The White Paper on rental reform may still be some time away, with a minister at the centre of its preparation saying he and colleagues “are still in the middle of meetings and consultations”.
Eddie Hughes - a housing and homelessness minister at the newly-named Ministry of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities - told a fringe meeting at the Conservative conference that his team were still “in roundtables” and virtual events speaking with stakeholders.
“We’re reaching out to all elements of the sector to try to make sure there are no unintended consequences” he told the event, organised by campaigning charity Shelter and the Onward think tank.
Hughes continued: “We want to get this right. For example if we start from a position of ‘Landlords Bad/Tenants Good’ then the approach might be too stringent for landlords and they’ll be forced out of the market. We don’t want that.”
He would not be drawn on whether the White Paper would call for a mandatory landlord register - “I’m not ruling anything in or out” he said - but he wanted to ensure councils had a better understanding of how many landlords operated in their areas.
He also said there would definitely be a lifetime deposit system allowing tenants to move more readily between rented homes.
Hughes confirmed that the White Paper would look at Section 21 but he made it clear eviction powers for landlords remained essential in principle, with appropriate safeguards.
He described the White Paper and the consequent legislation as “a very significant piece of policy.”
There were questions from tenants and landlords, and even one from a landlord who was himself still a tenant; some supported the broad Shelter critique of the private rental sector but the majority were critical of the government’s long series of regulations and controls on landlords, and many pointed out that the shortcomings of the private rental sector were far less severe than those which appeared increasingly in the social sector.
The latest Queen’s Speech back in May included a broad pledge for rental reform, starting with a White Paper expected to be delivered ilater this year. This follows a more specific pledge, delivered by the government over two years ago, to scrap Section 21 eviction powers currently with landlords, while beefing up Section 8 powers.
Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
/BorisJohnson-BlackandWhite-400x310.jpg)
/parliament400x310.png)
.jpg)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
As a good landlord I do not fear registration. However, if the Government want a registration system I feel it falls to them to fund it.
Exactly it's the cost and a cost that cannot be justified, but at the end of the day it'll be the tenants paying this costs with the increases in their rent.
The problem of bad landlords consists nearly always of those renting to tenants receiving benefits for their housing (whether HB/UC). There is no need for all Landlords to register. Instead the government should stop the current lazy policy of paying rent benefit on the bases of size of property rather than quality. The current policy has encouraged bad landlords. Rather than registered all properties it should inspect only those receiving benefits & issue a five year licence to allow continued right to be let to benefit claimants for that period.
Agreed Richard, that’s why I always thought If Councils wanted Licensing Schemes they should pay for it, we have to pay for so the work to comply many thousands of £’s while they pay for absolutely nothing, its no wonder they are out of control, just damaging the the Sector with unnecessary rules and costs exploiting LL’s.
I'm really interested to find out how this '' life time deposit'' is going to work, I expect we will have to incorporate the deposit into the rent, which means good tenants end up subsidizing the bad ones .
I agree Andrew; a great sound bite but in reality how will it work? A deposit is held as security against cleaning damage etc, and the idea that this can be transferred prior to vacation, or immediately at vacation without inbuilt potential recourse to tenants is ridiculous. Similarly, how is a new landlord expected to allow possession without a full deposit?
Rather than the 'ahh poor Tenant narrative' continuously churned out without brain engagement, this subject requires a far more nuanced approach.
There are numerous deposit replacement products in the PRS and, in my opinion, this is yet another example of the false outrage culture we live in and vastly exaggerated by the self-entitled brigade.
Andrew and John - Think there was mention, by the minister, Eddie Hughes, of considering using an ‘insurance route’. Have read this morning that the Minister has confirmed there would be a call for lifetime deposits, but, so far not how it will work. See what delights lay ahead for us all!
Presumably good Tenants will enjoy the ease of transferring their lifetime deposit from one property to the next, there may be small deductions by the LL which would be topped up by the Tenant when they move. This virtually removes the difficulty of finding extra deposit money when they already have a deposit with the previous LL. There will be cases where a Tenant has lost their entire deposit through their own actions and I do not think the lifetime deposit scheme will be trying to smooth the way for this type of occurrence. In my own experience it is the scant minority that get into this situation so i presume the lifetime deposit scheme is not going to be set up with these people in mind.
Life time Deposit is a non starter dreamed up by outsiders with no in put.
A Deposit scheme to protect to the Deposit what for. It’s the Property that’s supposed to be protected so no protection for the property just more scams.
Its going to be an insurance based product - like the 'No-deposit deposit' now in operation. What the powers that be have missed is that for a good tenant who leaves a clean and tidy property with no deductions, the insurance route is more expensive. How can it not be when you put a business in between LL & T who wants to make a profit?!
First off it is positive that the government has not rushed into this willy nilly and are continuing with consultations. That they have recognised the potential for unintended consequences is also a positive. Like many others I am waiting to see how the lifetime deposit can be made to work for landlords on both sides of the transaction. I suspect an insurance type route may be the only way to go unless the scheme itself underwrites the transition period. The current insurance alternative to a deposit seems expensive to me especially for long term tenants who end up paying monthly sums for years with nothing to show at the end.
Insurance is expensive when you never need to claim. Great value when something happens Same deal for Motor, house, holiday and accident. Also makes us more accountable for our actions!
Tenants need to be as responsible as the rest of us. Not to be treated like children anymore. Break, damage or mistreat it’s gonna cost and someone has to pay
Every Insurance is the best in the World until you need to make a claim, then you’ll find out all you didn’t know / why didn’t you read the seven down loads !
I'm one of those sad people that read the small print and ask questions, oh doesn't that annoy insurance companies and brokers when they don't know the answers .
There's a reason why insurance companies have such big buildings
Lifetime deposit is a misnomer. Tenants claim that if you deduct money for repairs and go to arbitraion they should still keep the deposit. Same as if when they skip the rent they think it they no longer need to pay it. Basically we have a communist government.
George, yes now Blocks of Flats and whole estates for letting as well.
Please login to comment