| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ 15:54 - Dec 19 with 6532 views | giant_stow |
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buy-to-let/evicting-90-year-old-tenan
(various paywall removers avaialable)
It turns out that this couple *had* to evict a 90 year old because Labour *might* have made them pay an extra 11 grand tax. They bought for £164,000 and sold at £425,000. This was all Labour's fault.
Remember that everyone - Labour's fault. |  |
| |  |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 21:52 - Dec 19 with 1444 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 21:04 - Dec 19 by bluelondon |
You’re totally correct on this.
Most landlords just want to make a reasonable return and be good to their tenants, but this potentially puts them in a very difficult position with absolutely no flexibility.
Unfortunately this will mean private rents will go up steeply for what is remaining. |
Here's the thing. Landlords who arent being paid, or have tenants breaching a tenancy will still be able to apply for possession as they always have. This will just mean that they don't get to turf people out, on 2 months notice, for no reason. What flexibility do they require?
It is normal in most other EU countries to have some security if renting. Pretty healthy for society surely? |  | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 23:02 - Dec 19 with 1387 views | reusersfreekicks |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 21:52 - Dec 19 by redrickstuhaart |
Here's the thing. Landlords who arent being paid, or have tenants breaching a tenancy will still be able to apply for possession as they always have. This will just mean that they don't get to turf people out, on 2 months notice, for no reason. What flexibility do they require?
It is normal in most other EU countries to have some security if renting. Pretty healthy for society surely? |
If tenants have eg a contract for a year, can the landlord say they are not renewing? |  | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 23:12 - Dec 19 with 1372 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 23:02 - Dec 19 by reusersfreekicks |
If tenants have eg a contract for a year, can the landlord say they are not renewing? |
No. Generally. Under the new proposed approach.
Worth noting the previous govt promised this for ages but made excuses to not do it.
The issue is that the use or threat of non fault evicition can be used as leverage in all sorts of ways. To agree rent increases, to not complain about issues and repairs etc.
If you are not being paid, have an antisocial tenant, or need the house, you can apply for possession. [Post edited 19 Dec 2024 23:13]
| | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 00:26 - Dec 20 with 1343 views | Europablue |
You have to be pretty deluded to think that you should shout about that as some kind of virtue signaling exercise. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 00:39 - Dec 20 with 1324 views | Europablue |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 16:12 - Dec 19 by DJR |
I have a free subscription to the Telegraph through a friend, and it twists every story to blame Labour.
But you don't need a paywall, you only need to read the headlines.
As the Jam might once have put it
It's Dr. Starmer's
A-P-O-C-A-L-Y-P-S-E, apocalypse |
There isn't much twisting needed to blame Labour for the bad things that they are doing.
How did someone think that it was a good idea to take away winter fuel payments for OAPs? Even if it is fair, it looks so bad and it won't even save that much. I remember the Conservatives looking into it and the result was that it might not even save any money if you have to means test everyone.
It has become clear that Starmer is just the left-left-wing leader of the Uniparty that was previously led by a right-left-wing leader. He is a continuation of failed concepts that don't consider the people of this country or what they want.
It is painfully clear that there are far too many people in the South East for the infrastructure that is in place here.
Starmer is deeply unpopular and he is opening the door for Farage and Reform. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing, it is difficult to say. In the long term it will probably be a good thing for Labour and the Conservatives to come back with an offer that is actually attractive for the British people rather than the main selling point of not being the other lot. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 00:53 - Dec 20 with 1310 views | Europablue |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 16:42 - Dec 19 by BloomBlue |
The left wing Daily Mirror twist ever story to blame the Conservatives.
The anti semantic Guardian twist every story to blame the Israeli state.
Your point is? |
The people who think that only right-wing newspapers or only left-wing papers twist the news are so deluded. The prevailing view on this forum seems to be that the Guardian is the word of God and the Telegraph, the Times, and especially the Mail and the Sun are the word of the Devil. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 00:55 - Dec 20 with 1311 views | Europablue |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 16:57 - Dec 19 by flykickingbybgunn |
As I read it the owners of the house were afraid that they would not be able to sell that house that they were using as a pension fund because of new laws restricting ""No fault" evictions.
Meaning that giving tenants reasonable time, say 6 months, would not be enough to comply with the law.
There can be no surprise that restricting the profitability or flexibility of renting out your house will result in fewer people doing it.
As a result rental costs are going up. An appaling thing at a time when imigration is not being restricted and living accomodation is at a premium. |
It's Labour's natural instinct to do the thing that sounds equitable, without thinking through the true likely consequences of a law change. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 01:04 - Dec 20 with 1311 views | Ryorry |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 23:12 - Dec 19 by redrickstuhaart |
No. Generally. Under the new proposed approach.
Worth noting the previous govt promised this for ages but made excuses to not do it.
The issue is that the use or threat of non fault evicition can be used as leverage in all sorts of ways. To agree rent increases, to not complain about issues and repairs etc.
If you are not being paid, have an antisocial tenant, or need the house, you can apply for possession. [Post edited 19 Dec 2024 23:13]
|
The point is that non-business landlords (I mean those who've inherited a property, or who've annexed off a s/c part of their home as a way of downsizing), particularly elderly ones, do not want or sometimes have the health to go through court proceedings that would, with this new law and the current backlog in the whole judicial system, now take a year+, with all the stress inherent in that as well as having to possibly deal with tenant neighbours from hell for that length of time. Many would rather remove their property from the market than take that risk.
And it needs to be said again that
1. All landlords want to retain *good* tenants, so there’s really no issue for good tenants wanting long term security; and
2. There is already legislation in place requiring landlords to carry out repairs to fix damp, mould or any other issues in order to bring their properties up to good, healthy standards - it simply needs to be actually enforced on rogue landlords who don’t comply! [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 2:49]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 01:14 - Dec 20 with 1305 views | Europablue |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 19:27 - Dec 19 by GeoffSentence |
i used to subscribe to the DT because it was good quality journalism and gave a different view point from many of my other sources of news.
Some time around 2016 it became a rabid, frothing mouthpiece for the tory party so I dropped it. If it has changed since it just seems to have become worse.
political objectivity is a thing of the past. |
Now they seem to be obsessed with pushing alternate lifestyles and in particular undermining marriage. Maybe they are being sponsored by a cheating website or something.
Every other article is about trans stuff. They are just engagement farming.
Then there is the proper journalism amongst all the other stuff. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 05:13 - Dec 20 with 1267 views | Benters |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 17:10 - Dec 19 by BloomBlue |
Starmer said earlier this year he would correct the injustice against the WASPI woman. Angela Rayner said the WASPI women had their money stolen by the governmen. Yesterday liar Starmer said he wouldn't correct it, and liar Rayner said it was OK for the government to seal from the WASPI women
That's the problem in life, One person's truth is another person's lie. |
They said a lot of things to get in power and backed tracked on them.
I am convinced that Granny Harmer and Rachel Thieves hate the natives of this country. |  |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 05:16 - Dec 20 with 1260 views | Benters |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 16:42 - Dec 19 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Reminds me, I bumped into an old neighbour recently who was moaning her disability benefits have only gone up a small amount (like £5 a month or something, which I agreed was ridiculous). And then she starts moaning about Labour putting up the tax on second and third homes, which is even worse for her and her husband as they're in London...
So let's get this straight... they have THREE homes, all of which are IN LONDON, and she's moaning about the tax and not enough of a rise on HER BENEFITS. A lot of people can't afford one home in London (and I'm struggling with the mortgage myself at the moment) let alone 3... and she's also claiming benefits!
Funny thing is she's a sweet woman, bit older than me, and talked like she had no idea she was in the wrong and wasn't being hard done by. Astonishing. |
I would have thought that a Gentleman of your calibre and age would be mortgage free.
I blame the £90 sausages. | |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 07:59 - Dec 20 with 1196 views | blue_curacao |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 16:42 - Dec 19 by BloomBlue |
The left wing Daily Mirror twist ever story to blame the Conservatives.
The anti semantic Guardian twist every story to blame the Israeli state.
Your point is? |
Everyone knows the Gauardian is anti semantic! | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:20 - Dec 20 with 1165 views | Zx1988 |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 17:59 - Dec 19 by Ryorry |
I might be wrong as I haven't read the small print yet, but I thought the issue wasn't "giving tenants reasonable time, say 6 months", but that once tenants had signed a Tenancy Agreement, they had in effect a right to stay permanently unless the landlord either went through lengthy court proceedings, or could show that they needed the property for themselves or a member of their family.
For many landlords (not saying all) that's a far bigger issue than profitability, esp when it comes to the possibility of having nightmare (anti-social, refusing to pay rent etc.) tenants on your doorstep. |
My understanding is that (in the Tory legislation at least) there is/was also provision for a landlord to evict tenants if they wanted to sell the property.
In practice, as confirmed to me by my firm's head of lettings when the Tories announced the plans, it wouldn't really change the playing field. All landlords would/will have to do is claim that Great Auntie Maud needs the property in order to get the tenants out, at which point GAM's housing crisis would miraculously solve itself, leaving them free to re-let the place. | |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:32 - Dec 20 with 1153 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:20 - Dec 20 by Zx1988 |
My understanding is that (in the Tory legislation at least) there is/was also provision for a landlord to evict tenants if they wanted to sell the property.
In practice, as confirmed to me by my firm's head of lettings when the Tories announced the plans, it wouldn't really change the playing field. All landlords would/will have to do is claim that Great Auntie Maud needs the property in order to get the tenants out, at which point GAM's housing crisis would miraculously solve itself, leaving them free to re-let the place. |
The difference is they would need to convince a Court that it was true.
The Tories version, however, was quite deliberately kicked down the road repeatedly despite their promises and committments. I leave it to others to consider why a party with lots of wealthy people in it might have wanted to do that. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:36 - Dec 20 with 1143 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 00:39 - Dec 20 by Europablue |
There isn't much twisting needed to blame Labour for the bad things that they are doing.
How did someone think that it was a good idea to take away winter fuel payments for OAPs? Even if it is fair, it looks so bad and it won't even save that much. I remember the Conservatives looking into it and the result was that it might not even save any money if you have to means test everyone.
It has become clear that Starmer is just the left-left-wing leader of the Uniparty that was previously led by a right-left-wing leader. He is a continuation of failed concepts that don't consider the people of this country or what they want.
It is painfully clear that there are far too many people in the South East for the infrastructure that is in place here.
Starmer is deeply unpopular and he is opening the door for Farage and Reform. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing, it is difficult to say. In the long term it will probably be a good thing for Labour and the Conservatives to come back with an offer that is actually attractive for the British people rather than the main selling point of not being the other lot. |
So much in here that is patently inaccurate or disingenuous. Haven't the energy to pick it all apart. However:
To suggest that Starmer is the one opening the door for Farage et al, when the conservatives have spent the last ten years polarising society with culture laws and borderline racist rhetoric is simply ridiculous. Even more so, when they presided over some of the highest immigration figures in recent history to fuel that rhetoric. To misquote Stewart Lee, its a bit like shi tting the bed in protest at poor service, only to realise they must then sleep in a shi tted bed. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:37 - Dec 20 with 1133 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 01:04 - Dec 20 by Ryorry |
The point is that non-business landlords (I mean those who've inherited a property, or who've annexed off a s/c part of their home as a way of downsizing), particularly elderly ones, do not want or sometimes have the health to go through court proceedings that would, with this new law and the current backlog in the whole judicial system, now take a year+, with all the stress inherent in that as well as having to possibly deal with tenant neighbours from hell for that length of time. Many would rather remove their property from the market than take that risk.
And it needs to be said again that
1. All landlords want to retain *good* tenants, so there’s really no issue for good tenants wanting long term security; and
2. There is already legislation in place requiring landlords to carry out repairs to fix damp, mould or any other issues in order to bring their properties up to good, healthy standards - it simply needs to be actually enforced on rogue landlords who don’t comply! [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 2:49]
|
Unfortunately many landlords use S.21 as leverage. If you complain, they have to do the work. Once it is done, the S.21 notice comes in...
It does not take years to go through a possession claim if it has merit and is pursued properly. At worst it might be a couple of months. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:38 - Dec 20 with 1129 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 01:14 - Dec 20 by Europablue |
Now they seem to be obsessed with pushing alternate lifestyles and in particular undermining marriage. Maybe they are being sponsored by a cheating website or something.
Every other article is about trans stuff. They are just engagement farming.
Then there is the proper journalism amongst all the other stuff. |
And here, the mask slips and we see the classic dog whistle about "promoting alternative lifestyles". Which is basically code for "I don't like people LGBTQ people".
Who is "undermining marriage" and how? Give a specific example please. And then explain why it is a bad thing. [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 8:43]
| | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:41 - Dec 20 with 1116 views | DJR |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:20 - Dec 20 by Zx1988 |
My understanding is that (in the Tory legislation at least) there is/was also provision for a landlord to evict tenants if they wanted to sell the property.
In practice, as confirmed to me by my firm's head of lettings when the Tories announced the plans, it wouldn't really change the playing field. All landlords would/will have to do is claim that Great Auntie Maud needs the property in order to get the tenants out, at which point GAM's housing crisis would miraculously solve itself, leaving them free to re-let the place. |
This sets out the grounds for possession (Table 1 in tenancy reform section) in the Labour Bill.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-renters-rights-bill/82ff
They include the sale of the property, although this cannot be used for the first 12 months of the tenancy. There is also a 4 month notice period. It is a mandatory ground. [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 9:23]
|  | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:47 - Dec 20 with 1083 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 01:04 - Dec 20 by Ryorry |
The point is that non-business landlords (I mean those who've inherited a property, or who've annexed off a s/c part of their home as a way of downsizing), particularly elderly ones, do not want or sometimes have the health to go through court proceedings that would, with this new law and the current backlog in the whole judicial system, now take a year+, with all the stress inherent in that as well as having to possibly deal with tenant neighbours from hell for that length of time. Many would rather remove their property from the market than take that risk.
And it needs to be said again that
1. All landlords want to retain *good* tenants, so there’s really no issue for good tenants wanting long term security; and
2. There is already legislation in place requiring landlords to carry out repairs to fix damp, mould or any other issues in order to bring their properties up to good, healthy standards - it simply needs to be actually enforced on rogue landlords who don’t comply! [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 2:49]
|
Once again you're speaking on an issue just from your own experience/very narrow perspective. The idea that there's no problem so nothing to fix is nonsense if you look at the bigger picture I'm afraid. What proportion of landlords are elderly non-business landlords who've inherited a property or who've annexed off part as a way of downsizing (i.e. you)? A tiny amount I imagine.
I'm sure you're a great landlord but there's thousands out there who aren't. And loads of people going through the misery of no-fault evictions. "there’s really no issue for good tenants wanting long term security" is so naive it's unreal. As with anything, there's a much bigger picture. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:47 - Dec 20 with 1083 views | Zx1988 |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:41 - Dec 20 by DJR |
This sets out the grounds for possession (Table 1 in tenancy reform section) in the Labour Bill.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-renters-rights-bill/82ff
They include the sale of the property, although this cannot be used for the first 12 months of the tenancy. There is also a 4 month notice period. It is a mandatory ground. [Post edited 20 Dec 2024 9:23]
|
I struggle to see how grounds 1 and 1A wouldn't be open to abuse, in particular 1A:
Landlord declares intention to sell, serves notice, and lists the property at a top-end-of-realistic price. Tenants leave, and Landlord takes the property off the market a few days/weeks later, claiming that they didn't receive any acceptable offers.
Unless it was done in a 'revenge eviction' type scenario, I imagine it would be very difficult for anyone to prove that the move wasn't taken with the sole intention of getting rid of the tenants. | |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:52 - Dec 20 with 1073 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 05:13 - Dec 20 by Benters |
They said a lot of things to get in power and backed tracked on them.
I am convinced that Granny Harmer and Rachel Thieves hate the natives of this country. |
No they haven't.
You said Starmer promised not to put up your energy bill the other day. I asked where he said this... someone else proved he didn't... and you disappeared.
Why you always be posting nonsense? | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:54 - Dec 20 with 1070 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 05:16 - Dec 20 by Benters |
I would have thought that a Gentleman of your calibre and age would be mortgage free.
I blame the £90 sausages. |
If you've been following the Dollers Story - which you should have been - you should know I only got my first mortgage two years ago, so it'll be a long time till I'm mortgage free. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:55 - Dec 20 with 1063 views | redrickstuhaart |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:47 - Dec 20 by Zx1988 |
I struggle to see how grounds 1 and 1A wouldn't be open to abuse, in particular 1A:
Landlord declares intention to sell, serves notice, and lists the property at a top-end-of-realistic price. Tenants leave, and Landlord takes the property off the market a few days/weeks later, claiming that they didn't receive any acceptable offers.
Unless it was done in a 'revenge eviction' type scenario, I imagine it would be very difficult for anyone to prove that the move wasn't taken with the sole intention of getting rid of the tenants. |
That is the sort of thing to be dealt with in drafting the actual legislation. What thresholds needed to prove it, whether there are potential consequences for landlords who appear to abuse it or change their minds etc. There are sticks and carrots which can be applied there. | | | |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 09:09 - Dec 20 with 1029 views | Zx1988 |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 08:55 - Dec 20 by redrickstuhaart |
That is the sort of thing to be dealt with in drafting the actual legislation. What thresholds needed to prove it, whether there are potential consequences for landlords who appear to abuse it or change their minds etc. There are sticks and carrots which can be applied there. |
I think that such measures would be very tricky to implement, without hamstringing the freedom of choice of well-meaning landlords. They could very easily find themselves at the whim of unscrupulous agents who provide over-inflated valuations in order to win the instruction, with no means of easily withdrawing the property from the market.
Similarly, it would be extremely difficult to introduce a scenario where, say, an eviction notice could only be served upon exchange of contracts, if the four-month notice period was retained.
Given that the general rule of thumb is that a tenanted property will achieve about 10% less on the open market than if it was offered with vacant possession, there needs to be a balance struck which allows landlords to easily sell with VP, whilst sufficiently protecting tenants' rights. | |
| |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 09:29 - Dec 20 with 992 views | jayessess |
| ‘We’re evicting our 90-year-old tenant because of Labour’ on 09:09 - Dec 20 by Zx1988 |
I think that such measures would be very tricky to implement, without hamstringing the freedom of choice of well-meaning landlords. They could very easily find themselves at the whim of unscrupulous agents who provide over-inflated valuations in order to win the instruction, with no means of easily withdrawing the property from the market.
Similarly, it would be extremely difficult to introduce a scenario where, say, an eviction notice could only be served upon exchange of contracts, if the four-month notice period was retained.
Given that the general rule of thumb is that a tenanted property will achieve about 10% less on the open market than if it was offered with vacant possession, there needs to be a balance struck which allows landlords to easily sell with VP, whilst sufficiently protecting tenants' rights. |
The underlying thing is just from a societal perspective "person with an additional property will face some stressful bureaucracy if they want to make someone homeless" is not a problem of any significance next to homelessness, exploitation of tenants, slum landlords etc.
If it weren't for parliament and the media being stuffed full of landlords and their advocates this would barely even be a discussion. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
