Being a landlord isn’t inherently unethical, says Glenn Nickols, founder of the online tenants’ community, The Tenants’ Voice.
Because if it were then all those local authorities and housing associations would be inherently unethical, wouldn’t they?
Clearly there are some terrible landlords, but there are plenty of existing laws to deal with them. Always baffled me that councils with many of these bad landlords (and tend to be Labour councils) don’t prosecute more for insanitary conditions/overcrowding.
And let the rest of the “good” landlords get on with providing a useful service.
But, but, they are local authorities and housing associations. They are therefore good and ethical. By definition.
Being a tenant is not inherently unethical, either, though the scum who ripped the radiators off the walls and then did a runner, owing three months’ rent, from the house owned by a friend’s wife certainly were.
Of course I have come across some people, befuddled by the ideas of 19th Century writer Henry George, who regard landlords as inherently suspect for charging rents – partly allied to land values – at all.
But landlords are capitalists. They’ve used their savings to buy something that will, if they are lucky, give them a return on their investment instead of splurging it on a booze cruise and a 40″ TV. Why has Arnald not yet said that they are intrinsically evil?
Providing folk with somewhere to live is a service to them and the community as whole whether it is done by a private individual like Gerald Grosvenor or by the local council (directly or indirectly) or by a charity like Peabody.
Local authorities and housing associations can be some of the worst landlords you can have. Crap repairs, overcharging for work, putting aweful neighbours next to you…….
There can;t be anythingh ethically wrong with providing a service, just in the way you do it.
@TimothyA, the underlying argument is that making a profit is always intrinsically evil. You should run your affairs such that all the benefit you ever generate ends up as consumer surplus. Or better still, make a loss. The Graun have, to the credit of their leftie credentials, been leading by example for many years.
As to the “ethics” of local councils–these being the same crew who charge you a fortune (under threat of violence) to live in a home that you have already bought and paid for?. At least bad landlords do provide a roof over your head of some sort.
From the article: “[Shelter] wants landlords to offer renters more stability through five-year contracts, where any rent increases are laid out clearly and linked to inflation, but allow renters to give two months’ notice”
Yeah…
There can;t be anythingh ethically wrong with providing a service
I know! But they still went on and on about how assassination was ‘morally wrong’ 🙂
As JamesV said, it’s not the service that they object to, it’s making a profit out of it. Which is capitalism, and therefore clearly wrong.
“…wants landlords to offer renters more stability through five-year contracts…”
I am sure that would be perfectly do-able.
Naturally you’d pay a hefty premium over the base rent, in order to mitigate the various risks the landlord is accepting on your behalf.
What do you mean that isn’t how you’d expected it would work?