Landlord home purchases fall to record low ahead of Labour rent reforms
Landlords were behind 9.6pc of house sales in January, according to a new report by estate agents Hamptons.
It is the first time the proportion has dropped out of double digits since Hamptons' records began in 2009 – beating the previous low of 10.6pc in January 2020.
The data comes as the Government aims to ban so-called no-fault evictions next year as part of its Renters' Rights Bill, which will also make it harder for landlords to increase rents.
There are 39pc fewer homes available for rent than there were in January 2019, with London seeing a decrease of nearly half, Hamptons said.
The capital has also seen the biggest fall in the proportion of homes being bought by landlords, making up 7pc of purchases in January.
But Scotland recorded the lowest total, with 4.6pc of homes bought by landlords.
The Renters' Rights Bill, which is being spearheaded by Angela Rayner, the Housing Secretary, is set to become law by next summer.
It was designed in response to the Conservative government's Renters Reform Bill which did not pass into law before Parliament was dissolved.
Both pieces of legislature sought to ban Section 21 notices – also known as no-fault evictions – which will make it harder for landlords to take their properties back from tenants.
Campaigners previously warned that the 'war on landlords' would cause investors to sell up, reducing the supply of rental homes and pushing up prices for renters.
Over the last five years, rents on newly let homes have jumped by a third, Hamptons said, with an average 26.5pc increase for those renewing contracts.
Aneisha Beveridge, of Hamptons, said: 'The pace of rental growth nationally has likely bottomed out. New purchases by landlords have been depressed by increases in stamp duty rates towards the end of last year and the prospect of tighter regulation in the form of the Renters' Rights Bill.
'While purchases by landlords haven't completely dried up, it's looking like higher stamp duty rates have reduced the share of homes sold to landlords by between 10pc and 20pc.'
Private rents increased by 8.7pc in the 12 months to January 2025, according to the Office for National Statistics, a slight drop from the 9pc increase in the year to December 2024.
Nathan Emerson, chief executive of Propertymark, said: 'It is concerning that more is not being done to make the private rental sector more attractive for current and future landlords.
'The dwindling supply of properties against a backdrop of ever-increasing demand from tenants is making it difficult for aspiring renters to find a home.'
Mr Emerson said: 'This is all in response to the continuous bombardment of costs placed on landlords, including rising taxes and regulations.'
Data from the HM Courts & Tribunals Service showed that evictions were at their highest level since records began in 2009, as landlords rushed to get rid of tenants before the new rules were introduced.
During Labour's first three months in power, 7,781 tenants were evicted. The number of successful no-fault evictions soared 20.3pc in England between 2023 and 2024 to their highest tally since 2017.
Possession claims also jumped in 2024, ahead of the passing of the Renters' Rights Bill, hitting more than 30,000 for the first time.
The Ministry of Housing spokesman said: 'The private rented sector has doubled in size since the early 2000s and our Renters' Rights Bill will support both tenants and good landlords who provide an important and high-quality service. It will set clear, fair standards and give these landlords the confidence and certainty to continue operating.
'This is alongside our major plans to get Britain building again by overhauling the planning system and delivering 1.5 million homes, including the biggest boost in affordable housing in a generation - bringing the dream of home ownership closer to a reality for working people and families across the country.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Is it better to rent or buy as interest rates fall? Readers have their say
Earlier this week we asked whether you thought it was better to rent or buy, following the recent cut to the interest rate. The Bank of England (BoE) lowered the rate last week to 4% from 4.25%, marking its fifth cut in a year, as the UK grapples with persistent inflation and a cooling jobs market. Although previous data from Rightmove (RMV.L) showed a rise in average rent for some properties, research released by Estate agent Hamptons on Monday showed a fall in the average private rent on newly let homes. Shop Top Mortgage Rates A quicker path to financial freedom Personalized rates in minutes Your Path to Homeownership The picture remains mixed, however and many tenants across the UK have seen their rent rise by as much as 3.4%. Read more: Mortgages as low as 3.73% as lenders follow Bank of England rate cut For prospective buyers, the BoE's decision was positive news as lower interest rates have a knock-on effect on lenders' borrowing rates, leading to cheaper mortgage deals. Many homebuyers will be considering the lower property purchase costs and deciding whether now is the right time to switch from renting to buying. Our poll received 581 votes, with a sizeable majority (83%) believing that it was indeed better to buy a property, while only 11% thought renting was the best option and 6% were undecided. Read more: Sterling hits one-month high as UK growth better than expected 8 secluded houses with no near neighbours 10 student homes that will appeal to savvy buyers Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
UK councillor acquitted over 'cut all their throats' speech
By Sam Tobin LONDON (Reuters) -A British councillor was on Friday acquitted of encouraging violent disorder for saying far-right activists should have their throats cut amid riots last year, drawing claims from right-wing politicians of a hypocritical "two-tier" justice system. Ricky Jones made the comments at a counter-protest in London after three girls were murdered in the north English town of Southport and was suspended by the ruling Labour party. Misinformation on social media said the teenager who committed the murders at a Taylor Swift-themed dance event was an Islamist migrant, fuelling days of violent riots including attacks on mosques and hotels housing asylum seekers. Jones, 58, was cleared by a jury following a trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court. He had made the remarks to a crowd gathered near an immigration advice centre in London after reports that far-right supporters were planning a protest. "They are disgusting Nazi fascists ... We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all," he said, running a finger across his throat. Jones gave evidence that he did not intend his words to be taken literally and said his comments referred to far-right stickers with hidden razor blades found on a train. Right-wing politicians and activists said his case was an example of how Britain had an unfair police and justice system, with those who voice concerns about immigration treated differently to those who support liberal or left-wing causes. They contrasted Jones' treatment with that of Lucy Connolly, the wife of a Conservative councillor who was jailed for 31 months for inciting racial hatred for a post urging mass deportation of migrants and the burning of their hotels. Unlike Jones, she had pleaded guilty to the offence. Chris Philp, the opposition Conservative Party's home affairs spokesperson, said on X: "The development of two-tier justice is becoming increasingly alarming." Zia Yusuf, from the populist right-wing Reform UK party which is leading in opinion polls, also compared Jones' acquittal to Connolly's sentence. Prime Minister Keir Starmer was labelled "two-tier Keir" by some opponents last summer after claims some ethnic groups were policed more leniently than others, a suggestion that has been rejected by senior ministers, police chiefs and prosecutors.
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ricky Jones case should not be compared to Lucy Connolly
A jury's decision to clear a suspended Labour councillor of encouraging violent disorder after he called for far-right activists' throats to be cut cannot be compared to the case of Lucy Connolly, lawyers have claimed. Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he described far-right activists as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' in a speech at an anti-racism rally last year, in the wake of the Southport murders. The now-suspended councillor, surrounded by cheering supporters in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 2024, was filmed stating: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' Jurors deliberated for just over half-an-hour and found him not guilty on Friday. This caused Conservative and Reform politicians to brand the decision 'two-tier justice' – with shadow home secretary Chris Philp comparing the case to that of Mrs Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' of asylum seekers and to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks. Former home secretary and Tory leadership candidate Sir James Cleverly also called the jury's decision to clear Ricky Jones 'perverse' in an X post, adding: 'Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system.' Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, told the PA news agency: 'Both (Jones and Connolly) said pretty unpleasant things. 'However, I'm afraid the conflation of the two after that is a problem. It comes from people who've got some sort of political agenda, in my view. 'They were facing completely different allegations and a massive part of those different allegations is the racial element. 'If you look at the Connolly case … her intention is of a racial nature.' Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.' 'She directs everybody to the fact that this was a racial comment,' Mr Stringfellow said. 'She pleads guilty to that intention … she accepted that she had intended to stir racial hatred. 'The Jones case is different because one, he's facing a completely different allegation: he's facing encouraging violent disorder. 'And the difference with him is he's saying: 'That's not what I was intended to do'.' Mr Stringfellow added that, in the case of Connolly, racially aggravated discourse on social media did translate into real-life violence across the country – whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause a violent disorder. 'What she (Connolly) did, what followed her comments about threatening to burn people in hotels, is that that's precisely what then happened – and people were attempting to burn people in hotels.' Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said comparisons between Jones' and Connolly's cases were 'misplaced'. 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal,' he said. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. 'That is not bias or 'two-tier justice' – it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do: separating facts from noise. 'Comparisons with the Lucy Connolly case are misplaced. 'Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty. There was no trial, no cross-examination, no jury. She admitted the specific offence: stirring up racial hatred online. 'Ricky Jones faced a different charge … with a high burden of proof. 'The jury decided the Crown had not met it. 'That does not mean the protest was not passionate or loud – it means there was not enough evidence to prove intent to incite violence. That distinction matters. 'I understand why emotions run high. But flattening two different situations into one misleading narrative does no favours to justice. 'The fact that a black man at a protest can receive a fair trial and be acquitted should be seen not as an injustice, but as proof the system can still get it right.' He added: 'The law is not perfect, but it must rest on evidence – not opinion, pressure, or politics.'
