Renters Reform Bill passes Second Reading without a vote

It’s about time they concentrated on creating new homes for the growing population where they could house all of their undesirables, rather than focusing on sequestrating our properties. But that would just be too difficult wouldn’t it. Also dampen demand by limiting immigration would help; especially the illegal and unproductive people.

More supply and less demand would free up the PRS to run its own business without these MPs endless meddling.

Yet more reasons for Landlord's to put their properties up for sale, the Government would be more useful if we turfed them out and turned the House of Parliament into just that.....a very large HMO!

The debate last night was depressing 🥲 the amount of anger from the Labour lot was palpable, we are doomed when they get in, everything the Conservatives have reversed, Labour will just bring back.

Any concessions will be temporary - they want the PRS to fulfil the roll of social housing ie permanent, long term homes, so this is just going to keep on down the track until we get there - its just about the speed of the train.

All the small, 'amateur' LLs will be rail loaded out of the PRS & only bigger players will be left. That's fine - I am taking my money & heading for the exit.

I don't understand why the government and activists can't see that the PRS is not a one size fits all entity.

Roughly half of PRS properties are owned by landlords with less than 5 properties, the other half by portfolio landlords with more than 5. Some landlords are only landlords short term as they have a house they couldn't sell or have inherited or are letting while they work elsewhere. It's understandable they want absolute control of the length of tenancy in those properties. Others have spent decades building their portfolios and very firmly regard their houses as the tools of their trade.

We all have different preferences for type of tenant and style of letting. Some prefer fixed term tenancies, others prefer SPTs. Some prefer gold plated tenants who have every choice available to them, others prefer tenants who are more likely to stay longer. As long as both landlord and tenant are on the same page at the start of the tenancy chances are it will run smoothly.
It needs to be recognised that fixed term tenancies are crucial for students, winter lets and seasonal workers.
SPT rolling tenancies after an initial 6 month period are fine as long as a functional eviction system is in place. In some parts of the country it's the way we have operated for years.
Some tenants want a specific fixed term, others want to find somewhere they can stay long enough to at least get their kids through school.

It doesn't matter what the government says on blanket bans on children or claimants. We need to know about household composition to ensure we don't allow overcrowding, so the existence of children needs to be taken into account. Some properties simply aren't suitable for young children from a safety point of view.
The government have ensured claimants are going to fail affordability referencing by freezing the LHA at a ludicrously low rate. They are very often extremely good tenants but for any landlord who wants to buy rent guarantee insurance are a complete non starter.

As a portfolio landlord I dabble in most types of letting (student fixed term, everyone else SPT, fully self funding, UC top up, single people, families with children and occasionally pets). The two areas I steer clear of are short term (less than 6 months) and gold plated families (most of my properties wouldn't appeal to them).

Can we please drop the 'no fault eviction' as it sends completely the wrong message. It is 'no reason given' eviction. No landlord evicts a good tenant unless they want to sell. This bill will not help bad tenants as they will in future be evicted for a given reason which is really going to help them get a new tenancy with a 'Bad Boy' label on their backs.

Let's not forget >80% tenants are happy with their LL! Govt should be focussing on building more houses to increase availability & stabilise rents instead of tweaking the existing rules which will not house anyone!

What on Earth is Michael Gove talking about was he drunk or something. He is the very one that caused the imbalance prompting thousands of landlords to exit driving up Rents making housing un affordable. Loads more in the process of selling up or have switched to airBnB, it bad enough to be hit with unforeseen interest rate rises deliberately hiked allegedly to bring down inflation but is the cause of inflation. Just Add Section 24 that was more than enough imbalance without him and his Renters Reform Bill.
He should know about imbalance he is the Architect of it.

Reading the comments it’s plain for anyone to see he is trying to fix something that wasn’t broken until he interfered,
Well done Michael Gove you made a right sows ear out of that.

So we have a Second Reading of the Renters Reform Bill based on what to Home Secretary says he’s Committed to Removing Section 21 to prevent bad landlords from intimidating Tenants, silencing those complaining poor standards of housing that need for repairs.
He has his mind made up to get rid of Section 21 so why is he wasting Parliamentary time, fist reading Second reading nonsense based on a blatant
pack of lies by Housing Secretary he should resign clearly he doesn’t know his job.
Where is the truth in what he says, how can S.21 intimidate or silence Tenants or get rid of them during a Contract period impossible its the landlords that are intimidated and not a leg to stand on. Tenants sometimes misbehave, damage property, create arrears, sub-let which is rampant since the introduction of HMO’s, licensing restricts the number of occupants the landlord can have so the Tenants fill the spare capacity.
The landlord can’t get rid of a Tenant without a Court Case and require Legal
Representation or it will keep being thrown out that will be a couple of thousands + £400. VAT Tax. So who is intimidating who surely it Mr Gove that is intimidating landlords.
What he is doing is abolishing AST which were minimum of 6 months and a maximum of 7 years or any Contract period in between that both Parties signed up to or in more recent years Periodic were added where it could continue on the same basis by mutual consent depending on how to Rent was paid monthly or weekly. There’s no one taking advantage of anyone and everyone knew where they stood. This is now being turned on its head and the landlords property being confiscated by Rogue Housing Secretary, why on Earth do you think so many landlords are getting out, deliberately causing a housing Crisis laying the ground work for Corporate take over the Business that we created from nothing.
Removal of Section 21 Totally unacceptable Scrap the Stupid Bill now haven’t you caused enough Homelessness. I’d like to see Mr Gove sleeping rough see how he likes it.