. (Look up rent arrears for those on UC).

Does this mean all of them will - clearly not. Insurance firms and loan companies charge higher rates for those where data shows that group to be a higher risk. Maybe it would be good idea if landlords could, what do you think?

Nothing to do with decency, basic risk assessment that is required to sustain a business.

3 Likes
97

she will not be a landlord /lady. Millions£ are owed to housing associations . Guess who the majority of their tenants are u/c or wage earners?

1 Like
98

If you read my posts properly instead of jumping to conclusions, (your own prejudices perhaps), you would see that I was suggesting that ANY tenant can get into financial difficulties and rent arrears due to a change of circumstances, but those on minimal incomes with no savings are rarely able to pay them back.

3 Likes
99

I agree in terms of the fairness, David22 has provided some really fair points as far as I have seen has put forward his opinion in a reasonable manner. It is sometimes different to your Louise66, but it’s a forum and he’s entitled to that.

On the other matter or maths being in the equation, I’d like to signpost to my earlier post beginning this where I backed up the following point with some resources and info. Sorry it’s long, but it’s complex and I’m trying to be clear.

A UC claimant could be in a range of situations however when the full time income person is favoured there are a few points to consider too. The millennial and genz group have been bombarded with the concept of using credit to manage money and protect purchases or facilitate online returns. As a group broadly speaking they are comfortable with borrowing and getting what they want now. This is statistically true of those who feel secure in their employment.

Part of this is the sense of impossibility for certain subgroups owing property so long term savings seems less appealing.

This comfort with credit and instant gratification can really sting if a job goes wrong, a contract finishes or circumstances change, COVID was dramatic but things change all the time. In this group we are typically talking about young adults, but it might be older groups who are in a relationship (or not) and often don’t have children. People who feel secure spend to their means and are more.likely to access credit products. Therefore if things go wrong they go very wrong.

Your UC claiment has either got credit history or they haven’t ,but they are less likely to take it out new credit and the money is enough to live a reasonable basic life on.

Neither is better, or worse there is so much more difference within the groups than between them.

If you want to guage any sort of risk (I don’t think you can’) but you might want to consider how long someone has claimed (are they used to the income figure) have they got savings or family support. Realistically though if their situation changes it’s like to financially improve, not the opposite and so the sense they are unsafe is more perception really.

The main ways (if any) you can reduce your risks are;

Have a long term tenant and maintain an open dialogue that is friendly and personable. In some cases this may mean a long term tenant has rent a little below current market, but that was always historically in lieu of this additional risk analysis.

Ask to know about minor repairs and or concerns, use these as opportunities to pop over have a cup of tea and be a good human let them know and look in on your asset. This means your tenant is likely to talk to you early if circumstances change (before rent is late) they will care about yourcircumstances and you.

I appreciate this isn’t possible for all landlords but that dialogue dispels so many myths, means you have a good quality ongoing risk assessment and potentially keep your tenant longer also reducing costs. I feel very strongly based on what I’ve read and my own experience that this is a much better way to feel confident of the risk at any given time.

It ensures your tenant respects you as a human and your asset. (Doesn’t fall into the stereotypical prejudices). tenants aren’t stupid any more than landlords but there are several pillars of society trying to put one group against the other. Both are interrelated and mutually benefit each other. There should be so much more cohesion.

B. Ensures there are less misjudgments both ways and shows you respect them as a tenant and their home.

C. It Is an early warning system for both property problems and tenant issues. Knowing someone reasonably well makes them more predictable. It’s still a business relationship but if there is respect and it’s reframed as a partnership everyone is working to the same outcome.

Remember also that a change in landlord financial circumstances is also a worry to tenants. You might sell, be repossessed or any number of other issues that can adversely affect the tenant, their job education etc might be tied up with the area. They want to know that the landlord is ok, that their home is stable. Meeting allows them to risk assess too.

The right relationship is more important than the right tenant, but it needs cultivating.

100

Have you found a direct comparison stat ? Please could you send or upload a link. Thank you
I’m also still trying to find stats on S8 for uc/ non UC at tenancy commencement. If anyone else has managed?

101

You may feel it’s too personal and that’s fine, but I’d love to know what your other role is if possible? You could pm me if you like.

I also completely understand if you don’t want to share.

102

too long for me… give me it in 15 words or fewer…

104

Have you read this government survey?

“Landlords who let to tenants on housing benefits were more likely to report having two or more tenants in arrears (48%) than those who did not (22%), Annex Table 3.8, Figure 3.5.”

1 Like
105

very subtle that… does it mean they were more likely to report that they had tenants in arrears or more likely to actually have tenants in arrears?

1 Like
107

I’m quite shocked to see this published in a Government survey. Does it give some defence against a discrimination claim to landlords who make a business decision not to let to tenants on benefits on the basis of this data? Maybe we should ask the lawyers about this one.

1 Like
108

Thanks that’s really useful. I’ll take a look when I have chance.

109

I’m wondering then, how would landlords feel about handing their property over to the local authority for a fixed term, say 10 years?

In return LL literally do nothing,the LA looked after the EPC, all certs, tenant find everything.

They can do this cheaply because they either hire them in house and pay themselves or use economies of scale.

As a landlord the return is a monthly sum, lower than market rent to reflect that they are hands off, but an income. At the end of 10 years or agreed term should they wish to reclaim the property it’s handed back in ready to sell condition: bland walls and all certs or they can put it in again for another longish term.

The benefit to the LA is better control of housing stock, ability to rent to everyone and longer term security for tenants.

LL still gets the return on investment, but no hassle whatsoever. The RRB becomes no concern.