Around 814,000 private renters in England, equivalent to one in 10, are at risk of losing their homes through Section 21 evictions this winter, according t0 new research from Shelter.
The housing and homelessness charity says this figure increases to an estimated 1.1 million people if you include the children in the household.
To calculate how many people are threatened with losing their home this winter, Shelter looked at the number of private renting adults who have received or been threatened with an eviction notice in the last month (474,000), as well as the number of tenants who are behind on their rent (411,000), which puts their home in danger.
The survey, conducted by YouGov and funded by Nationwide Building Society, showed that rocketing rents and rising evictions have left millions of private renters in England fearing the worst, with 3.5 million tenants (43%) saying they are now worried about becoming homeless due to housing costs.
Shelter argues the severe lack of affordable social homes means that millions of struggling households are trapped trying to pay record high rents and keep a roof over their heads. A situation it says is being made much worse by the government’s nearly four-year freeze on housing benefit, and so the unfreezing of housing benefit in Autumn Statement was welcome news.
Nevertheless, the charity’s latest findings further expose the immense financial strain tenants are under:
+ More than 2 in 5 (43%) private renters who are struggling or behind with their rent – equivalent to 2.4 million adults – say this is due to the increase in payments.
+ More than 3 in 10 (31%) – equivalent to 2.5 million adults – have borrowed money in order to pay their rent.
+ Some 14% – equivalent to 1.1 million adults – have had their rent put up in the last month.
Polly Neate, Chief Executive of Shelter said: “A terrible winter of evictions lies ahead as millions of renters’ grapple with runaway rents and the enduring cost of living crisis. Every day our frontline teams take more calls from families living the nightmare of rent rises they cannot afford. And every day we speak to more families facing the horror of losing their home.
“Shelter will continue to be there so that no-one has to weather this storm alone, but as more people are forced to turn to us, we need the public’s support more than ever.”
Comments (12)
‘Shelter argues the severe lack of affordable social homes means that millions of struggling households are trapped trying to pay record high rents and keep a roof over their heads. A situation it says is being made much worse by the government’s nearly four-year freeze on housing benefit, and so the unfreezing of housing benefit in Autumn Statement was welcome news.’
Well, at least for once they show some small understanding of the biggest part of the problem, Government – closely followed by Shelter for all the things they lobbied for that have caused increased costs to landlords have to be passed on to tenants or properties sold as no longer viable options, decreasing supply and increasing demand meaning higher rents. It’s simple economics and its really not rocket science!
What is very clear is that Shelter continue to skew figures to show landlords they are damned if they do and damned if they don’t whilst lining their own coffers and paying their execs handsomely whilst offering no real solutions to anyone! You have to applaud Shelter for their entrepreneurial spirit, if nothing else!
Who would take on a benefit tenant today, after yesterdays announcement. How many lenders/insurers are going to start to look seriously at new and existing BTL’s housing benefits occupiers?
SHS tenants should not have been in PRS, the system was abused from all quarters and now it comes back to haunt.
It should be of no surprise that low risk landlords will bail from the market and considering the majority of landlords are non-professional, Sec 21 which Shelter and Co wished to be outlawed, will accelerate a mass exodus up to the date it is banned. Time will tell but much misery for many.
Define non-professional.
Usually I like your comments, Woodentop, but you seem to have got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning. First you have a go at “bedroom agents”, presumably they just sell bedrooms? Now it is the turn on non-professional landlords. What are they? Ones who are not incorporated or what exactly? Do tell us the criteria you use to ascertain how professional a landlord is.
I have never had a “benefit tenant” in any of my “professional” properties. They are too expensive for them.
Half the problem people don’t read comments properly and thank you for asking for clarification. I answered on the ‘bedroom post’.
Regarding non-professional landlords. The majority are single property landlords, may have one more, possibly two. PRS is not filled with landlords with large portfolios, those that run it as a business, a good understanding of all aspects of the industry and in for the duration. However there are some rouges in amongst them, so its not a perfect world.
There are good individual landlords who dabble at a bit of extra income (that’ll get a response). But those that are half hearted and object profusely at any bills coming there way. Find me a letting agent who isn’t ahead of me! They are in for when the going is good, easy money coming in, once burned they often bail as quick as they can. Many became landlords through inheritance, so thought they would have a dabble at extra income. A minority are unreasonable, petty and haven’t a clue of their responsibility and as can be seen many a landlord for whatever personal opinion is …. are already leaving the market. Common phrases, ‘no longer worth the money, I’ve had enough of the politics, there’s no protection, I have to jump through hoops to give tenants everything”. The list goes on but the main thing is they are not prepared to weather a storm and we see more and more now selling up.
I still decry your use, incorrectly and as a definite slur, of the phrase bedroom agent.
So do I now class as not a professional landlord since I have sold two of my four properties so am now within that category? There are many large portfolio landlords who are rogues (the correct word, rouge is a colour – are you related to Sandra Bowes-Rennox) and, by your criteria, self-define as non-professional by selling up. What a ******** you are insulting many professional landlords who have had enough landlord bashing from Shelter, Generation Rent, Acorn and the government, without the need for you to chip in.
Professional …….
Belonging to a profession.
Engaged in specified activity as ones main paid occupation, rather than a past time.
Qualified in a profession.
A person competent or skilled in a particular activity.
Conducts themselves with decorum.
Of course you are right and the rest of the world is wrong, unless they agree with you.
I wonder how many of those landlords are using a s21 because they need to sell their property because of high interest rates or the increasing burden or regulation. Also, We use S21 a lot for antisocial behaviour cases so it might look like “no fault” but it really isn’t. The government really needs to do something about a joined up housing policy – they want us to evict for antisocial behaviour but taking that to court on a S8 would be very expensive and likely to fail, even if you could get the terrified neighbour in as a witness; they want to reduce the number of properties owned by landlords but then we get criticised for evicting people so we can sell. And if we don’t evict, we’re selling to other landlords so why are they trying to scare landlords off all the time? Headache.
More scare-monger stories from #Shelter !
Its like saying every shop will be at risk from shoplifting. We know that 98 % of tenancies are ended voluntarily, by the Tenant and all this manipulation of statistics is causing more harm than good to tenants.
Section 21 is not an eviction. 225,000 tenancies end each month, 225,000 tenancies start each month that doesn’t mean 225,000 families are being evicted and to suggest there are is the most appalling and cynical marketing
Well the truth is Shelter (who never sheltered anyone) are a major contributor to the problem.so shooting yourselves in the foot see seems to be their modus operandi.
Whilst I agree that Shelter are a major contributor to the problem, they haven’t shot themselves in the foot at all. It’s exactly what they wanted! It’s blindingly obvious that if you increase costs the end price has to go up, yet Shelter supported S24 with **** and bull reasoning as to why it was a good thing. Heck even the CEO at the time (Campbell Robb) gave completely different reasons for supporting it than their policy man (John Bibby).