A high-profile property investor who this week launched a petition calling for evictions after two weeks’ rent arrears to be introduced has launched a YouTube video to support his campaign.
In the video, property developer and investor Ranjan Bhattacharya says the current tenant evictions process “is not fit for purposes”, pointing out that under the existing system it can take a landlord up to 14 months to get their property back, which he says is “not good for landlords and not good for tenants”, as eventually it will, in his opinion, “lead to the demise to the private rented sector”.
Bhattacharya wants to see an ‘Australia style’ system introduced in the UK enabling tenants to be evicted for being 14 days in arrears with rent.
He believes that the existing system is not just “unfair to landlords”, but is also an incentive for landlords to only rent their properties to tenants with higher than average income who are likely to care about getting a bad credit rating.
Bhattacharya’s online petition calling for rents to be suspended to protect tenants from the threat of eviction has now reached more than 4,000 signatures, which is almost double yesterday’s count.
However, close to 6,000 more signatures are still needed in order to meet the 10,000 mark, which is the tally required to get a response from the government, while 100,000 signatures are needed for it to be considered for a parliamentary debate.
“Let’s sign the petition and get the issue of tenant evictions on the political agenda and debate it,” he added in the video.
Petition launched to allow evictions after two weeks’ rent arrears
Comments (11)
I added my comment (similar to my comment here) to Mr. Battacharya’s youtube video yesterday and now find it has been deleted. I find this deletion unprofessional and not at all equitable and it calls into question the integrity of the petition commentary controlled by Mr. Battacharya.
You can’t ask for two weeks when tenants are paying monthly contracts.
As I pointed out yesterday you can (pre-Covid) get a 14 day accelerated possession order (if the system would work with you?)
To use the accelerated possession procedure, the following must apply:
The tenant is on an assured shorthold tenancy in England or Wales
The tenant moved into the property after 15th January 1989
You must have given the tenants at least 2 months’ notice under section 21 of the Housing Act and they have not left by the date specified
If you took a money deposit, you must have put it in a deposit protection scheme
You are not claiming rent arrears
The current system is frustrating as it takes too long, but the chances of 14 day eviction for arrears ….. Fat chance. There are many valid, excusable reasons why a tenant may accrue arrears and in the main are worked out. Rogue tenants is another subject and 14 days isn’t going to stop them.
Misleading to say it takes 14 months to evict a tenant …. what have you been doing!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Our last court eviction, 2 months notice, 3 weeks court order with no contest by tenants. The longest we have ever had was 8 months when a rogue tenant and Shelter tried all the tricks to delay with landlords solicitors only pursuing Sec 8 and landlord won in the end. If they hadn’t been involved it would have been the usual 3 months from Sec 21 Notice served. Everytime I hear of landlords trying to evict on grounds on arrears and it goes on and on …. they never issued a Section 21 Notice to run in tandem, head in the sand with “I want my money owed”. Thats OK but they never get it if the tenant hasn’t got it, so why drag it out month after month and loose much, much more?
Time that a central data base of tenants should be available for referencing and a criminal offence to provide false statements on an application …. those rogue tenants just move around to another landlord who doesn’t do the checks. No Government wants a register or speedy process … they have to house them.
How many landlords know that Universal Credit are paying (drip feeding) housing benefit arrears to landlords?
Quote: “We can’t allow these kinds of rules, it will make renting less risky for landlords, encouraging more landlords into the business of providing tenants with accommodation, forcing down rents. My properties are already cheap, so it will force me to improve the standard of accommodation just to attract tenants. We all need to stand together as professional landlords to stop these so-called “landlord-friendly laws” from encourging amateur landlords into the market, driving down rents and increasing tenant choice. Especially in light of the pandemic.” – anonymous labour MP
…This is 100% fake news, just for laughs. sorry.
I haven’t watched the video, but whilst I agree the current system is heavily weighed against the Landlord, I think two weeks is too short. One month/6 weeks is better, or even stick with the two months with a much shorter and easier process to regain possession.
Landlords are aware that there can be circumstances beyond the tenants control which may lead to rent being late occasionally, and most are willing to work with Tenants on this.
Bad timing all round, and too hard-line.
I’m embarrassed to be a landlord and a professional when I read some of the comments above.
I asked Ranjan on the Property Tribes thread who he consulted before starting the petition, as he said in the video that he wanted the “whole industry to pull together and get behind the campaign”.
On that basis, I believe it would have been a good idea to consult with industry stake-holders, landlord associations, communities, and key property commentators/influencers to find out 1. if they agreed with what he was doing and 2. to garner their support beforehand.
He replied that he had only consulted with his following of landlords.
It is clear from comments on social media that this petition as caused extreme commentary “for” and “against” what is being proposed.
A united front across the industry would have been more effective in my opinion, not only to give the campaign credentials, but also to help spread the word and keep the momentum up.This divided opinion will only weaken the campaign and landlord detractors already have enough ammunition imho.
The people “for” it will supply ammo to the likes of Shelter, Generation Rent and tenant action groups/unions, for being callous and uncaring during a pandemic, and the people who do not agree will not sign it, and that will affect the impact it achieves.
My opinion is that the timing is very unfortunate – talking about evicting people during a pandemic/when furlough ending/Christmas on the horizon.
I also don’t agree with the 14 days. Being a landlord is a business and landlords should operate with a cash buffer to be able to withstand any voids or rent arrears, the same as if a customer does not pay a business or is a late payer.
There are many, many instances of people going in to rent arrears and being able to get back on track within a short time period.
It can also take 6 to 8 weeks to get set up UC as it is paid in arrears, so this approach does not take that into account.
Sustaining tenancies should be the approach during a pandemic imho.
I DO agree that reform of possession definitely needs to be on the political agenda, but only when this Covid19 pandemic has been contained, and in consultation with industry stake-holders, landlord associations, and other relevant parties who can work together to come up with an equitable and sustainable fix of the problem.
Finally- via solicitor Giles Peaker – English landlords always could (save for the coronavirus extended notice periods) serve a 14 day notice on *any rent arrears at all* – grounds 10 and 11.
I fully agree with this initiative, why is there always an assumption that it is okay for a landlord to take a hit on their income when someone stops paying rent. In what other business model does the customer just keep receiving the service after they stop paying for it. I fully acknowledge that there needs to be a safety net for those who are in danger of becoming homeless but why should landlords be responsible for this. Many landlords are decent and caring but also need their rental income to live.
I use to think this Ranjin was ok. But i think the timing is just a bit wrong for this type of campaign just before sh** is about to hit the fan at end of month with furlough etc.
I said the same yesterday. This is exactly the image that landlords shouldn’t be projecting. It’s massively unhelpful for the PRS.
A campaign for two week evictions on the run up to Christmas? Really.
Nonsense
Nonesense to be humane and sympathetic?