Letter: Rights of tenants in the private sector
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: As an agency dealing with more than 2,000 private tenants each year, we feel compelled to comment on the Government's plans to encourage institutional investment in the private rented sector. These plans follow on from the 1988 Housing Act, which was designed to encourage people to let property by deregulating rents and reducing tenants' security of tenure - for example, by introducing Assured Shorthold tenancies, by which the landlord has an automatic right to repossess after as little as six months.
One might think that short-term tenancies at high rents would be mostly occupied by well-paid people who value the flexibility such accommodation offers, but this is rarely the case. Eighty-eight per cent of Assured Shorthold tenants who come to us rely on housing benefit. Nationally, 38 per cent of such tenants are single parents.
Large institutional investors have not been attracted to private renting, and the sector is dominated by individual landlords and small companies, often with little knowledge of housing law, for whom profit, or the lack of it, is more important than the rights of the tenant.
The reduced security that now affects many tenants means that they cannot exercise their legal rights without fear of losing their homes. This explains why, despite higher rents and easier legal recovery by landlords, a large proportion of tenants still complain of disrepair, harassment and illegal eviction. If it were the case in any other business that the supplier completely ignored the rights of the consumer, they would face stiff penalties - why should this not be the case with such a basic human need as housing?
If the Government truly intends to improve the image of private renting, it should look again at subsidising the private rented sector, and link any financial gain for landlords with a proper system of redress for tenants whose rights have been breached.
Yours faithfully,
COLIN WILSON
Housing Aid Centre
Manchester City Council
Manchester
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments