Secure private renting.

The government have signaled that what has always been the cornerstone of private landlords, is now going to have to end due the bad landlords - the no fault evicition (under Section 21 of the housing laws) is to end in England. The Section 21 allowed a landlord to regain their property without needing a reason.  As usual, abuse always gets the laws changed.   Not that many landlords/letting agents seem to know how to issue a valid Section 21.

It's good news for the tenants and the professional landlords.  Good news for the taxpayers too, who have been funding the councils who have had to prosecute this rise of the unethical landlords and letting agents who don't know the laws that apply to their business; and the courts who are having their time wasted throwing out these invalid Section 21 notices.


There seems to be some talk on the landlord forums about the government also planning to bring in laws to control any rent rise allowed. At the moment, tenant can go to a Tribunal if landlord wants to raise the rent and the Tribunal then contols the rent rise because landlord cannot just raise rent to what they want to, but these are funded by the taxpayers too. Professional landlords don't raise rents unitl they re-let the property as they don't have money problems: their Business Plan takes account of changes. That's always a good question to ask the outgoing tenant; if they have allowed viewings. If tenant has not allowed viewings, it speaks volumes about that landlord as landlord will have a void (at least a month without rent).

How fantastic that they are finally implementing this.  Such a backwards law before.  Glad tenants will have some security on their homes in the future.   

How fantastic that they are finally implementing this.  Such a backwards law before.  Glad tenants will have some security on their homes in the future.   

It is great news, isn't it. They did say the other year that they were going to get rid of the small landlords.

All landlords will have to be in it for the long term now as even a fixed term tenancy rolls over into a Periodic tenancy if a tenant decides not to leave at the end of the fixed term. It took a valid Section 21 (no fault) notice to end that Periodic Tenancy: or a valid Section 8 (that requires a reason) such as tenant falls behind with the rent by 2 months or are anti-social.

 Plus councils will carry out the repairs and bill the private landlord for the money. 

And from the first of next next month the "rip off Britain" tenant fees that arrived over the last decade, will end under the Tenant Fees Act 2019 in England and ensure a  return to what England used to have for tenants, to once again make it cheap and easy for tenants to move rentals. No more Tenant fees and Security Deposit can only be 5 times the weekly rent.

Councils will now also loan the secutiry deposit is one is required/the landlord is allowed to take a security deposit. Although tenant must still be given the deposit back if landlord fails to follow the deposit law to the letter and landlord  must also pay the tenant compenstaion of up to 3 times that deposit: I guess some landlords who don't know the laws might be pleased that fine will only by 15 times the weekly rent.

We will have to agree to disagree on small landlords versus large landlords.  I think it's very much known in the world of renting, that it is FAR preferable to rent from a private landlord than a bureaucracy.  When the landlord genuinely *cares* about the property and aren't just looking at it from an income perspective, everyone wins.

Glad to hear they are taking steps to punish the bad landlords Hoping they eventually take steps to do something about the bad tenants as well as it seems that space definitely still seeing abuse. A step in the right direction is a step in the right direction though!

We will have to agree to disagree on small landlords versus large landlords.  I think it's very much known in the world of renting, that it is FAR preferable to rent from a private landlord than a bureaucracy.  When the landlord genuinely *cares* about the property and aren't just looking at it from an income perspective, everyone wins.

There is nothing to disagree on. Professional landlord care about the state of their properties too. What made you think they didn't? They also know that councils can come in and carry out their repairs and bill them, that the bill will be higher than if they used a tradesperson and they know all the powers councils have. It's ofter the small landlord that does not have 4k to replace a boiler straight away.

As I have said before, it's the me-too-buy-to-let who have been causing all the law changes because many don't seem to know the laws, as landlords have always been required to do. Letting Agents are not required to know the laws, although they can be taken to court for a cirminal offences. It's been costing the taxpayers too much to fund councils to prosecute all these bad landlords; ignorance is never an excuse in the eyes of the law. Too much abuse get the laws changed

Unprofessional landlords don't care about the state of their properties. 

Glad to hear they are taking steps to punish the bad landlords Hoping they eventually take steps to do something about the bad tenants as well as it seems that space definitely still seeing abuse. A step in the right direction is a step in the right direction though!

Sometimes the law changes only affect the landlords who don’t follow the laws.

Remember when I told you last year that you can't deduct what you like from your tenant's deposit as you thought? Landlord never could and the courts used to deal with these but bizarrely the tenant had to take the landlord to court for breaking the law. Now, the changes to the laws mean the penalties only affect these landlords.  A landlord can now be prevented from ever taking a deposit again if they have a habit of trying to take their tenants’ money, enforced through the deposit schemes. And there is always one landlord on a site who is upset as to find out they have to return the deposit in full to the tenant in their property and pay them thousands in compensation to the tenants for landlord's failure to follow the deposit laws.

The same with KFdancer when she said she though she could inspect how her tenant lived, when in fact the Housing laws actually say that those inspections are only for a landlord to check for any  repairs IF the tenant will allow it. To be fair, she is not the only landlord that has thought that, but if she had tried to enforce her belief, it would have only affected her. The laws clearly states that every tenant has the right of quiet enjoyment of their home and had done when I first became a landlord.

But other changes that have had to be brought in, are affecting the landlords who do comply with the laws and they also make it easier for the bad tenants. e.g. the end of the Section 21.

I have been shocked to read the response from some landlords to this as they thought a Section 21 meant the tenant have to move out in 2 months! Which is why they used it when they should have used a Section 8 because they thought only a Section 8 ends up in court! These don’t even realise that only a court can tell a tenant to leave, Section 21 and Section 8 and that a Section 21 notice isn't even a notice to quit! But this all adds to the abuse used of Section 21.

And with many landlords still unable to understand the ever changing Security Deposit laws, it’s hardly surprising these don’t know how to issue a valid Section 21 as that uses the deposit part of the Housing laws too. They waste the courts time with their invalid Section 21, but apart from that it only affects the landlord who didn’t follow the law.

Sometimes the law changes only affect the landlords who don’t follow the laws.

I didn't argue otherwise I said hopefully in future they will start enacting laws to also effect bad tenants as well.

Remember when I told you that you cant’ deduct what you like from your tenants deposit as you thought?

I don't remember that because it didn't happen   (please feel free to look at my post history as a refresher) What happened was that you argued with me about if you could deduct from wear and tear and we argued about what was considered reasonable wear and tear and what was considered destruction of property that warranted making a claim to keep part of the deposit. I.E. a brand new carpet that had been installed a year prior being destroyed to the point of requiring new carpets because it physically had holes in it was not just "light wear and tear" that we "factored into our business plan". It had been proven through various channels in the real world that we were well within the rights to make a claim to keep part of their deposit (it does seem though that you almost NEVER think a tenant does anything wrong so we maybe shouldn't even bother taking a security deposit if nothing qualifies as destruction of property?). I do remember that you did reference a lot of stuff that wasn't relevant to the discussion and ignored all attempts to bring the discussion back on topic, but you did highlight scenarios in which a landlord could NOT keep a deposit. While it might not have been relevant to me/my situation, I'm sure it helped somebody (which is never a bad thing).


Either way, this is irrelevant from this current thread where my comment is that sometimes there are abusive tenants and hopefully some day there will be rules/regs in place to change that as you're always quite confident to state that abuse triggers change

The same with KFdancer when she said she though she could inspect how her tenant lived, when in fact the Housing laws actually say that those inspections are only for a landlord to check for any  repairs IF the tenant will allow it. To be fair, she is not the only landlord that has thought that, but if she had tried to enforce her belief, it would have only affected her. The laws clearly states that every tenant has the right of quiet enjoyment of their home and had done when I first became a landlord.

If fairness, I think you might have taken what KF said out of context (as you often do) but I can't speak for her - I will let her follow this statement up herself.

But other changes that have had to be brought in, are affecting the landlords who do comply with the laws and they also make it easier for the bad tenants. e.g. the end of the Section 21.

I have been shocked to read the response from some landlords to this as they thought a Section 21 meant the tenant have to move out in 2 months! Which is why they used it when they should have used a Section 8 because they thought only a Section 8 ends up in court! These don’t even realise that only a court can tell a tenant to leave, Section 21 and Section 8!

And with many landlords still unable to understand the ever changing Security Deposit laws, it’s hardly surprising these don’t know how to issue a valid Section 21 as that uses the deposit part of the Housing laws too. They waste the courts time with their invalid Section 21, but apart from that it only affects the landlord who didn’t follow the law.

Which brings me back around to the fact that I do hope, at some point, they bring in additional laws to help curb bad tenants holding good landlords to ransom. These bad behaviours can cause equal amounts of unnecessary stresses

The same with KFdancer when she said she though she could inspect how her tenant lived, when in fact the Housing laws actually say that those inspections are only for a landlord to check for any  repairs IF the tenant will allow it. To be fair, she is not the only landlord that has thought that, but if she had tried to enforce her belief, it would have only affected her. The laws clearly states that every tenant has the right of quiet enjoyment of their home and had done when I first became a landlord.

I 100% never, ever, ever said this.  I would love to be shown the quote where I did!  I have never in my entire life conducted an inspection on a tenant and have ZERO intention of ever doing so!

I have, however, been subject to inspections.  Mine were absolutely fine.  But as Margo and MANY other friends in real life have experienced, often these landlord inspections pick up on "how a tenant lives" calling out dust and limescale. 

I would absolutely, positively, LOVE LOVE LOVE to be shown where I've stated I want to inspect how my tenants live.  Because I know I didn't say - because I don't - nor do I believe landlords should be allowed to get away with treating their tenants like children!

And I'm just curious why you think XoD and I are such bad landlords?  I suspect we are as good of a landlord as you are!  Which I suspect is pretty damn good one.  I know my tenants give me glowing feedback - continuously.  Because I genuinely believe my tenants home should be perfect - they are paying for it to be perfect after all!

Which brings me back around to the fact that I do hope, at some point, they bring in additional laws to help curb bad tenants holding good landlords to ransom. These bad behaviours can cause equal amounts of unnecessary stresses

Not while there are more bad landlords/those landlords who make up their own laws, than there are bad tenants.

The governmnet are going to try to tigthen the laws for Section 8 when they get rid of Section 21, but there are professional tenants out there who take advantage of those landlords who haven't bothered to learn the laws. The problem for these landlords is that they often use a letting agent instead, but LAs don't have to know the laws and most charges and fines are aimed at the LL not the LA.

And I'm just curious why you think XoD and I are such bad landlords? 

All I did was tell you both the things that you were not allowed to do. Yours could have resulted in a crimanal record if you had continued with your statements and I thought these  were friendly warnings as it helped you both. Don't worry, I won't warn you again.

Not while there are more bad landlords/those landlords who make up their own laws, than there are bad tenants.

The governmnet are going to try to tigthen the laws for Section 8 when they get rid of Section 21, but there are professional tenants out there who take advantage of those landlords who haven't bothered to learn the laws. The problem for these landlords is that they often use a letting agent instead, but LAs don't have to know the laws and most charges and fines are aimed at the LL not the LA.

Should we only limit improvements to punish the bad landlords and help the bad tenants just because this idea that you hold that the bad landlords outweigh the bad tenants? Should we not be looking to implement positive changes that will help eliminate BOTH bad tenants and bad landlords?

I wonder how many of these landlords you claim use letting agents that actually only use them for minimal tasks? For example, we have a letting agent but we used them only to find the tenant and to take care of when we either re-sign a contract or the tenant moves out (and they deal with refunding the deposit - for example) but they don't take care of any of the other queries/issues. Wondering what the percentage of people using L.A. for their properties  actually use them for more than just the "introductions" and "departures"?

Also, where do you get this figure about bad landlords outweighing bad tenants? I'm sure they exist and I know that you participate in landlord forums so would be interested (genuinely) on reading up on this.