Labour has confirmed that it will ban letting agent fees to tenants if it wins next May’s election.
Speaking at a Generation Rent fringe meeting at the party political conference, shadow housing minister Emma Reynolds also said a Labour administration would bring in longer tenancies.
Separately, Ed Miliband has announced that a Labour government will set up New Homes Corporations, which would be run by local councils in areas prioritised for development.
The aim would be to increase housebuilding to 200,000 a year by 2020.
Speaking at the party’s conference in Manchester, Miliband said that local councils operating the corporations would work with developers and housing associations, and get government funding.
He said: “Our plan today begins with helping build the homes our country needs.
“So that young families can get a home of their own. Building a future for our young people.”
Comments (10)
Pathetic political gesturing in a desperate attempt to win a few extra votes. Why shouldn't an agent charge for providing a service? In the eyes of the law a tenant is classed as a consumer! To make them a consumer surely they have purchased something? Staff are often sent out to several viewings on occasions before a consumer takes a property – Is that not providing a service to the individual? More often than not we then have to babysit them through the application process – Again using staff time. We spend an hour at the move in with them showing them the workings of the property and getting an inventory signed of which they get a copy to help protect their deposit which I also register for them. I provide as service and they are a consumer – I charge for a service like any other business. Is it right for a mortgage advisor to take an arrangement fee? He found them a willing lender – I found them a willing landlord. UKIP all the way – Dont care if its a protest vote. They cant make a bigger joke of it than the current so called mainstream parties.
Can someone please explain to me why adopting the same system as Scotland, where the Landlord pays all fees including any advertising costs, would lead to the end of civilisation as we know it. It has not done so in Scotland, either before when the Law was correctly applied, or more recently when post Shelter it has been again.
Mind depends on your view on Scotland and civilisation I suppose!!
Making Landlords liable for all fees, or illegal to charge any to tenants, would have two immediate benefits:-
1. Transparency and a lack of double charging
2. Fees would moderate as Landlords w0uld not stand for being ripped off as
tenants are
Where is the problem? It is the Landlord who wants tenants vetted, wants an agreement, wants an inventory etc etc etc so why shouldn't the Landlord pay for the services he wants – or conversely, why should the tenant?
So the tenant doesn't want an inventory to protect the deposit from being unreasonably kept after they have moved out by a landlord? So the tenant doesn't want an agreement to set out their rights? Why do you think that tenants shouldn't pay for people to do checks in order to make sure they are suitable for the property?
Let me ask you this IO; would you, as a landlord, be happy to pay the costs for the half a dozen or so failed referencing attempts before finding a good tenant? Bear in mind that with no tenant fees, and thus nothing to lose, it opens the floodgates for everyone to apply for a rental property, not just good tenants. I've seen this before with an agent locally who advertised no tenant fees – he was inundated with all sorts and spent most of the first month rejecting applicant after applicant – his referencing costs went up by over 800% – he stopped it after the first month as he didn't let any extra property.
Or would you want the agent to carry that cost and put his agency fees up to cover them? either way as a landlord you're going to get the cost thrown into your lap.
I have no problem with Generation Rent as they have more in common with agents than you may think. I do have an issue with Labour's ill informed soundbites which are simply designed to win votes. When in power, they did nothing to regulate lettings yet in opposition keep calling for it. Now Ed, Emma & Stella have burning torches ready for any landlord who turns a profit. No lettings fees and no VAT that goes with them. Higher rents will follow as will the cutting of corners.
In fact MP's from all parties keep calling for statutory regulation. Remind me, who are the only people who can introduce statute? If all these soundbites are made law together with the 'revenge evictions' rules, BTL will become less and less attractive and tenants wont be unfairly treated anymore as there will no properties to rent.
As some have already stated there should be some control over fees but not a complete blanket ban on them. This policy is yet another gimmick from Labour who are once again completely void of any common sense on this issue as they are on many other issues. God help us if this lot are not in charge of the ountries finances come next June.
Why is it that Labour can never get it right!!!! I agree with Robin, there needs to be some control over fees as there are agents out there completely exploiting tenants but removing them completely is just typical Labour pre-election hype!!!
"The aim would be to increase housebuilding to 200,000 a year by 2020.
Speaking at the party’s conference in Manchester, Miliband said that local councils operating the corporations would work with developers and housing associations, and get government funding."
Sounds like another term of Labour's infamous 'tax and spend' policy to me. They left the country on the verge of bankruptcy last time, leaving this government, poorly constituted as it is, with a massive deficit to overcome – will people really vote for them again?
Pure unadulterated socialist claptrap. God save us from Old Labour !! Oh, so that's a MILLION new homes by 2020 is it ?? Don't make me laugh.
I wish they would consider regulation or some kind of limit on fees rather than an outright ban. It seems to be true that tenants are exploited by some agents in some areas of the country but not all, or even most, agents do this. There is nothing wrong with the concept of both sides paying towards their share of the transaction; and making landlords bear all the initial costs just opens the door to rogue tenants who will have nothing to lose.