Originally published at: What Does the Renters’ Rights Bill Mean for Landlords?
The new Renters’ Rights Bill is Labour’s version of the Conservatives’ Renters (Reform) Bill, which was scrapped following Rishi Sunak’s surprise call for an election. This new bill aims to “fundamentally reform the private rental sector” and improve the quality of housing in it. It also seeks to “balance the playing field” between landlords and…
Does that include Awabs Law and the Decent Homes Standard?
Hi David,
These are proposed policies that have not yet come into effect – and may never do so.
Should these policies come into effect for the private rented sector, our tenancy agreements will be promptly updated to adhere to the new rules and regulations.
My point was really that those two things, (if they become law) are more a factor of ongoing management than tenancy creation. Telling Rent Now users that they neednt worry about any regulatory changes in the bill could be misleading.
2 Likes
One important thing this Bill means for landlords is that they must learn to be sensible. For instance: On another blog, I came upon a case where the landlord, having upped his tenant’s rent by £700 a month, displayed his own mortgage-payment cost as justification. Eh? What makes this fool landlord imagine that his tenant must pay his mortgage costs, or be evicted?
1 Like
I agree in principle that rents are set by the market, not by the individual circumstances of landlords. However, its likely that this landlord was faced with a choice of evict and sell up asap or increase the rent to cover costs that he could not cover any other way. £700 is a massive monthly increase, so I can only assume that the tenant was previously benefitting from an unsustainably low rent.
As to whether the rent should “pay his mortgage”, the answer is that any business that operates from premises theyve bought must set their pricing to cover all their business costs including any borrowing. Whilst larger businesses, like Tesco can absorb sudden large increases by increasing their prices incrementally over time, smaller businesses cannot and if no-one is willing to buy at the price they set, they fold.
I’m sorry, but it does not seem to me that yours is an enlightening analogy: ‘a business’ is a kinetic entity, often with substantive variables. Landlording is almost static, needing to be concerned only with the cost of mortgages. His mortgage is the landlord’s burden. It is not an ethical expectation that it can be made the tenant’s burden. A law of the land is just when it sactions such ugly, exploitative landlord expetations. Such landlords are best kicked off the rental housing market.
[/quote]
, so I can only assume that the tenant was previously benefitting from an unsustainably low rent.
[/quote]
I can assume quite other things! 
“only the cost of the mortgage”??? No repairs then? no upgrading? No registration payments tp L/A? Agents costs? Elec and gas Certs? Epc ? Only Static . Cuckoo. Cuckoo. is the land you are in .
1 Like
I do wonder why you have listed the things you list. Nothing on that list is a variable, let alone an unpredictable one. Perhaps you would like to see those things become the burden of the tenant too? Or is it that you threw in some red herrings in the hope that they will make it seem as if you have something sensible to say?
I am a joiner I can send you a chip to balance up the chip you have on your other . shoulder. Often people with nothing are against those with something. But I am sure this does not apply to you… First time posting ignorance on this subject that has been discussed in other blogs… But I do love all your big words in your 2nd post
Its absolutely a business, with similar “substantive variables” to any other business. Its also far from passive with 160+ laws and regulations governing it and has a very wide range of costs other than mortgages, including maintenance, compliance licensing, advertising, insurance, legal costs etc. All the costs associated with a business in fact.
2 Likes