From: max_demian@bigfoot.com 
  
 On 04/09/2025 23:14, The Todal wrote: 
 > On 04/09/2025 12:11, Jon Ribbens wrote: 
 >> On 2025-09-04, Davey  wrote: 
 >>> On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 10:50:19 +0100 
 >>> Malcolm Loades  wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>> On 03/09/2025 11:40, The Todal wrote: 
 >>>>> On 02/09/2025 11:08, Davey wrote: 
 >>>>>> On Tue, 2 Sep 2025 07:51:05 +0800 
 >>>>>> J Newman  wrote: 
 >>>>>>> What do you all think about this new act? 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Key Changes 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 1. No more €€€no-fault€€€ evictions 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Section 21 will be abolished. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Every eviction must go through court on a specific legal ground 
 >>>>>>> (arrears, anti-social behaviour, sale, family move-in, 
 >>>>>>> redevelopment, etc.). 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 2. All tenancies become periodic 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Fixed-term ASTs will convert into rolling periodic tenancies. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Tenants can give 2 months€€€ notice to leave at any time. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Landlords lose the certainty of fixed terms (e.g. guaranteed 12€€€18 
 >>>>>>> month contracts). 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 3. Rent increases restricted 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Only once per year, with 2 months€€€ notice. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Tenants can challenge increases at tribunal if above market level. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> €€€Bidding wars€€€ and large upfront rent demands will be banned. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 4. Ombudsman & PRS database 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> All landlords (including non-residents) must register with a new 
 >>>>>>> Private Rented Sector database. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Disputes will go first to a mandatory Ombudsman, which can award 
 >>>>>>> compensation and order remedies. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 5. Property standards & penalties 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Stronger minimum housing standards. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Fines (potentially €€7,000+) for failing to meet requirements. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> 6. Grounds for possession clarified 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> Still possible to evict for arrears, nuisance, sale, family 
 >>>>>>> move-in, or major works. 
 >>>>>>> 
 >>>>>>> BUT everything must be proven in court €€€ adding time, cost, and 
 >>>>>>> risk of delay. 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>> It will result in the death of property rental. Where is the 
 >>>>>> matching Landlords' Rights Act? 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>>> -- 
 >>>>>> Davey. 
 >>>>>> 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> I'm a landlord. I rent a small house to a middle aged couple (with 
 >>>>> her kids) who have paid rent regularly. We use an agent, who takes a 
 >>>>> commission but it's useful that the agent arranges periodic 
 >>>>> inspections, ensures we comply with statutory requirements, 
 >>>>> arranges any urgent repairs through reliable contractors. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> Now I hear that the relationship between the couple has ended and he 
 >>>>> will be moving out. Our agents advise us that we should insist that 
 >>>>> he remains on the tenancy agreement so that we can enforce any 
 >>>>> arrears against him as well as her. 
 >>>>> 
 >>>>> That seems very unfair, to me.€€ If you break up with your partner 
 >>>>> you should be free to move on and rent somewhere else. I wonder 
 >>>>> whether other landlords would disagree? 
 >>>> I'm a landlord and I disagree.€€ You don't say but I assume the 
 >>>> tenancy is a joint tenancy?€€ If I'm correct both incomes will have 
 >>>> been taken into account to check affordability.€€ Does the 'remaining' 
 >>>> partner have the income to support affordability?€€ If so then have a 
 >>>> new tenancy agreement made in just one name.€€ If not then the 
 >>>> 'leaving' partner should remain on the tenancy agreement and accept 
 >>>> joint liability for the payment of rent. 
 >>>> 
 >>>> Malcolm 
 >>> 
 >>> Fine, in the ideal world. 
 >>> But if he won't? 
 >> 
 >> What do you mean by "won't"? If a person won't accept liability for 
 >> a debt they owe then generally speaking they get taken to court and 
 >> a judge says they do owe it and then you send bailiffs after them, 
 >> etc. 
 >> 
 > 
 > I guess if it looks as if she can't afford to keep up payments of rent 
 > it would be premature to try to end the tenancy and if there are arrears 
 > of rent in future there might be a need to terminate the tenancy. 
 > 
 > I don't much like the idea of insisting that he remains liable for the 
 > rent, unless he wants to agree to that out of affection for his former 
 > partner. 
 > 
 > Whenever we are looking for new tenants the managing agents strongly 
 > discourage us from letting to people on benefits or low incomes, because 
 > prosperous tenants are less trouble. I suppose the managing agents are 
 > just doing their job. I would like to help out those on low incomes and 
 > if they do fall behind with the rent it wouldn't be an economic disaster 
 > for me, just rather irritating. 
  
 I do object to the requirement that the tenant should have an income 
 which is three times the rent, as both rent and income (usually) are 
 beyond the tenant's control. 
  
 -- 
 Max Demian 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)