
Could Angela Rayner's squeeze on landlords hurt the very people it's supposed to help?
On the face of it, Angela Rayner's Renters' Rights Bill has some benefits – not least that Section 21 no-fault eviction notices will be scrapped, giving tenants more security.
But experts are now warning that, as part of Labour's reforms currently making their way through parliament, landlords would be prevented from re-listing their properties as rentals for a year if they try – and fail – to sell up. Which, therefore, also means they'll have to forgo rent for a year.
Failed sales are not unusual – and with the latest Rightmove stats on the housing market, things are looking especially bleak for homeowners in London and the South East. If they are forced to hold onto their property under these new provisions, not only will they as landlords be out of pocket, we'll end up with even more empty properties gathering dust.
Right away, you can see the problem: Britain already has too many of those and this may lead to an even bigger shortage of housing during what the National Rental Landlords Association (NRLA) describes as 'an unprecedented supply and demand crisis'.
Indeed, the organisation puts the number of empty properties in the rental sector at roughly half a million in England alone, using data from the government's English Housing Survey.
'We are concerned that the government does not recognise the risk that the number of empty homes in the private rented sector may substantially increase if this proposal passes into law,' says Meera Chindooroy, the trade body's deputy director of campaigns, policy and public affairs.
So, has the government lost the plot? Not quite. I can see the method in Rayner's apparent madness. Let me explain…
The problem with the private rental market is that the balance between tenant and landlord has been out of whack for too long. The current system, which allows for tenants to be booted out with a couple months' notice at the end of a year's tenancy, can leave them in a horrible jam if the owner decides that it's time to book a quick profit when the property market gets hot.
Rayner's policy aim with the bill is to create a situation where this doesn't happen because most landlords will be professional – in it for the long haul, rather than hobbyists who buy themselves a flat or two to fatten up their pensions.
The re-listing ban is an explicit attempt to make landlords think very carefully before putting their properties on the market. It makes that option a risky move for them.
Other provisions included in the Bill that the NRLA describes as 'the biggest change to renting in over 30 years' include a protected 12 months at the start of a tenancy, where a landlord will be barred from evicting a tenant for the purposes of selling.
As also mentioned, there will be the abolition of Section 21 notices, better known as 'no-fault' evictions. A national database for the private rented sector will be created, and there will be an ombudsman to handle disputes. Landlords will no longer be able to discriminate against families or benefit recipients – nor will they be able to create bidding wars.
Some of these policies were first mooted by Michael Gove, when housing was part of his portfolio. And while the current chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced a 5 per cent 'second home' stamp duty surcharge, the drive to professionalise the sector began with former Tory chancellor George Osborne.
He restricted the tax relief residential landlords could claim on mortgage interest payments to the basic rate of 20 per cent. These measures ramped up costs for the small fry and many left the market as a result.
As you can see, there has been a degree of cross-party consensus on the need for reforms aimed at improving life for private sector tenants, who are often left feeling as if they're lost in a swamp with no map and no mobile phone reception.
As a package, the reforms should, in theory, improve life for them. If an owner is in it for the long term, the renter can make a home of their tenancy, as often happens on the continent. Needless to say, a long term tenant could also improve life for the landlord, because they will likely be more inclined to look after the place (if you've ever been house-hunting, the ex-rentals stand out – and not in a good way).
However, at this point I feel obliged to trot out one of those old sayings: 'The road to hell is paved with good intentions.' You don't help renters if you end up with fewer properties on the market. Constricting supply will inevitably add rocket fuel to rental prices, which are already too high.
According to the quarterly tracker by Rightmove, the average advertised rent of homes outside of London rose to a record £1,349 in the first three months of the year. London, meanwhile, recorded its 14th consecutive record, with monthly rents increasing to £2,698.
It is true that Rightmove noted a (welcome) increase in supply, but that doesn't mean there isn't still a shortage overall.
There are some good things in Rayner's reform package. But facts are facts and markets are markets – and if she squeezes landlords too hard, she will hurt the market and end up squeezing tenants – the last thing anyone wants, least of all her.
Banning rents for a year after a failed attempt to sell is a measure that demands a rethink, however well-intentioned.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Air India slammed for ‘repeated violations' and three officials sacked over ‘systemic failures' in wake of horror crash
AIR India has been slammed for "repeated violations" with three officials sacked over "systemic failures" following the tragic crash. Cracks within the airline have started to show after flight AI171 smashed into a doctors' hostel and exploded into a huge fireball last week. 7 7 All passengers and crew - except for one miracle survivor - died in the horror accident on June 12 which killed at least 270 people. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) urged Air India to remove three company executives from crew scheduling roles, it has been revealed. The three officials include a divisional vice president, a chief manager of crew scheduling and one planning executive. Their sacking relates to lapses linked to flights from Bengaluru to London on May 16 and May 17 that exceeded the stipulated pilot flight time limit of 10 hours. The order on Friday cited "systemic failures in scheduling protocol and oversights" and criticised the lack of strict disciplinary measures against the officials. Despite the latest action by the aviation authority against Air India being unrelated to this month's tragic crash, it has laid bare the significant issues with the airline. On Thursday, it was also brought to light that authorities previously warned the airline for breaching safety rules after three of its Airbus planes flew despite being overdue for checks on emergency equipment of escape slides. The latest order by assistant director of operations at the DGCA, Himanshu Srivastava, said: "Of particular concern is the absence of strict disciplinary measures against key officials directly responsible." Air India said it has implemented the DGCA order and in the interim, the company's chief operations officer will provide direct oversight to the Integrated Operations Control Centre. The airline added: "Air India is committed to ensuring that there is total adherence to safety protocols and standard practices." Shock moment passenger threatens to CRASH Air India plane mid-flight in furious row just days after Ahmedabad disaster The DGCA stated in its order that Air India had voluntarily disclosed the violations. Investigators are continuing their probe into what caused the airline's London-bound plane to plunge to the ground moments after takeoff in Ahmedabad. Air India said on Thursday that the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner plane was "well-maintained" and that the pilots were accomplished flyers. The airline's chief N Chandrasekaran also hit back at 'speculation' on what caused the London-bound flight to crash a minute after take-off. And it was revealed that the black box recovered from the flight could be sent to the US for analysis after being rescued from a blazing 1,000 degree inferno. The Indian government has the final say on who probes the device, but reports say the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in Washington, D.C. is being considered for the analysis. A team of Indian investigators is expected to accompany the device to ensure all protocols are followed during the advanced data extraction. Investigators warned on Tuesday that the recovered black boxes may have melted due to the intense heat of the raging explosion. 7 7 7 7 Planes usually carry two black boxes, which are small but tough electronic flight data recorders. One records flight data, such as altitude and speed, whilst the other monitors the cockpit sound. The Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Flight Data Recorder (FDR), were recovered 28 hours after the horror crash. Despite the name, these devices are painted bright orange for visibility amid debris. Investigators believe the CVR on this 2014-delivered aircraft likely stored only two hours of cockpit audio. The jet predates a 2021 rule which enforced 25-hour recordings on all planes. But the FDR is capable of logging thousands of flight parameters for over 25 hours, including altitude, airspeed, and control inputs. The aircraft had climbed less than 600 feet before its ascent stalled, according to the Ministry of Civil Aviation. A distress signal was sent but was met with complete radio silence. Moments later, the plane crashed into the BJ Medical College hostel complex near the airport's northeastern boundary. The damaged black box is now seen as a crucial piece of evidence in understanding what led to India's worst air disaster in nearly three decades. Investigators hope the data from the box will shed light on the aircraft's final moments. 52 Brits died on board the flight, but London local Vishwash Kumar Ramesh managed to cheat death when he escaped the blazing inferno following the crash. Theories have swirled over how the sole survivor managed to narrowly escape death when he was sat in seat 11A during the horror smash. Leading theories on Air India Flight AI171 THESE are some of the leading theories explaining the tragic Air India disaster which killed at least 270 people. Emergency power system: A small turbine generator was seen deploying as the Boeing 787 went down, experts said. Footage showed a "protrusion on the belly of the aircraft" with a "little grey dot" beneath it. Commentators say this was a system called Ram Air Turbine (RAT) poking out from the fuselage of the plane. Bird Strikes: A bird strike could have taken out both of the jet's giant General Electric engines. While a bird taking down something the size of a commercial airliner might sound fanciful, there are numerous examples. Wing flap position: Aviation experts have suggested the position of the aircraft's wing flaps could have played a role in the disaster. Video evidence suggests the flaps were either fully retracted or on a very minimal setting, which would have provided very little lift. The flaps provide crucial extra lift at low speeds during take-offs and landings. Pilot error: The state-of-the-art Boeing 787-8 is highly automated, with human pilots making only key decisions - but human error cannot be ruled out. Co-pilot Clive Kundar had more than 3,400 hours of flying experience and made the mayday call but Captain Sumeet Sabharwa at the helm had 11,500 hours - making him one of Air India's most experienced pilots. Heat: Planes get less lift on a hot day due to lower air density, and therefore they need to go faster to get as much lift as on a cooler day. This is particularly important when an airliner is heavy with fuel, passengers and baggage, as the Air India flight was. Technical error: Catastrophic technical or engineering issues have not been ruled out. The jet's complex design mean it could take months for a design or engineering fault to be pinpointed.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Proof UK cares more about asylum seekers than its own citizens? Shock figures show councils are housing up to 10 times more asylum seekers than homeless people
Seventeen councils are accommodating up to 10 times more asylum seekers than homeless people, analysis suggests. The biggest disparity was seemingly in Pendle, a borough inside Reform's newly-gained Lancashire authority. Latest Government data shows 453 asylum seekers are being housed in Pendle. In contrast, only nine homeless households are in temporary accommodation. Critics of Britain's immigration policy have seized upon the figures as proof we are ran by people who 'care more about illegal migrants than its own citizens'. However, officials criticised MailOnline's 'misleading' analysis and argued that they could not control where homeless people choose to live. The full results of our investigation can be viewed in our interactive map, which lays bare the true situation in every council. Home Office data shows 89,000 asylum seekers – the equivalent of a town the size of Stevenage, Hastings or Southport – were being housed across England as of the end of March. By comparison, 128,000 homeless 'households' were in temporary accommodation heading into 2025. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which keeps track of the number of homeless 'households', says their overall estimate equates to around 295,000 people. Because it does not list specific figures for each council, the only way of comparing the two is by posting homeless households against the number of asylum seekers. Ten councils did not publish figures on homeless households, meaning they were excluded from our analysis. In total, more than a third of England's councils currently house asylum seekers at double the rate of homeless households. Behind Pendle came Stockton-on-Tees (797 asylum seekers vs 26 homeless households) and Wyre (375 asylum seekers vs 14 homeless households). Robert Bates, of the Centre for Migration Control thinktank, said: 'Those who were born here and have contributed to the economy have been abandoned, and left on the streets, in favour of undocumented young men towards whom we should have no moral or legal obligation. 'Thousands of British veterans and families are facing real hardship but are denied even a fraction of the generosity extended to asylum seekers. 'Scattering these people across the country places further strain on communities suffering with a dysfunctional housing market, increasing rents and making it harder for young people to own a home. What is an asylum seeker? Asylum is protection given by a country to someone fleeing from persecution in their own country. An asylum seeker is someone who has applied for asylum and is awaiting a decision on whether they will be granted refugee status. An asylum applicant who does not qualify for refugee status may still be granted leave to remain in the UK for humanitarian or other reasons. An asylum seeker whose application is refused at initial decision may appeal the decision through an appeal process and, if successful, may be granted leave to remain. 'Anyone entering the country illegally should be detained and swiftly deported - it is only then that we can hope this madness will end.' While an asylum seeker is waiting to hear the outcome of their claim, the Home Office is legally obligated to provide them housing if they need it. If they are successful they become recognised as refugees – entitled to work and receive full state benefits. From that point on, councils have statutory responsibility to look after housing, if the refugees are unable to. But councils do not provide accommodation to everyone and instead use a priority system, which takes into account children and other vulnerability factors, to decide who gets a home. It means that some refugees may also fall under the homeless category in official statistics. Fuelled by an explosion in small boat crossings, the cost of accommodating asylum seekers has tripled to £4.2million a day. Around 30,000 are currently kept in hotels, where they are usually provided meals along with £8.86 per week. The Chancellor Rachel Reeves promised last week to end the housing of asylum seekers in hotels over the next four years. The handout amount rises to £49.18 per week if no meals are provided. Extra money is also provided to pregnant mothers and young children. As well as getting free accommodation, asylum seekers are also entitled to taxpayer-funded NHS healthcare, prescriptions, dental care and children under 18 are required to go to school, where they may be able to get free meals. Homeless people in temporary accommodation are offered full state benefits such as Universal Credit, and some hostels provide food that is paid through a service charge. Those living in temporary accommodation make up the vast majority of homeless people, with only around 3,900 sleeping rough on any given night, according to the charity Shelter. Critics claim that many homeless people have paid council tax and contributed for years to British tax and society, unlike asylum seekers. Around four in five of those assessed as needing homeless relief of some kind were British nationals, according to the latest data. Some of those left out in the cold are even veterans and ex-service personnel who have fought for the country in Iraq and Afghanistan. Concerns have been raised that they may have to make do with a concrete pillow in a shop doorway, while they look up to see asylum seekers getting a cosy hotel bed on the same street. Life on the streets is often dangerous, with rates of drinking and drug abuse high, leading to high rates of poor mental health and death compared to those who have a bed. Alp Mehmet, of Migration Watch UK, said: 'Over 100,000 people applied for asylum in 2024, including main applicants and their dependants. There will be just as many seeking asylum this year. 'If they're not in hotels, they will have to be housed elsewhere. 'Then there's the 430,000 net migration added to the population last year. 'Well over half a half a million people needing a roof over their heads, roofs that won't be available to British citizens. 'When will the Government see sense and end this madness? Get a grip, Sir Keir!' The public has been expressing their discontentment with the apparent unfairness of the situation for some time. A recent survey by IPSOS found 68 per cent of the public deem the numbers coming to the UK to seek refugee status or asylum too high. And in March when MailOnline visited Coventry, the local authority with the fifth-highest number of supported asylum seekers in Britain, locals expressed their frustration with the process. Louse and Dee said they were living in temporary accommodation and claimed the increasing numbers of asylum seekers in the area was making the housing shortage worse. Louise, 37, said: 'I'm currently homeless. The houses go to the asylum seekers rather than the actual homeless. 'I'm in a shared accommodation and I am technically homeless. 'I think the Government should be looking after their own before helping other people. 'I don't think the city can handle the amount of people coming in.' Dee, 38, said she had to live separately from her husband just to find a bed to sleep in and blasted the Government. 'I think it's ridiculous that asylum seekers can come over here and get housed but my husband, who has paid taxes his whole life, is on the street. 'I'm homeless too, we've had to separate so that one of us can get somewhere to sleep. 'I don't think we can handle the numbers, we can't house the people who are from this city. 'If they come over here and work and pay into the system, fair play to them. I know diverse people who I call my family. But the fact is, we need to help our own.' In Manchester in November 2024, protesters against asylum seekers being housed locally held up signs which said 'House Our Homeless First'. There have been some recent cases of local authorities block-booking entire hotels for homeless people, in the same way the Home Office does for asylum seekers. Last year Milton Keynes council signed a deal to use all 140 rooms of Harben House Hotel for five years, which it will use to house homeless people. A report in August revealed that the council was spending around £20m a year on temporary accommodation mainly in the private rented sector and it needed to find lower cost spaces. In the battle for scarce accommodation, councils have lost out on renting hotels due to Home Office contractors seeking space for asylum seekers outbidding them. Furthermore, many asylum seekers become homeless once they are granted refugee status and have to find their own accommodation. They are given 56 days to move on from asylum accommodation following the issue of their decision, which was extended from 28 days in December, but some campaigners complain it is still not enough time. The No Accommodation Network (Naccom), an umbrella organisation for 140 frontline groups working with asylum seekers, refugees and other migrants across the UK, said homelessness among refugees has doubled in the last year. In data shared with the Guardian in November, it said 1,941 refugees had now found themselves without accommodation – the highest number they had ever dealt with. A Government spokesperson said: 'This analysis is incorrect and misleading as it compares the number of individual asylum seekers with homeless households, which can contain more than one person. 'We've taken immediate action to fix the broken asylum system this Government inherited, by increasing asylum decision making by 52 per cent and removing 30,000 people with no right to be here. We have already made asylum savings of half a billion. 'We are also taking urgent and decisive action to end homelessness, fix the foundations of local Government and drive forward our Plan for Change by providing £1bn for crucial homelessness services this year so councils can support families faster.'


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Supersonic travel inevitable, maker of Concorde successor claims
The return of supersonic travel has become 'inevitable' after Donald Trump lifted a 52-year ban on such flights over US soil, according to the company building a successor to Concorde. Boom Supersonic, which has been developing an updated version of the Anglo-French aircraft for a decade, said the president had provided the final push needed to make the jet a reality. Blake Scholl, Boom's founder, said the lifting of the ban will open up a wider market for supersonic flights and help the sector reach critical mass and financial viability more quickly. Flight times between London and an inland US city such as Chicago could now be cut from 7 hours 20 minutes on a subsonic aircraft to just 4 hours 30 minutes on Boom's Overture jet. Mr Trump signed an executive order lifting the supersonic ban this month after a Boom test flight in January broke the sound barrier without the sonic boom reaching the ground. Mr Scholl said: 'It's just fantastic. I think at this point it makes the return of supersonic passenger flight inevitable.' He said he encountered 'a tremendous amount of excitement' on visiting the White House and Congress a day after announcing that so-called 'boomless cruise' had been achieved. 'It's been talked about in theory for a long time,' he said, 'but once a thing goes from theory to practise all of a sudden it gets people's attention.' A bipartisan bill was introduced in the House of Representatives and Senate, before Mr Trump's intervention rendered the legislative route unnecessary. Speaking about the move, the president expressed frustration with the pace of modern air travel, saying that the industry had 'gone backward' in the past 30 years. Describing Concorde as 'one of the most beautiful pieces of art,' he said the sonic boom was never a huge problem and that companies now had it 'pretty well figured out'. He said: 'The technology changes. So we're making it possible. We have regressed and now we are going to progress.' During its test flights, Boom ensured that sound waves were refracted away from the Earth by breaking the sound barrier at an altitude and speed dictated by atmospheric conditions. Mr Scholl said he expects to see supersonic private jets link American cities as Boom's airliners operate transatlantic routes while taking advantage of the rule change when crossing the US. He said: 'I think other people are going to build this product. It makes the market much larger and the use case much larger.' Canada retains a supersonic ban so a London-Chicago service would have to ignore the shortest route over Newfoundland and fly at Mach 1.7 to the US east coast and then drop its speed to Mach 1.3 to complete the journey. Mr Scholl said Mr Trump's landmark decision, under which the speed ban will be replaced with noise-based standards, should not be viewed as controversial. He said: 'It makes all the sense in the world. If there's no boom, that's not a hard decision.' He said that the 1973 law – introduced to spite Europe and the Soviet Union, which had pressed on with supersonic projects after the US withdrew – had stifled innovation and was 'the worst own goal in regulatory history'. Mr Scholl said the supersonic ban could even be blamed for what he called 'the gradual implosion of Boeing' as talented engineers deserted aerospace for the technology sector and companies such as Facebook, Amazon and Google. He said: 'If you go from the Wright brothers to the introduction of the Boeing 707, every generation of commercial aeroplanes was faster and better. 'But the modern day 787 is really the same product doing the same thing, just more efficient and more refined, but not any better at connecting the planet.'