x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Graham Awards

TODAY'S OTHER NEWS

Yet another MPs' committee probes private rental sector

Yet another committee of MPs has launched a ‘call for evidence’ as it starts an investigation into the private rental sector.

The Levelling Up, Housing and Communities select committee has launched the call ahead of its scrutiny of the government’s recent White Paper, A Fairer Private Rental Sector.

Submissions to the select committee must be in writing, and no more than 3,000 words, filed by August 19.

Advertisement

A statement from the committee says that in particular, it will seeks answers to the following questions:

- Will the Government’s White Paper proposals result in a fairer private rented sector (PRS)?

- What do the proposals in the White Paper and other recent reforms indicate about the role the Government envisages the PRS playing in providing housing nationally?

- Have the Government’s announcements already led to any changes in behaviour in the PRS?

- Do the proposals for reforming tenancies, including the abolition of Section 21, strike the right balance between protecting tenants from unfair eviction and allowing landlords to take possession of their properties in reasonable circumstances?

- How easily will tenants be able to challenge unfair rent increases under the proposals?

- Does the PRS need its own ombudsman? If so, what powers should it have?

- Will the proposals result in more disputes ending up in the courts? If so, will the proposals for speeding up the courts service suffice?

- What impact, if any, will the reforms have on the supply of students homes in the general PRS?

- What impact, if any, will the reforms have on the supply of homes in the PRS?

- What should be included in the new decent homes standard and how easily could it be enforced?

- How enforceable are the proposals to make it illegal for landlords to have blanket bans on letting to people on benefits or with children? What other groups, if any, should be protected from blanket bans?

- Overall, what additional pressures will the proposals place on local councils, and how many of these will require new burdens funding?

Submissions should go to luhccom@parliament.uk.

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.

  • icon

    I can write the proposal in about 100 words - as long as there is no restriction on the word 'No'!

  • icon

    Not sure I could be concise enough to fit into 3000 words.

  • icon

    They want us to fit all the government's and tenant's groups attacks spanning back to Osborne's 2015 parting shot in 2015 that have severely adversely affected the PRS as well as the new proposals effect in less than 3,000 words?? And to be able to make understandable justifications that a schoolboy could understand- tho the aforementiond groups couldn't understand both with foresight and hindsight?

    Impossible- it's a waste of my time seeing as they have already made their minds up anyway and at best are paying lip service to us.

    Watering down changes to commonsense levels and being seen to be supportive of landlords is a vote loser.

    Better things to do with my time than talk to people who have no intention of listening

    icon

    Your last sentence sums the situation up perfectly, who ever is in government in 3 yrs time will find the answers to all those questions plus some more all by themselves

     
    icon

    The questions are specifically about the white paper proposals, so any comments about all the other previous attacks on landlords would most likely be ignored. Problem is, if the only responses they get are from anti-landlord groups, then they still may not grasp the simple truth that there will be far fewer rental properties, and therefore life will be much more difficult for all tenants.

     
  • icon

    As long as there are more potential tenants than available rental properties we won't need any "blanket" ban on pet owners, benefits claimants etc. We can simply exercise our right to select the most suitable tenants with appropriate solvent guarantors.

    To ensure less desirable groups get homes, more rental properties need to be made available. Current moves will achieve the polar opposite!

  • icon

    If anyone is going to do this, you need to consider if you want your response to be confidential or not.

    This is what it says about that:

    The Committee will decide whether to accept each submission. If your submission is accepted by the Committee, it will usually be published online. It will then be available permanently for anyone to view. It can’t be changed or removed. If you have included your name or any personal information in your submission, that will normally be published too. Please consider how much personal information you want or need to share. If you include personal information about other people in your submission, the Committee may decide not to publish it. Your contact details will never be published.

    Decisions about publishing evidence anonymously, or about accepting but not publishing evidence, are made by the Committee. If you would like to ask the Committee to accept your submission anonymously (meaning it will be published but without your name), or confidentially (meaning it won't be published at all), please indicate this when submitting evidence, and tell us why. This lets the Committee know what you would like but the final decision will be taken by the Committee.

    The Committee has discretion over which submissions it accepts as evidence, and which of those it then publishes on its website. We may anonymise or redact some of your submission if it is published. The Committee may decide to accept evidence on a confidential basis. Confidential submissions remain available to the Committee but are not published or referred to in public. All written evidence will be considered by the Committee, whether or not it is published.

  • icon

    My response to the White Paper is:

    No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

    So much so I have decided to put one house up for sale. It has an undesirable tenant in it who is nearly 3 weeks behind in rent with endless repairs reported. She can go live in council temporary accommodation instead.

  • James B

    We never let without a homeowner working guarantor… that’s the best security a landlord can get

  • icon

    Regardless of the obvious futility of contributing, I still say we should all respond to the call. Nobody else is going to tell them the truth so we’ll have to. I’m going to respond and would urge us all to do so. They at least can’t then say they weren’t warned!

    icon

    I agree with you, James. At least, give it a shot.

     
  • George Dawes

    I suggest MP's sort out their own seedy house before pontificating

icon

Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up