x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button

TODAY'S OTHER NEWS

Most tenants satisfied with private rented housing, says new report

The majority of private renters were satisfied or very satisfied with their current accommodation, according to the English Housing Survey report on the private rented sector 2017/18, published yesterday. 

Some 84% of tenants expressed satisfaction with their private rented housing, the report found.

Compared with social renters and owner occupiers, private renters unsurprisingly spend the highest proportion of their income on housing.

On average, private renters spent 33% of their household income (including Housing Benefit) on rent. This is compared to 28% for social renters, and 17% for mortgagors.

The proportion of household income spent on rent was higher for private renters in London (42%) than for the rest of England (30%).

Most private renters - 71% - said they found it easy or very easy to pay their rent.

About one in five households in England live in the private rented sector,

making it the second largest tenure.

Some 4.5m households live in the private rented sector in England, 19% of all households. By comparison, 17% (4m) live in the social rented sector and 64% (14.8m) are owner occupiers.

David Smith, the Residential Landlords Association’s policy director, commented: “Today’s English Housing Survey dispels the myth that private renting means insecure tenancies and ever increasing costs. It shows that renters are spending less of their income on housing, at 33%, down from 34% the previous year and 36% in 2014/15, and are staying in their homes for over four years on average.

“As Ministers look at ending so called ‘no fault’ evictions the survey finds that the large majority of those who moved out of their home did so because they wanted to, either for work, a larger home or to move to a different area [72%] or because their tenancy had come to an end (8%). A further 10% moved on mutual agreement with their landlord.

“The majority of private renters also reported being satisfied with their current accommodation, higher than in the social rented sector.”

The English Housing Survey 2017/18 report on the private rented sector is available by clicking here

  • icon

    Happy tenants = a happy landlord, I get on well with all my tenants, I have of course had a few bad ones in the past but over the yrs I have learnt to be very selective when it comes to a new tenancy and it has certainly paid off.

    Paul Barrett

    Yes but Govt doesn't want to allow you to be selective.
    They want and expect you to house any old dross at your potential loss.
    They will regulate to that effect especially if Labour is the new Govt.
    You will be forced to accept HB tenants in contravention of mortgage conditions etc, etc!
    Mortgaged LL would have to give up as such requirements would bankrupt them.

     
  • icon

    No way, if dont like they dont rent simple. My rules they sign to accept or dont sign.
    No clueless council bod will tell me who to rent to, ever.

  • icon

    Renting cost includes all maintenance, insurance etc, mortgage cost does not include any extras. The two cannot be compared.

  • icon

    None of the eminent sense here will change the Government's decision, as they see Votes in the policy ( sadly )

    Paul Barrett

    Yep totally correct.
    LL who consider they can avoid the Anti-private LL Govt Regulatory juggernaut are deluding themselves.
    Before Govt will accept they have got it wrong they have to see the evidence of it gone wrong.
    So LL need to wake-up and realise this.
    Not easy to do at all but it must be obvious to even the stupidest LL that the Irish experience will have to occur before the UK Govt will accept they have got it wrong.
    This is a difficult proposition for many LL to contemplate but accept it they must.
    In doing say they maybe able to devise a survival strategy.
    My one is having to leave the PRS.
    Prefer not to but I know how to recognise when Govt has the power over my business which I'm not prepared to allow.
    So I've gotta go.
    Tough on my 14 tenants who have done no wrong.
    But they will be homeless courtesy of Govt and S24 etc.

     
    icon

    Always ways round it Paul

     
  • icon

    mays mob are libdims--not a Conservative amongst them

  • icon

    Incorporation is well worth it if u tick the relevant boxes mine has been running for over two years best thing I have ever done

    Paul Barrett

    Unfortunately incorporation was never a viable option for me.
    Plus even if I could I wouldn't as I simply do not trust Govt not to bring a S24 variant for incorporated LL.
    I much prefer my aspirant strategy of being a lodger LL.
    I will rarely be at my home as I will be a guest elsewhere.
    So I will maximise lodger income and funnily enough I will never exceed more than £7500 in lodger income nor will there be anymore than 4 occupiers at my home except if I have a guest which doesn't count as an occupier.
    I have my ways of skinning a cat and it won't be letting on an AST
    Depending on income possibilities I might try illegal Air BnB.
    Can't see any Residential mortgage lender of mine being able to detect my illegal AirBnB lettings.
    But I prefer the lodger route.

     
  • icon

    English Housing Survey, 4.5m Households in Private rented sector, 19%. 4m in Social Housing 17%. & 14.8m Households 64% owner occupiers. I think there are a few more statistics 4.8m family's on Housing benefit ( 2.7m workless) Huge numbers of single mothers on housing benefit how did they all get pregnant obviously the benefit system is designed to destroy the family unit, if the benefit system wasn't there, they would be supported by the Father of their kids but why rear your family when the State will do it for you ? & you can pass your day walk around looking smart shaking hands with your friends up the High St, who are also on the rock & roll, no wonder Society is gone the way it is, children brought up in broken family environment. We The Tax Payer are paying £46 billion to fund all this nonsense & then you hate us and screw us for every penny, so when you have killed us off where is the next golden goose coming from.

    icon

    Basically if I tell it as it is, slags breed slags, and we the hard working tax payer pay for them, blood boiling !

     
  • Paul Barrett

    Indeed unfortunately the workers pay for the feckless.
    This decision was made in about 1979 when Council Housing allocation was to be based on ALLEGED need rather than where you were on the Council Housing List.
    From that point the feckless were in charge and have been ever since.
    It basically is worthwhile being feckless.
    Those on welfare are the undeserving poor who actually aren't as they are in the upper 25% of UK income earners.
    Well now the feckless are facing issues.
    LL don't want anything more to do with them anymore.
    This has come as a bit of a shock for the feckless.
    The feckless are no longer profitable enough and for a whole variety of well known reasons the feckless aren't wanted by LL.
    So now we have the left- wing media castigating LL for discriminating against feckless HB tenants in refusing to let to them when previously LL were castigated for being allegedly subsidised by HB!!!!
    The idiot left-wing media have never been able to work out which option they choose.
    Catch-22 of course for the idiotic left-wing media but they are too stupid to even realise it.
    The feckless are for a wide variety of reasons no longer a viable business proposition.
    Govt policy is directed to supporting the feckless but rather than making them a more viable business proposition for LL Govt continues to make it harder for LL.
    With regulations being imposed as they are there is the very distinct situation of even more LL selling up which doesn't assist tenants at all.
    The PRS is not the answer to housing the feckless.
    That should NOT be the province of the PRS which exists to make PROFIT an imperative NOT required of the SRS which should be how the feckless are housed.
    As it stands currently the way welfare is disbursed there is a massive incentive to remain feckless.
    Most workers earn effectively less net income than the feckless on welfare.
    Until the needs based allocation of council housing is changed to where you are on the list fecklessness provides a rather nice lifestyle.

  • icon

    This is a damaging report for organisations the like of Shelter etc. I’m sure by next month they will have paid someone an exorbitant fee (from charity monies) to write up an opposing report saying how poor the PRS properties are

icon

Please login to comment

Zero Deposit Zero Deposit Zero Deposit
sign up