Registering landlords

Every landlord renting out a property must register and get a licence.

To protect tenants apparently.

This could make it easier for the Inland Revenue to identify tax evaders.

That\’s what it\’s about.

Sigh. At the same time that everyone is screaming about the need for more affordable rental housing they\’re going to make it more expensive.

8 thoughts on “Registering landlords”

  1. Like house prices and the economy, Labour only propose action once the lasting damage is done. Allow unregulated landlordism, with thousands of amateur investors looking for an easy buck through a leveraged buyout of a young couples income, the most tennant unfriendly laws of almost any major Western nation (ask for repairs and you’re on the streets!) and thousands of poorly built, shoebox clone apartments to feed the frenzy – many of which will become slums of the future. Naturally, the wellbeing of the people who suffer will remain second to the collection of tax revenue, should any legistlation come to pass.

  2. “(ask for repairs and you’re on the streets!)”

    With the standard short-term fixed-length tenancy agreements, I think not.

    More of an issue is the procedures for handling the mortgage default of the landlord: the tenant often has no notice of the impending eviction.

  3. Johnathan Pearce

    I am setting my watch for when the usual suspects arrive and argue that what is needed is a land value tax….yawn……

  4. Kay Tie,

    “Common problems include broken doors and furniture, rising damp, leaking roofs and sinks, peeling paintwork and inches of grime.”

    “Registered landlords would have to comply with certain standards and those who fail to carry out repairs or who intimidate tenants could be struck off. If that happened, all their tenants would have to move out, although this would not happen overnight, Whitehall sources suggested.”

    So if my tenant complains to the licencing authority that I’ve not fixed the leaking gutter, I will be struck off and the tenant will have to move house.

    Everyone’s a winner!

  5. You don’t own your property, the state does. You are allowed the use of it, that is all.

  6. Well, what would be the result of the Rugg survey if they’d looked at Local Authority, Housing Association and Government (e.g. MOD) property? I suspect they’d find less than 50% met their standards. What about “regulating the social housing sector as well!

    The last time HMG poked their fingers into the private rental sector ( security of tenure and “fair rents” – not) it shut down for the best part of 30 years.


  7. “…everyone is screaming about the need for more affordable rental housing…”

    Hmm, what I notice is “everyone” (well…Vince Cable, Shelter, some other tossers) screaming about the demand for more council-provided social housing.

    As I don’t notice enormous numbers of bedraggled families sleeping under flyovers, I can only assume that “social housing” = housing with a more attractive subsidy than that which the tenant is currently being given to pay a private landlord.

    Not very surprising there’s such demand really, there might be more money left over to buy smack & White Lightning. And not very surprising that our idiot socialist rulers would wish to provide more of those attractive subsidies and cripple the private opposition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *