.jpg)
Generation Rent has issued an angry statement about amendments to the Renters Reform Bill - just as one MP says agreement is near and the Bill could resume progress through Parliament.
The activist group’s complaint is that amendments made through the normal committee stage of the Bill going through the Commons include some seen as weakening the power of tenants - these are in addition to other amendments put forward which strengthened tenants’ position.
The BBC says amendments have been circulated to MPs who want changes to gauge their views ahead of the Bill going tonics next stage - the Third Reading in the Commons. One of those MPs told the BBC: "Agreement seems to have been reached on nearly all points."
However, Generation Rent is angry over what it sees as “watering down” of some measures.
This includes enshrining in the Bill that the abolition of Section 21 will take place, but only after improvements have been made to court processes - something which Housing Secretary Michael Gove had announced some months ago.
There are also suggestions that the amendments include reducing the burden of evidence when landlords seek to evict anti-social tenants; ending selective licencing schemes from councils when a national register proposed in the Bill serves the same purpose; requiring tenants to commit to at least four months in a property before giving notice; and protecting student HMO landlords from periodic tenancies deemed inappropriate for tenants at college.
Some of these points emerged from MPs’ comments on the all-party housing select committee last year.
But Ben Twomey, chief executive of Generation Rent, says: "It is unacceptable for tenants to be treated as an afterthought around reforms which we were told would help us. We will not stand by while the new law to protect and empower renters is transformed into a Landlord’s Bill of Rights. If the government really is going to water down the Bill even further, England's 12 million private renters deserve to know why.
"In particular, weakening licensing schemes could compromise the safety of renters. These schemes give councils some of the strongest powers to tackle criminal landlords and sub-standard, dangerous homes. The plan to trap tenants in properties for six months, making it much more difficult for them to leave sub-standard or mis-sold homes, is another measure that undermines tenant welfare. The call to delay court run a judicial review into court reform means that the key promise first made five years ago by the government to renters - respite from the misery of Section 21 no-fault evictions - will be kicked firmly into the long grass.
“The ability of landlords to evict us without needing a reason means there is no trust between landlords and tenants from the very start. Abolishing Section 21 is an essential step to improve landlord-tenant relations and allow all parties to deal with each other in good faith.
"Another round of government giveaways to the landlord lobby will water down this landmark piece of legislation and is another step away from their promise to ‘rebalance’ the power dynamic between tenants and landlords. We have waited a very long time for this Bill, but it must genuinely offer to improve renters' lives if it is to be worth the paper it's written on."
A statement from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities says: "Our landmark Renters Reform Bill will deliver a fairer private rented sector for both tenants and landlords. It will abolish section 21 evictions - giving people more security in their homes and empowering them to challenge poor practices. We continue to meet regularly with a range of groups, representing all those in the private rented sector."
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.jpg)
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Good tenants don't get evicted for no good reason. A landlord wanting to sell is a good reason but the RRB is doing nothing to help genuinely good tenants in that situation. Some form of financial assistance would be far more use than the complete nothing the RRB proposals are offering. It would be an absolute bargain for landlords if there was a clearly defined system for when they want to sell. Right now tenants get all sorts of bizarre ideas in their heads and can behave very unpredictably, which can result in a significant loss of income for the landlord. If long-term tenants were entitled to two months rent to be refunded along with their deposit if they moved out within the defined period on the eviction notice it would avoid a lot of stress for all parties and keep most of those evictions out of court. Landlords saying they shouldn't have to compensate tenants just because they want to sell the house should think logically about it. You only sell the house once. You may have had dozens of tenants live in it during your period of ownership. It's only the final ones that may get any compensation.
It's a bit questionable how many tenants actually get evicted at all. I've recently seen 2 people I know get in a complete panic because they THOUGHT they were going to be evicted. Neither have actually been served with any kind of eviction notice but both are going around saying they were being evicted. One of them had had a vague conversation with the letting agent who said the landlord might have to sell because their mortgage was going up. Was that just an attempt to get them used to the idea of a rent increase? Anyway even though she had lived in the house for 5 years and had a pretty good relationship with the landlord she got it into her head she was being evicted and has rushed out and found another house miles from where her children go to school and £600 a month more than she was previously paying. That's left both her and her previous landlord in a fairly unfortunate situation. Whichever way you look at it the landlord has an unexpected void at a really inconvenient time depending on exactly when the mortgage fix is ending and the tenant now has to drive her children 6 miles each way to get to school.
The other one has decided he is going to be evicted imminently because a sold board has been put on the house. He hasn't had any communication from his landlord on the subject. He has sold all his possessions and given away his cat and is now really depressed and anxious. He can't get any help because he hasn't got an eviction notice. It's uncertain if he's a lodger or a tenant so may or may not be entitled to notice. He started out as a lodger with a lodger agreement stating he would be given 180 days notice if the landlord wanted him to leave. The landlord moved out of the house over 2 years ago and he's lived alone ever since. He's just desperate to feel settled somewhere and will take pretty much any property anyone is willing to let to him. Again it leaves the current landlord potentially facing several months without rent while they wait and see if the house sale actually completes.
It's also a terrible utilisation of housing stock and must be adding to the overall shortage of rental properties.
The landlord must control THEIR PROPERTY. Nothing less. All this talk of being fair and processes will otherwise only ever go one way - the tenants’ way.
“The plan to trap tenants in properties for six months”. I wouldn’t worry about that! With all this legislation it will be the property or the street going forward!
I for one am not being trapped with a tenant for life. One who I can never get rid of, and who has endless ways to make my life a misery with not paying rent, endless damages and repairs costs out of spite and carelessness and fraudulent no win no fee compensation letters to defend. I had to do that already with mould and asthma claims. They went on the S21 defence and for the deposit. These people will be able to put anything forward going forward and it will be considered and we will lose every time.
No fault is the only way.
I think many landlords feel like you, Nick, and the main problem at the moment is that there are landlords with empty properties which they no longer have the confidence to let.
The Government and the Labour Party need to consider how they can restore that confidence and delaying the abolition of Section 21 is not enough.
I think as you know I have an empty property since May because I have no confidence to relet it. I am sprucing it up at the weekends. No hurry to sell as the market was dire!
“I for one am not being trapped with a tenant for life. One who I can never get rid of, and who has endless ways to make my life a misery”
Yes yes yes Nick. This is precisely the issue that concerns me. Only option is to say you are moving in or selling after paying so much money to buy the property. There needs to be a clause saying eviction because they are affecting our mental health. I’m serious
Generation Rant will only be happy when we are a Communist country where everyone will be able to receive a universal salary. No work will get done and the infrastructure of the country worse than it is now. The next group of people they will rant about will be older people living in houses with spare bedrooms.
If Labour have their way Jahan selling the property won’t be an option unless you sell with lifetime tenants in situ. The property’s value will be reduced by at least 50 per cent.
Wouldn’t surprise me at all Margaret. There will be a few incoming MP’s who will champion this sort of communism
Rubbish Rubbish at more Rubbish there was nothing wrong with the System until the meddling started With Licensing Schemes in 2006 followed by Shelter non housing Charity in 2007 meddling with Deposits on lies and none of their Business then the 2015 De-Regulation Act claiming property damage.
Now the final straw removing S.21 before which there was virtually no Private lettings and only a handful of letting Agents I only knew of 5, Andrew’s were main ones and Ahawes had Assured ones.
I Campaigned long and hard with others from 1978 until it was introduced with the 1988 Act, only for Sir George Young it wouldn’t have happened a good man that believed in fairness or none of you that are so smart would even be a landlord. Not least Mr Ben Beadle CEO of NRLA Association
with his Student let’s. He says we have long accepted to getting rid of no fault evictions. Hi Ben who are we you don’t speak do me or other landlords that’s been well documented on here so it must be just yourself well above your stations alway with easy ride and was never a grass roots core landlord so what would you know. So much hardship, homelessness, costs and damage to landlords mental health to achieve housing disaster. Mr Ben Towney of the anti- Tenants group where did he come from he has only been around 5 minutes any relation to Lynch.
It was suggested that landlords would be able to serve a no fault notice for all student lets, but I can't see an amendment to that effect. It may be that landlords will only have control of student lets in HMOS.
Agreed. I read Bungling Boy Beadle’s statement on another website and the bit that stuck in my throat was the “We have long accepted”. Who is this WE he is talking about? 😡 As an NRLA member I was never asked my views on fixed tenancies nor S21. How dare he speak for me. 🤬🤬🤬
Come renewal I will tell Bungling Boy Beadle exactly where he can put his membership. 😈
We always had fixed term Contracts renewed again and again with the same or different Tenants or a mixture of both for years and years it was in much later years the amendment to allow Statute Periodic Tenancies so don’t pretend it was always there. There was never any question of keeping Tenants tied to a Contract if they wanted to go, neither was it the case of been thrown out on a whim or at a months notice that’s just fabricated lies not a good bases for RRB and should be scrapped. Ian said yesterday who wanted ever to get rid of good Tenants given yourselves headaches Looking for replacements. At the end of the day its your property and you have to have control over it without having to justify yourself to anyone plain & simply we didn’t need their advice or get any of their support when purchasing what makes them think they should now have this right obviously Tenants always got good notice in advance, don’t the Tenants also leave when it suits them.
Fixed term contracts were acceptable to landlords and tenants. Retaliatory evictions were not an issue because the landlord had to honour the terms of the agreement for its duration.
This circus 🤡 🎪 just keeps rumbling on 🫣🫣🤷♂️🤷♂️
GenRent are angry! Wait until they get what they want - and realise it isn't what they need after all!
Yes Tricia they are. The politics of envy. What they will end up with are fewer properties to rent as there will be a stampede of landlords selling up.
Who do GenRent think they are? do they own a single property, or manage a portfolio of properties, no, they are just parasites with a big mouth! If they want to have all of their demands, buy a property, Landlords are a business who take risks in their investments, not charities!!
I wish there was a 'Generation Landlord'!!!
Generation Rent seem to be the only ones who shout and are heard whilst landlords have to swallow all the sh*t that's thrown at them.
Who would invest in a property only to give all control of it to a bunch of clowns?
No wonder we're selling up in our droves. I, for one can't wait to get out of the mad house!
Generation Rant and Polly Bleat from the non-housing charity mis-named Shelter subscribe to the politics of envy. “You own a property. It’s not fair. We want it.” 😫
If they put as much effort into working hard and saving, they too could own a property. 🤔
Lets face when the power is given to to the extremists allowing them to remove the internal organs from landlords children and sell them they will be still saying it is not enough and they demand more power over landlords and their families
I can’t think of another group that have done more to increase homelessness than activist charities, the chronic shortage of rental stock is a direct result of landlords exiting the market without being replaced because all of these measures have sucked all the profit for many, and hugely increased costs and liabilities (often in areas the LL has no control over).
That said, if you’re a homeless charity - you will thrive in this misery, angrily quoting increases in homelessness while pretending you have played no part in causing the mess.
Margaret. They have nothing to be envious of. I have a 4 double house vacant since October directly because of HMO Licensing Scheme and even though it was licensed 3 times previously. The Application was in before other one expired still waiting following their inspection given me another list that wasn’t required before, not withstanding the fact I have already spent £12k updating and giving the Council £1150. Application fee and £860. C/tax on empty and rising + no Rent in the mean time, very good investment who’s still envious ??. This is all deliberate vandalism by local Authorities causing homeless.
The other thing I used to do was to give to Charity when purchasing goods some say do you want to give 50p on your card, I have stopped that now especially after seeing this particular business had a sign up saying they had raised £75k for Charity. I hope Shelter didn’t get a chunk of that. I seen one of our own a very young girl sitting on the ground freezing outside M&S homeless and pregnant so I gave her tenner instead it won’t do much I know but the crowds were passing her by.
I now donate to 10,000 dogs run by Niall Harbisson who is doing something practical for street dogs. Dogs Trust and Cats Protection support the Housing Advice charity that does not shelter anyone, no longer get any money from me.
Please login to comment