"the private rental sector does not work as well as it could"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    "the private rental sector does not work as well as it could"

    Unbelievable.

    Have you read the article ? - https://www.landlordzone.co.uk/news/...social-sector/

    Councillor Jeremy Pert, cabinet member for community and health at Stafford Council believes "the private rental sector does not work as well as it could" and his "radical scheme" aims to encourage more PRS LLs to take on social tenants.

    He confirms that the Council spends more than £10,000 putting social tenants in B&B accommodation for the average 7 months it take to place them in a property.

    His department has earmarked a massive - wait for it - £30,000 - to help 30 tenants secure PRS accommodation.

    DREAM ON FELLA


    Dream On Councillor – living in his fantasy World with guaranteed income from the taxpayer. When the Council runs out they simply collect more.

    Why not step back and realise that landlords in “the private rental sector (that) does not work as well as it could” do not have the luxury of guaranteed income.

    Why would a PRS landlord risk taking on households with “complex needs” – does he think providing a deposit of £1,000 is going to sort it all out?

    Here’s another radical idea for Councillor Pert – hand the landlord 50% of the £10,000 the Council spends on the average B&B stay as an incentive to take on your “complex need” tenants.

    £5,000 MIGHT encourage a few landlords to accept the drawbacks linked to so many social tenancies. The Council saves £5,000 and disposes of their "complex tenant" at the same time.

    #2
    I think the money would be better spent fixing the very broken social housing sector as has been highlighted in Croydon recently

    Comment


      #3
      He must have been smoking something, he is simply looking at it from one perspective...... saving the council money, fair enough i guess, but he has not even considered the also ' complex'' reasons that LL's may not wish to take on those tenants. I deal with on a weekly and often daily basis with these tenants with complex needs, and i like to be able to go home and forget about them, i do not wish to have them in my rental properties where i deal with them out of my work life, not a cat in hell's chance.

      This chap and others need to have a real conversation with a number of LL's to find out the issues they have with renting to individuals who may well have alcohol and drug issues, coupled with mental health and family/relationship issues, let us not mention the criminal history side of things, which in many will be there.

      I agree with cymro123, the govt and councils need to look at building millions of council/social housing, not looking at the PRS for the answer, especially when all they have done for years is punish us for being in the business of renting properties, that now they want to go to the exact same people they are having issues with !!! It would be amusing if it were not so tragic.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Hudson01 View Post
        I agree with cymro123, the govt and councils need to look at building millions of council/social housing, not looking at the PRS for the answer.
        The councils have no choice but to try to encourage the PRS to help. The Right to Buy scheme has seen many council houses sold off, often to re-appear quickly as PRS rentals, and the councils do not even get the house sale proceeds. Some councils from the south of England network with the PRS in cheaper rental areas in the Midlands and North trying to house their social housing tenants out of area. From what I can see the Local Authorities do not build houses anymore but seem to rely on the few affordable houses that they can coerce out of the developers.

        Comment


          #5
          I agree with the above, and i understand that the right to buy has decimated the housing stock, but all of this is a govt choice, they can end it but choose not too, and have no answers other than the PRS, the half witted public vote for all of this of course and then blame LL's for all their woes due to the lack of affordable housing, it is utter madness.

          Comment


            #6
            It should be mandatory for these people pontificating on the PRS to work for at least six months dealing face to face, hands on, with the social tenants he’s wringing his hands over. Be on the premises dealing with smashed furniture, doors, holes in walls, good accommodation destroyed, his social tenants off their heads on drugs, alll of that and no rent and that’s only a part of it. Go on try it then start telling private landlords what to do.

            Comment


              #7
              Just because Govt (local and national) have failed to address their responsibilities for social housing does not mean the PRS wants to or has to provide for these tenants.

              The PRS is shrinking slowly but surely; the number of renters keeps rising; so LLs can choose who they want to rent to.

              I choose to rent decent houses in decent areas to working people who can afford rents above the LHA rates. I have no inclination to change a policy that has worked for me for 20 years and there is nothing any LA could offer that would entice me into this section. I appreciate there are many decent people renting in this sector but the risks are too great for me.

              LAs & central Govt need to realise that private LLs are small businesses, not charities or social workers and they cannot rely on us to plug the gap in their resources. They need a program of building social housing which would not only solve their problem but would also ease the pressure on rents in the PRS which are hurting so many renters these days.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by AlexR View Post

                The Right to Buy scheme has seen many council houses sold off, often to re-appear quickly as PRS rentals
                Do you have any statistics to back this up, especially the 'quickly' part ?

                Yes, properties sold under the RTB scheme should have been replaced with others built, or bought, to replace them, but I don't think RTB is a bad thing in itself. It has given hardworking people the security of owning their own property, when they wouldn't have otherwise had a chance to.

                RTB and BTL are not the causes of the the current shortage in the UK housing market. If these properties were empty, then I'd accept that argument.

                BTL totals around 4.5 million properties, RTB runs at around 11,000 properties per year (.gov website). The real issue causing shortages is the fact that the UK population has been growing at a rate of 1 million extra people every 2-and-a-bit years.

                Oh, and in answer to the main point in this thread, you couldn't pay me enough to take on your 'complex need' (problem) tenants, Mr Pert.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by steaming View Post
                  It should be mandatory for these people pontificating on the PRS to work for at least six months dealing face to face, hands on, with the social tenants he’s wringing his hands over. Be on the premises dealing with smashed furniture, doors, holes in walls, good accommodation destroyed, his social tenants off their heads on drugs, alll of that and no rent and that’s only a part of it. Go on try it then start telling private landlords what to do.
                  You appear to have inhabited my work day about a week ago !!! I dealt with a LL having such issues. It is this reason alone that i do not take social benefit tenants, i have seen far too much.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by AlexR View Post
                    Local Authorities do not build houses anymore but seem to rely on the few affordable houses that they can coerce out of the developers.
                    Until quite recently, local authorities weren't allowed to borrow to build residential housing (as a policy), which is why many of them have borrowed to buy/build commercial property instead.

                    Building and letting is traditionally one way that local authorities actually generated revenue - as well as meeting their obligations to provide homes for people.

                    They now have access to government funding for residential homes, but the pandemic has put another obstacle in the way, as funding has been diverted and the cost of building is now considerably higher than is used to be a year or so ago.
                    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Beswick View Post

                      Yes, properties sold under the RTB scheme should have been replaced with others built, or bought, to replace them, but I don't think RTB is a bad thing in itself. It has given hardworking people the security of owning their own property, when they wouldn't have otherwise had a chance to.
                      I have been against RTB from the get go and see nothing in my daily working life dealing with the inhabitants of social housing that has changed my mind, i see social housing tenants scrabbling around the bottom of the housing pool for fewer and fewer houses that they can move too, they want to move because their current dwelling suffers either ASB or neighbors who are so off their heads on all manner of substances that they are a real mental health issue for all around them, they cannot move because the only other properties the housing associations have are the ones that no one wants to buy under the RTB scheme...... What does that tell you about them ? The easy answer is that no one wants to live in them or the area they sit in so are not worth purchasing, its a akin to those fish living in an African water hole, after months of no rain the water slowly evaporates and the fish remaining are flapping around fighting for the dwindling resource.

                      I can see the initial idea being laudable, but without the building of replacements it should have been stopped decades ago. It does not help those who cannot afford to buy..... the exact same people that social housing was meant to assist !!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Beswick View Post
                        Do you have any statistics to back this up, especially the 'quickly' part ?
                        No - but there was a case in our area about 2 years ago where a house was sold under RTB and was tenanted about a week later. I assumed from this case that whatever rules were in existence were not being enforced. Perhaps this was a 'one off'.

                        My comment was made tongue in cheek and I realise that there are many people benefitting from RTB - but why allow a valuable resource to be sold off cheaply when the Local Authorities need every property?

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I think RTB was a huge mistake - why should anyone be entitled to a huge discount on a property just because they have lived in it (paying low rent) for a long time? The fact that these properties have not been replaced is part of the reason social housing is in such short supply now.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            I wish property had been treated as more like a utility than a means to speculate on. People talk about housing shortages, but that can't be true because otherwise there would be much more homeless.

                            The problem is the composition of housing and how it has been treated by government over the decades, further worsened by easy money, miras, RTB, government funded immigration and supporting of social rents that keeps rents in PRS high.

                            We need to learn from Germany. Stop relying on rentier forms of wealth creation (which is actually at best a net 0 wealth creation for the country), and focus capital on investing in projects that actually boost productivity for this nation. Instead we have resorted to playing a game of musical chairs and when the music stops, all you are left with is a basket case of an economy.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by leasee123 View Post
                              I wish property had been treated as more like a utility than a means to speculate on. People talk about housing shortages, but that can't be true because otherwise there would be much more homeless.
                              The reason homelessness is not a bigger issue is because children are having to live with their parents until they are in their thirties.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X