A fairer deal for renters

The problem is that Shared Ownership Properties are purposely being held back. 99% of the Estate Agents who are being asked to market the properties are purposely ignoring applicants who can afford the rents and combined mortgages even if they are semi retired and have the deposits because they are in their 50's and are forcing older age groups into Homelessness and dodgy private sector properties. There is alot of age discrimination and the only way the Local Authorities can overcome this is to stop involving Private Landlords in the Allocations and Selection of Applicants of Shared Ownership Homes. It is obvious what is happening. The same Estate Agents also say you have to be a First Time Buyer which is not true. What are Homes For Londoners doing to ensure peope aged 40-50-60 can have their own Shared Ownerhip Homes? Nothing! And that includes ensuring they are not eligible for Social Housing. Absolutely disgraceful treatment by the Local Authorities and Social Housing Landlords who have allowed Private High Street and similar Estate Agents to have the lions share of the market. Local Authorities and Social Housing Landlords need to take control of Housing back!

I know that one of the biggest issues younger people face is the prospect of renting by yourself, 
people I know easily pay £700 up for a room in a shared house,
while I know others who get to pay a similar amount for a 2 bedroom flat just because they're in a relationship and can pool resources.

I know it's not as clean cut as this, and it's a benefit of a relationship or even knowing someone well, it seems like there isn't any feesible way of living well in the city unless you cramp yourself in a room and share ameneties with strangers.

Put rent control in place and bring down prices of homes for people to buy based on their salaries. Subsidise the cost of properties rather than make people take out a help to buy equity loan on a property they can’t afford on the open market. Everyone should have a right to make their own home and not be forced to rent because they are priced out of the market. Property in London is turning into investor only. Their lives are not dependent on them living and working in London. Helping tenants get out of rental sector completely means that landlords have less power to abuse tenants beucase they can’t just replace them. Adding in rent control means than landlords can’t just evict tenants hike up the prices for other potential tenants.

The wages can’t compete with the rental increases and property prices which pushes middle income people on a downward tragetory towards poverty. With renting being the only option for most more protection needs to be given to tenants.

Open ended tenancies is a first step. Other things that need to be addressed are not only the high prices but also the quality of the properties.
Properties should have a minimum of square feet per person. How often I have seen rooms where you have a shower unit within the room or a kitchenette where you can stretch your arm and cook from your bed because there is no space. It's awful . How landlords can get away with these sort of things.

Stating the obvious - High rents and low availability of genuinely accessible housing work against access to property for medium to low income renters - young people who cannot afford to stay in the communities they grew up in - those who need social housing for good cause. (Accessible housing rated as 80% of the market value does not add up for any but high earners - nowhere near the average London earner even with double incomes.)

The disconnect between housing and education /social care /health has financial consequence for all areas.

Shifting housing needs outside of London because they cannot be provided for in London due to exorbitant rents and low availability of social housing worsens the divisions and solves nothing.

So these measures, whilst an attempt at listening to landlords and renters are missing large swathes of the London population altogether.
Answering the questions in this questionnaire does not touch upon the real issues for those below the first rung of the ladder.

The proposed changes are a way of pretending to help the rental / first time buyer crisis when in actual fact it will have hardly any effect at all!

I was evicted twice from private rents within 4 years. Once because the landlady wanted to increase the rent by 20% and we could not afford this. The second time because the landlady wanted to sell her property. This proposed change would not make the slightest bit of difference in these cases.

More needs to be done so people can feel secure in their homes! It is simply not enough! We are thousands of people renting, not by choice, but because we are unable to afford the high prices to buy a home in London.

The prices are so high because Buy to Let investments have been encouraged for decades as an easy investment for the banks, thus increasing demand and in turn increasing prices.

The government now needs to do much more to support the increasing numbers that are being forced to rent long term.

The problem is big companies buying hmo properties and doing work that does not need to be done in order to increase the rent. Then sending section 21 notices to tenants to force them to move. Akelius residential is notorious for this and is making the rental properties in my area unaffordable. Yet there are no regulations to stop them and the law is in their favour. 

I don't think these proposals will do much other than tinker. Re ting in London is in crisis with impossibly high rents, amoral estate agents.laissez-faire landlords rather than serious ethical players in housing.folk with good incomes can't pay rent and save to buy. Too many landlords treat their houses and flats as pension or investments rather than housing provision. Housing shouldn't be a market. The H. Associations are corrupt and dreadful landlords

None of these suggestions actually help Londoners at all. The problem is the cost of renting and the cost of buying. If you want to fix the rental market, fix the buyers market. When it’s possible for Londoners to buy a decent home on an average salary the rental market will have to shake itself up to compete.

Longer tenancies would give me more security and peace of mind as both a current landlord (outside London) and a current tenant (in London). Open ended tenancies might help in this respect but only if they also included a minimum term. Some alternative measures (eg double council tax) are problematic because they only work for a saturated market such as London, whereas the impressive thing about this London model is that actually the measures would be beneficial for both tenants and landlords across the whole country.

In order for these measures to work there has to be more affordable housing in the first place.

I would have no qualms about taking up a tenancy with these conditions if they were out of London.

It is virtually impossible to find affordable housing and find the upfront fees and deposit needed to move.

More and more people like myself (over a certain age) are no longer optimistic when it comes to living on our own. We have had to rely on help from family and friends. 

When I look at my future, I see myself living outside the capital (again) as I cannot see how I can possibly afford to continue to live in London.

I feel the main issue is to have a cap on rents and to set a level of fair rents. This should not be more than a certain proportion of the minimum wage calculated on a monthly basis. Of course that needs to be debated in the Council Chamber.The mayor should also try and enforce an obligation to let at a fair rent of all those properties which are bought by speculators who never intend to live there. If no-one has moved into a recently bought property, the GLA should put an 'obligation to let' on the property. This would cause administrative costs but would be vastly cheaper  than housing people in B&Bs.

I find it hard enough renting from a housing association. I need to move on health grounds and yet the new properties are all asking nigh on £200 per month and upfront deposits paid by card only! What do they think social renters are mini Bransons and Sugars? I don't have cards i live week to week with cash.

If social housing is as hard as this i shudder to think what private is like. It must be torture. 

Most of Conservative MPs are landlords themselves. How can we expect anything to change on a larger scale if the parliament and government themselves have it in their interest to keep thei status quo - i.e. the landlord has almost god-like powers over the tenant.

The rental fees in the private sector are higher then the tenants income, and it is only the landlord that benefits, yet I doubt there will ever be a reduction or cap placed on private rental charges as there are those individuals in govenment who are landlords themselves, includes members of their families, so they will stand to lose out, othewise a cap would had been seen as ideal. Moreover, if rental fees were more affordable there would be less of a need for tenants to claim certain benefits. 

Also, why are landlords allowed to neglect the 'exterior and indeed interior' of their rental accomodation particularly if it is a house, results in making the whole vicinity looking very depressing, and which subsequently has a very negative impact on residents in the area. It is about time that Local Authorities were given the power to fine such landlords for being irresponsible. Clearly, there should be a landlord code of conduct for all landlords.to obey in order to help smarten up London for the greater good.