Landlords overwhelmingly back Airbnb clampdown - council’s claim

I don’t give a toss either 😀. Live and let live. If that’s how they want to squeeze a buck out of their property good luck to them. All this witch finder general stuff , burn them at the stake I will leave to others.

Absolute clap trap another glaringly obvious warping of reality. Where's the incentive for any AirBnb landlord to return to residential lets? They've slaughtered residential letting and now they have airbnb in thier sights.
What sort of crass idiots are they?

Quite simply if HMO's are used as part HMO and part air bnb it causes a problem as what was wholly residential now being used for for hospitality as well. presumably there should be a change of use. It seems there is a movement to keep houses and any other form of residential accommodation strictly for tenants which considering the challenges for the firmer is fine by me.

We need to stop referring to holiday let’s getting more tax benefits. It’s not they get more benefits it’s that they don’t have the same penalties as BTL’s. Holiday let’s are considered and taxed as a legitimate business being allowed to write off all their expenses including interest as legitimate business costs which they are! BTL’ landlords are seen as the scum of the earth and penalised for providing their service and not seen as at all legitimate at all. We need to call it out for what it is!

The lack of council housing means they dictate how and who LL's should rent out the properties to.

Not to me they won't, I will sell out completely before that ever happens.
There is no Council landlords can trust.

What you have said makes sense, Jo.

However, I don't think it is just AirBnB guests who are going to be prohibited from mixed use buildings. It could perhaps be anyone who wants to rent for a short, fixed term, perhaps as long as nine months.

Ellie - what you have said basically comes down to economics. No politician is going to allow you to keep tenants prisoner, so the length of contract is the only mechanism that would have any impact.
I thought the RRB was saying 2 month minimum, which would make it cheaper to rent a room in an HMO than a hotel room if you were planning to be in an area for more than about a fortnight. What's the difference in that and Airbnb in practical terms?
Obviously it only works for furnished accommodation.
Hopefully the government have worked out giving tenants the right to bail out free of financial penalties after only 2 months would cause huge problems and push rents even higher.
Then we come down to the actual tenancy agreement. As far as I am concerned we can be more generous than the tenancy agreement states, so if we wish to allow tenants to leave early without financial penalty we can but it's our choice, not their right. The reason ASTs are usually 6 months is because you can't apply to the court for eviction until a tenant has been in situ for 6 months. I don't think anything has stopped us doing shorter tenancies if we want but we couldn't apply to the court for eviction until the 6 month point.

That is all true, Jo, but there is some uncertainty as to what is going to happen to the RRB, and perhaps also any new legislation governing short term lets.

There is quite a good chance that there will be a May general election and the Renters Reform Bill may not have finished its journey through Parliament by then. I think that the Bill will just fail in those circumstances.

However, a Labour Government is likely to adopt many of the measures within the Renters Reform Bill, possibly going further and making all grounds for possession discretionary?

If the past is anything to go by then many landlords will have empty properties by May or properties let to short-term tenants who are definitely leaving.

It seems that Government/local authorities will want to ensure that properties are available/used for long lets, but many landlords will resist/refuse to hand over their properties indefinitely.

Whats needed is a 'bonfire of regulations' and the return of the 'market competition' that drove the BTL miracle that now houses 9-11 million people.
What we will likely get, is more and more of the same suffocating red tape. If these idiots would just get off our backs, we could and would get this 'housing job done'.

That is exactly right, AJR, if all tenancies were contractual and simply governed by terms agreed between landlord and tenant, then landlords and tenants would be a great deal happier - supply would increase, rents would fall and there would be some stability in the private rental sector.

So James homes should be free then should they?

Andrew, pointless replying to the brain-dead. None of my tenants die of cold or starve in the streets, so he cannot be talking about me. Mind you, once his beloved Labour party take control (if they do) there will be a lot more homeless as good landlords sell up.

You could apply that logic to a number of things.
Energy companies, car dealers, etc etc.
A car may be an essential for someone who needs to get to work, maybe the dealers should be selling them at a loss.
Typical leftie, who thinks that every thing should be free.
Socialism is ok, until it runs out of other peoples money.

So James, please explain how landlords should operate, if they can't make a profit?

I went to the Soviet Union when I was young, and I don't think James would have liked the housing situation there. Crowding of many families into one flat was almost universal and the estimated living space per person was less than 7 feet by 7 feet.

The best conditions for tenants probably occur when rents are low and there is a high supply of accommodation. Tenants can then put money aside to buy their own flat, and can easily move if they don't like the flat they are in for some reason. The less regulation that landlords experience, the more likely they are to continue as landlords and offer a good deal to their tenants.

Absolutely agree with you there Shane.
The government and local authorities will grab any opportunity to relieve us of our hard earned cash.
Just as one area becomes non-lucrative, they will look at other sources of income that they want to regulate/tax.
There appears to be a shortage of ways to make money and as a landlord we are considered lower than pond life.
My main worry, is when Labour get in, things will no doubt get a lot worse.
They may try and convince us that they are going to raise taxes specifically from the well off, but how many times have they reneged on their promises?
They will no doubt be looking at anyway they can to fund their policies.
You need only look at how things are in Wales, to see what the outcomes are likely to be with a socialist Westminster Government in England.