The reason why platforms like BuyAssociation exist is the huge expansion in property investment by private individuals since the 1988 Housing Act, which ushered in ASTs and Section 21 notice evictions.
Because, to persuade people to risk their money in rental property, Section 21 notices gave landlords the confidence to jump in.
Previous Tory governments had forgotten this, and Labour continues this collective establishment amnesia.
But I wonder if those advocating the immediate removal of Section 21 would be so vocal on this if their only nest egg of £200,000 had recently been invested in a £400,000 two-bedroom flat via a chunky mortgage, for example, and the tenant then stopped paying the rent with the intention of saving money – it happens all too frequently.
Will Labour immediately ban Section 21?
Of course, many tenants do feel insecure when dealing with bad actor landlords and agents, but my key issue with Labour’s plans for banning Section 21 is wanting to make it ‘immediate’, as they did on social media this week, saying it will make renting ‘fairer’.
Housing minister Matthew Pennycook should know this is not realistic.
Matthew Pennycook was at the debate in parliament on April 24th when then Tory housing minister, Jacob Young, made it clear an ‘immediate’ ban was not possible.
He said, after considering a Pennycook amendment to the then Renters (Reform) Bill suggesting an immediate ban, that: “This would mean that there would be no transition period leaving no time at all for landlords, letting agents, tenant groups or local authorities to adjust to the new system”.
He also pointed out that there would not be enough time to conclude the necessary secondary legislation leaving the statute book “a confusing mess”.
And importantly, without having the necessary improved Section 8 eviction notice system in place, “it would prevent landlords from being able to regain possession of their properties even where they had a legitimate reason to do so”, he said.
Using words that Pennycook may want to reconsider now he’s in power, Young said that while it may “sound good” to abolish Section 21 immediately, it would cause “chaos in the sector”.
What is the practicality of banning Section 21?
The other issue I have with those who want to get rid of Section 21 is that their argument is on shaky practical ground.
While Shelter, Generation Rent and the many other tenant champion groups are right to say that property quality in the private rental sector is poor, and that some landlords would rather eject a complaining tenant than improve their home, by banning Section 21 they don’t see that good landlords facing ‘bad actor’ tenants will instead switch to other means of eviction.
Bad tenants who wreck homes and opt not to pay the rent must go eventually – leaving them in situ is not an option.
Also, any ban is likely to be delayed for some time for another reason. It is taking approximately a year to evict tenants as the broken court system grinds on, so thousands of landlords remain in limbo awaiting permission to repossess via a Section 21; hardly an ‘immediate ban’.
What politicians don’t grasp – or want to I assume – is that the private rented sector is in the main owned and operated by reasonable people and that it’s the small minority of sociopaths who see themselves as outside the law that local authorities should be focussing on.
Removing the certainty that Section 21 evictions provide from every landlord regardless of their previous good record is non-sensical and feels like punishing the many for the crimes of the few.
Nigel Lewis is an award-winning journalist and editor who has covered the property sector for 25 years including work on national newspapers, magazines and online news and features including spells at The Daily Mail as well as Channel 4 and, more recently, leading specialist titles covering property investment, buy-to-let and the agency sector.
