A commission investigating affordable homes in the UK has called for annual private sector rent increases to be limited to a new index of income growth and for landlords to pay tenants’ removal costs in some circumstances.
The Affordable Housing Commission also recommends that “charging more than the permitted rent increase would be an offence, with the landlord facing a fine and having to return the excess rent to the tenant.”
The policy would be policed by the First Tier Tribunal, or new Housing Courts as proposed by the Conservatives in the 2019 election manifesto if these are established.
Amongst the commission’s other recommendations is one saying that if private rental sector tenants are evicted because landlords want to sell their property or even move into it, “they should pay the tenants’ relocation costs, to minimise hardship.”
Another says: “The Commission recommends that the government examines the case for a national mandatory professional standard of competency in the private rental sector. Private landlords would have to demonstrate their credibility and a professional standard of management on a similar basis to the regulation of letting agents.”
And another states: “The Commission also recommends that a new national landlord register (run by councils but freely open to the public) is established to improve standards within the PRS.”
The commission includes representatives from Savills, the British Property Federation, the Home Builders Federation, local councils and groups including Generation Rent.
It is chaired by Lord Richard Best, who also chaired the Regulation of Property Agents working group that reported last year with a string of recommendations for letting and estate agents to be qualified before being allowed to deal directly with members of the public.
The Affordable Housing Commission reported a few weeks ago but its recommendations received little coverage as they came at the start of the Coronavirus lockdown.
You can see the recommendations here.
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
.png)
%20(002).png)
%20(002).jpg)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Where were the Nrla then.
Busy calculating the new salary of the Chief executive?
They should also have a Law that stupid ideas from quangos should be an offence (they certainly offend me!).
What a nightmare, we are rapidly going back in time to the disastrous days prior to the arrival of the AST, it is absolutely none of the governments business to interfere with rents that landlords charge, God knows what ARLA have been doing, Shelter seems to have incredible influence over this government, if something isn't done soon to stop this absurd level of regulation, there won't be a PRS left. It is high time that ARLA and Landlord associations got together and hired a decent PR agency to give the lie to all the negative propaganda pumped out by Generation rent, Shelter et al, for years tenants have been groomed into believing that every Landlord is a devious crook intent only on racking up their rents while deliberately ignoring repairs and problems, throwing poor defenceless tenants out if they dare to complain, it is time to stop this rot before it is too late, I doubt though anything will happen, just constant whinging and no action.
You couldn’t make it up ... they should have included the landlord should go round and help with the packing
Don't give them any more ridiculous ideas James, - they come up with enough on their own !
A commission on Housing that doesn't have representation of Landlords ! - well that's about par for the course isn't it !!!
I had to check the date THREE times to make sure it wasn’t 1st April. The kindest expression I can use for the Affordable Housing Commission is numpties. AHC now stands for Association of Hopeless Cuckoos.
Lost for words! Remember and send a gift and a moving in card!
Their statement that, "They should pay the tenants’ relocation costs, to minimise hardship," assumes of course that landlords are rich and tenants are poor - the default view of such organisations, the mainstream media and the general public. In reality, it's just as likely to be the other way round.
I've stumbled across this website and shocked at these responses, no doubt from landlords! I'm a tenant and a landlord so understand the issue from both sides. Landlords choose to become landlords to make money, which is fair enough, tenants however usually just need a home. I don't agree with the over protection for tenants who don't pay rent, but most tenants, like most landlords, are decent people. Is it right that having been a good tenant, looking after landlords property and probably paying off their mortgage, to suddenly be asked to move through no fault of theirs and to deal with the stress of moving as well as all the costs incurred because the landlord wants to sell up? I don't think this is fair, good tenants should not have to pay removal costs when they dont want to move. Being a landlord means being responsible, yes not all landlords are rich, but if you choose to become a landlord you have to be responsible, if not invest in stocks and shares, not people's homes.
And what's this on page 34? Wipe the tenants a**e after they've had a s**t!
What about tenants who just up and leave when they feel like? Or tenants that think giving a weeks notice (therefore breaking their contract) etc etc should the landlord pay their removal fees also?
Please login to comment