Landlords have come under renewed criticism for reduced mobility among younger people and a lack of housing affordability.
Two separate reports have blamed the rental market for issues in the housing sector.
A report by the Resolution Foundation, based on ONS data, found that young people are moving jobs and to new areas less than they were 20 years ago.
Its analysis of official labour market statistics found that just 18,000 young people started a new job in a different area and moved home last year, compared with 30,000 in 1997.
The report acknowledges that local job availability has improved and the gap between wages among different local authorities has narrowed, but said young private renters are only one-third as likely to switch jobs and homes as they were 20 years ago
This was blamed on rental growth outstripping earnings in 165 out of 324 English local authorities.
Meanwhile, the Affordable Housing Commission (AHC), set up to examine how best to define and measure housing affordability, has proposed a new definition in its interim report based on when rents or purchase costs exceed a third of household income.
Using this measure, the AHC found there are 4.8m households with affordability issues, equivalent to a fifth of all households.
This number has increased by more than 0.5m households since 2010, with the largest rise in the private rented sector, the AHC report says.
The 4.8m figure consists of 2.9m struggling renters, 1m low income older households and 0.9m struggling home owners.
A full report on a new definition will be published in early 2020.
Landlords have hit back at the findings of both publications, claiming the issues of mobility and housing would be helped if the buy-to-let sector wasn’t under attack from tax and regulatory changes and if more homes were built.
David Smith, policy director for the Residential Landlords Association, said: “The biggest threat to rent levels are the policies being pursued by the Government which are choking off the supply of homes for private rent as demand is increasing.
“We warned ministers that this would happen but they have not listened.
“Instead of attacking the private rented sector we need pro-growth policies that recognise the need for more homes of a good standard and at an affordable rent.
“Making renting less attractive for landlords will not make a substantial difference to the availability of property. We must focus on building more homes to address this.”
Comments (20)
The only good thing to come out of the destruction of the PRS is that once all private LLs have exited they’ll have nobody to blame but themselves and the look on their face will be priceless!!
Unemployment rate in 1997 versus 2018? Almost double. 1997 mobility necessitated by lack of choice.
Ability to work from home in 1997 versus 2018? No need to move when you only visit the office occasionally.
If I blame Landlords for everything can I also apply for charitable status?
I’ve been called a think-tanker.
Of course it’s all landlords fault. Nothing to do with the fact that the population is 10 million more than in 1997.
This is an incredibly biased report – the one suggesting the private sector impedes job mobility. I have been waiting for an acknowledgement from business and other quarters about the essential role the PRS plays in enabling job mobility. Without it, people would have to stay in hotels or tents long-term. Instead, the opposite is suggested. It is as though the remit is: ‘write a report about whatever you like, but make sure that the conclusion is that private landlords are to blame.’
They need to look back (Corbyns back to the future) to the late 1970’s early 1980’s when the Rent Act 1977 was in force. There was no mobility in housing as protected statutory tenancies had tenants that stayed for life and no new rentals as Landlords could not obtain market rents and lost tenure to the tenant and their successors. Rents were set by very suspect rent officers who based the rent on the assumption of no lack of supply or demand – a total falsehood. This is where Corbyn now wants to head. At least in those days you had council housing; which has now been disposed of!. The only way people could find anywhere to live was if their employer took a short term furnished property which was outside the Rent Act 1977 or as someone elses lodger with zero rights. This almost totally prevented mobility of labour and ensured other part of the country were significantly poorer than London due to lack of mobility. Mind you the current crop of so called experts often have no idea of what they are talking about and suffer myopia as they have a fixed focus or trashing landlords.
Landlords will no doubt be blamed for Mrs May’s situation, cost in the rise of fuel, cause of the rise in taxes and the fact is it is raining where I am! The world is full of gullible fools prepared to accept whatever they are told or believe what is written in the papers or moreover believe what they are fed without looking at the facts.
Next it will be landlord’s fault that people are not buying diesel cars!
Where do they get the folk that do these surveys?
It’s absolutely clear to anyone with half a brain cell between their ears that the issue is the lack of housing coming into circulation. If successive governments had done as they said they were going to do and had built as many properties as promised the problem would be much less; instead we get crazy policies like selling off housing association stock and tax-payers subsidising buyers!
STOP BLAMING LANDLORDS WITHOUT WHO THIS COUNTRY WOJLD BE IN A MUCH WORSE STATE!
Well said.
The failure of successive governments to build houses is the major defining factor in creating affordability. Without radical planning reform that is unlikely to improve as despite everyone one subscribing to the idea of more affordable housing tgey don’t want it in their back yards.
Someone also needs to explain to renters that whist they struggle to pay rent that is not tax deductible I’m sitting on a few million pounds of tax free gain for doing absolutely nothing other winning a post code location lottery.
Time for a rethink on property taxation by moving some of the burden to sellers taxes to replace stamp duty etc
Whatever the knock on effect it would seem fairer push the tax burden on to those who have made gains rather than those trying to put a roof over their heads.
In the meantime however Landlords should not be allowed to rent anyone who works within a 50 mile radius and where there is an efficient transport system. That would force selfish tenants into buying diesel cars and pay low emission zone taxes. This would boost the motor car industry and tax revenue whilst helping tenants to fall behind with their rent payments and the landlords with their financing. The evicted tenants could then enter the housing benefit system so that the landlords rent and mortgage is effectively paid by the government.
i think my lack of understanding proves I have ministerial qualities!
How many more want to jump on the band wagon and blame the BTL landlord for everything.
Policy advisors are hell bend on destroying the BTL rental sector and won’t be happy until it disappears.
Never mind the amount that BTL as pumped into the economy.
The increased homeless the temp accommodate costs.
This country is being run by lefties. Who will stand up for the BTL certainly not the current government’s who are implementing its distruction.
Yet they can afford £1k iPhones, avocados and £5 lattes. Yeh, definitely landlords at fault here.
And thats exactly the problem, the youth of today always blame someone else. Those that knuckle down seem to be able to move home or even buy somewhere.
‘The youth of today’, that old chestnust aye? I’m sorry but saving up £20/30k isn’t simply a case of ‘knuckling down’. The population has increased by 10 million in the space of 20 years, you’re telling me it’s just a case of people not knuckling down? Mortgages are harder to get, there is a shorter supply and more people trying to buy.
Don’t sit their like the stereotypical old ******** giving it the ‘youth of today’ ********. Of course it’s not any landlords fault for people under 25 not being able to buy as easy as it was back in the day, but to blame it simply on not ‘knuckling down is ridiculous. I’ve been saving on my own for 2 years now and only have £10,000 saved up, it’s gonna take me another year or so to save enough and even then i might not get a mortgage. Was it that difficult for you back in your day? No i thought not.
I dont disagree that saving for a deposit is much harder now that a few years ago, however we live in a “want it now” situation for many people and saving hard/making sacrifices for 2-4 years is something they are not prepared to do.
As an example through friends i met a young couple who are renting and struggling to save a deposit. I asked was there any possibility of them moving back to one of their parents for a year or 2 so that could save easier. They answered that although both sets of parents had offered this, they didnt want to as they loved having their independence.
I completely understand their point of view, but they werent prepared to make the sacrifice for long term benefit.
PAT123 yes it was! when I made my first purchase there was a mortgage famine and the only place I could buy was 50 miles from where I worked. I was 28 and had been saving for years (since 16) to buy my first home. I used to get into the office and because my shirts had frayed cuffs I used to trim them with sissors so they looked respectable and that was as a newly qualified Surveyor. I have a 1hr 30 drive into work and another going home each night. My mortgage rate was 15.25% and I had a mortgage at the max at the time of 3.5 x income. I slept on a lilo as I could not afford a bed and had furniture others were throwing out. OK 3.5x’s sounds good but at 15.25% interest it was probably not much different from today. I get it it is tough but it always was but I guess there were easier periods from time to time. I would not eat out but lived during to day on a small snack from a Greggs type place. So yes to get on the property ladder I had to move a long way away and commute and then moved nearer London as my wages increased and as my equity in my home improved. I never purchased anything on HP as I was brought up with the theory you only bought that which you could afford. I know times are different and expactations are much higher. However it does rub a bit when you read of the rubbish comments about baby-boomers. The fact is that the political parties have split society putting young against old etc. I agree that there is now a wider gap between rich and poor which is not good for the country or society. Hard left and hard right are not good but don’t think everyone had it easy and handed on a plate – it is not the case. I can’t imaginge what it was like for my parents who went through the 2nd world war and lost everything to bombing and then fighting in a foreign country. I heard some of the stories but my father would not discuss the war despite it being not many years earlier. Yes you proabbly think I am preaching but the above is true and yes now I am comfortable and at retirement age. And yes I have earnt it.
Oh dear a sweet little snow flake does not like the truth.
And the average uk income to houseprice ratio of 5.0x in 2002 to almost 8x in 2018 has nothing to do with it?
Can’t look at it in isolation interest rates have a significant impact around 1980 house prices were about 4-5 x salary but interest rates were at 15.25%. So much comparison nonsense and Trump style statistics giving fake results. Everyone has their own angle we are past the days of honesty and well into fake news and gross manipulation. Government policy also has a significant impact and when things go wrong they ALWAYS try to lay the blame at some one elses feet. Take the dreadful events at Grenfel Tower the fact is Government made the Building Regulations that allowed wrong materials to be used; under the 1966 Building Regulations you had Protected Areas (no large areas of flamable materials allowed) to the exterior of buildings which would have prevented the spread of fire up the outside of this type of building.
I’ve always been amused by the whole Avacado thing. They are not expensive at all.
The whole idea of Avacado being expensive was from one time in Australia when there was a shortage and prices increased considerably.
Its also not the younger generation buying iPhones, they generally prefer a cheaper Android.
Basically you are continuing a stereotype.
You just haven’t got this Landlord thing!! Landlords are responsible for every ill in our society or that befalls it. Including recessions, the credit crunch, floods, pestilence and plagues of locusts.