UncleEbenezer wrote:None of these look like particularly reliable sources, and one has to wonder if a site like landlordzone might be lobbying. As might a journalist posting in a personal capacity. The government of course could just kick it into the long grass (as they've done so far) if they've been lobbied by someone who ... erm ... matters.
With the exception of the link to Twitter, itself part of the quote lifted directly out of the Landlordzone article in my OP and the second, and later, Landlord zone article reporting Truss' confirmation that Section 21 will be removed, all the other links in the thread to date are from UK government websites and I suspect these were not the target of your remark doubting the reliability of the sources.
So I must assume your remark is targeted primarily at Landlordzone which is a news reporting website, picking up on anything which is of interest to those operating in the private rented sector, including local authority housing officers dealing with the PRS.
Landlordzone is not a lobbying site and all the two articles I quoted did were first report a leaked intention not to repeal Section 21 on Monday and then, on Tuesday, the exact opposite intention. If I had quoted from, say, the National Landlords Association or an estate agent's trade body then your suspicion of lobbying would be well-founded, but that's not the case here.
UncleEbenezer wrote:Section 21 should certainly go, and as a quid pro quo for that landlords should be consulted on streamlining processes for at-fault eviction. The one case where no-fault eviction is genuinely justified is a homeowner renting out his/her own home while spending time away (e.g. working), but from memory there is already separate provision for that - albeit unused because with section 21 on the books landlords have no need for it.
Section 8 provides a number of grounds for re-possession of a property by a landlord, including that of re-possession when the property was formerly the landlord's main home and will again become his/her main home again after re-possession. In fact it it is Ground 1 in a list of 17. But all Section 8 grounds require a formal court hearing, whereas all a landlord seeking re-possession under Section 21 has to do is correctly fill out the paperwork and send it to the local court. Providing the paperwork is correct and a number of other conditions are satisfied (including several things required at tge start of the tenancy), the judge reviewing application must grant a re-possession order. No court hearing and, importantly where rent is not being paid, much quicker than Section 8 (though typically 4-6 months from service of notice to re-possession if the tenant refuses to go and can be much longer if it is necessary to involve bailiffs to effect re-possession).
UncleEbenezer wrote:And we could do with more professional/institutional landlords. Someone to do for rented flats what Premier Inns have done for hotels: a name or two that mean fair quality without costing the earth.
Unfortunately, wherever land and property is involved it is often accompanied by financial engineering that leaves the users of that property in dire circumstances. As you are, if memory serves correctly, a reader of Private Eye you will have seen the reports.
Southern Cross care homes was one of the most notorious but there have been plenty of others. Although not housing related, the emergent disaster at Worcester Warriors rugby club, also has the hallmarks of financial trickery and mismanagement focused on land assets.
The temptation to liberate the value locked up in land and property is great and the financial engineers are very good at doing it, though often very uncaring about the consequences on others. Definitely a case of be very careful about what you wish for in the context of rented housing.
One area where corporates have made inroads is in purpose built student accommodation. Whilst standards seem good, at least initially because it is mainly all brand new, rents are also very high. Those I am aware of seem to be like private halls of residence but without some of the advantages - such as a bar and on-site catering. Rents are often higher than for accommodation provided directly by educational institutions and much higher than those that can be found in the PRS.
However, for investors, PBSA is now just another asset class, so to offset risk returns have to be relatively good and that means sky-high rents. Again, it is a case of being careful about what is wished for.
modellingman