GENERATION RENT campaigns for professionally managed, secure, decent and affordable private rented homes in sustainable communities.

Join us today and help campaign for a better deal for private renters.

How we help

  • hwh-1.pngCall for changes in legislation, strategies, policies and practices to make private housing a better place to live

  • hwh-2.pngStrengthen the voice of private tenants by developing a national network of private renters and local private renters’ groups
  • hwh-3.pngProvide opportunities for private renters to campaign on issues that affect them and their local areas
  • hwh-4.pngWork with affiliates towards achieving the aims of Generation Rent
  • commented 2015-02-04 08:01:05 +0000
    Can we lobby for rent control and anti-discrimination towards tenants on benefits, age, parents etc?
  • commented 2015-01-24 19:38:12 +0000
    The day Housing Benefit was introduced was the day subsidised rents should have been abolished. They must be abolished now. It is unjust, also bad for flexible labour movement, to have “social” tenants who may be well off, being subsidised by those paying full market rents. Adding insult to injury, those with the “Golden lottery ticket” of a council house will have security for life, (which may not be in even their own interests, if they need to move for jobs or to care for relatives) Currently, the perverse result of well intended long out-dated housing policies mean the struggling “Have-nots” are subject for life to the insecurity of two month notice "No-Fault " evictions.

    Making social housing rents equal to the market rate would free up stock, as occupants shifted themselves around to live in the places, and at the prices, most suited to their changing needs. Those who were too poor to pay could do the same as everyone else, and apply for Housing Benefit. The inequality of security could be overcome by a National Tenancy Agreement (N.T.A.)

    That would be a tweak on the Deed of Assurance (devised by Property 118., and using, in the main, the existing legislation. ) Every existing and future tenant could live under the same equal terms. All tenants are then bound by the existing A.S.T. (Assured Shorthold Tenancy) rules, including usually giving one month’s notice, and getting usually two, as a Section 20 No-Fault repossession, or else being evicted for breach of terms (e.g. non payment of rent or antisocial conduct) . But the national introduction of a standardised version of the Deed of Assurance, for all tenancies, could simultaneously provide them the benefit of a default assumed lifelong tenancy, if they wish, unless the landlord chooses to evict them for breach or else because for his own reasons he needs to recover the property (e.g. for sale).

    The difference would be, a National Tenancy Agreement scheme would give social justice and security for all. It would put all tenants on fair and equal footing, and would give an incentive for landlords to retain a trouble-free good tenant, because it would impose a modest proportionate penalty for No-Fault eviction. Tenants have an incentive to behave well and to take extreme care of their home, if it is theirs for as long as they want it. (They also have an incentive to attend to minor matters at their own time and expense, and also to draw the owner’s attention to such things as overflowing gutters or missing roof tiles, which could be missed on a routine periodic check)

    An extra supply of housing should soon become available as those in social housing realise they may as well live wherever it suits them, now, instead of remaining trapped where a local council once put them, possibly decades previously. They will have no more and no less security of tenure, and will pay the same market rents as everyone else, so they may as well select the type and location of their tenancy, just like anyone else. N.B. The cry that “The Council can’t give me a place” will no longer be relevant, when social housing and private housing is all on equal tenancy terms.

    Perhaps the penalty could reasonably be set as one month’s rent for every completed full year of tenancy, if the landlord evicts a No-Fault tenant. The existing government schemes to protect tenant deposits could also store a “Sinking Fund” of these amounts, so there is no doubt the tenant will get both his deposit and his compensation. This would not be entirely onerous on landlords, because it would greatly increase the likelihood of tenants treating the property with care, and it would greatly reduce the likelihood of landlords having “void” periods between tenancies. The Sinking Funds could be paid to local or central government, when tenants freely choose to leave for their own reasons.

    ( This would a) feed a source of extra tax revenue, and b) discourage landlords from “constructive eviction” tactics, i.e. trying to “encourage” a No-Fault tenant to leave “voluntarily”)

    There would be no financial shock to any landlord, or his mortgage funder, because the financial liability is already paid, and safely stored along with the tenant’s deposit. (It could be included as routine that all tenants pay every twelfth month’s rent directly into their Deposit Protection Scheme, on the understanding that part of the money, unlike the Deposit itself, will never be theirs to reclaim, unless the landlord evicts them through no fault of their own)

    The advantages appear to include: 1/ Freeing up housing stock 2/ Introducing incentives to care well for property 3/Introducing social justice and fairness between all tenancies equally 4/ Providing the entire population with either security of tenure or reasonable compensation if deprived of that 5/ Putting all tenants on equal footing regarding paying market rent or else claiming Housing Benefit during periods of low income (instead of, as at present, subsidising a selection of buildings, regardless of the wealth of any particular occupant) 6/ Instantly producing increased revenue to local authorities and housing associations, as they charge market rents 7/ Quickly beginning to reduce calls on public funds a) from people who could be cared for by relatives, if they are free to move b) from people who could take up employment if they were free to move. 8/ Beginning a trickle of income to local or central government, as the Sinking Funds begin to release money which has been held in Deposit Protection, each time a tenant who has completed a twelve month tenancy (or pro rata multiples of years) chooses to move of his own free will, thus releasing funds which had been set aside to compensate him if his move had been forced by the landlord when he had not breached his tenancy terms.

    The latter point raises the need to include exceptional provisions, regarding already existing tenancies. Any compensation due when either social or private landlords wish to repossess from a No-Fault tenant, under the new National Tenancy Agreement, would begin to be calculated from the date of the relevant legislation (or amended legislation, as the case may be).
  • commented 2015-01-04 19:22:44 +0000
    conditions of tenancies are often in great need of repair. renting can be tenuous if complaints made for improvements
  • commented 2014-12-17 12:48:29 +0000
    Misrepresentation of lettings. Agents that find tenants for landlords they are not contracted to manage the rental for, not disclosing this beforehand, then shirking responsibility when the landlord when repair issues crop up or issues with the rental. You sign with a ‘reputable’ letting agency only to find they are a front for a less than desirable landlord!
  • followed this page 2014-12-15 11:22:34 +0000
  • commented 2014-11-24 16:31:44 +0000
    Rent prices are utterly scandalous – people get stuck in situations where their rent accounts for such a high proportion of their wages that they may never earn enough to save for a deposit on a house. The other part of the problem of course is this drive to own a home. In some countries (Germany I think?) the proportion of people who rent their homes much higher and people are prepared to think of themselves as long-term or even lifetime renters. This means a) they’re less likely to put up with scandalous behaviour on the part of landlords and b) the industry is better regulated and there is a better supply/demand balance.

    Rents need to come down and the industry needs to become fairer and better regulated. Maybe then people wouldn’t see renting as ‘a situation to put up with’ until you can afford a deposit or you have to move to another part of the country.

Have something to voice?

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.

Blog

London Housing - a new opportunity to push for greater security

Delayed from August, this week saw the publication of the London Mayor's draft housing strategy, which is now open for consultation for three months.

Covering all housing policy from leasehold reform to tackling street homelessness, the strategy also has a specific section devoted to the private rented sector. With a quarter of London's children in the private rented sector, and millions of renters living in poverty, we all know how urgently action is needed.

We'll be coming back to parts of the strategy in the coming weeks, but here we just focus on the main headlines for renters.

The strategy builds on the Mayor's manifest commitment and previous public statements, and although the Mayor lacks the powers to fundamentally transform London's PRS, there are nonetheless some steps forward and potential to go further.

Read more

The Other Waitrose Effect - the hidden costs of gentrification

Is a new Waitrose in your neighbourhood a cause for excitement, or a troubling omen for your future in the area? 

A new study reveals that the high-end supermarket is linked with rising evictions of private tenants in areas they open up in.

The analysis, conducted by Oxford University academic David Adler for Generation Rent, found that the arrival of a new store was associated with an increase in the number of evictions of between 25% and 50%.

Waitrose.jpg

Great cheese selection, but will you be around to enjoy it?

Read more

Giving people the right to a safe home

This week saw the introduction of Karen Buck MP's Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation and Liability for Housing Standards) Bill, a private member's bill which will now have its second reading in parliament on Friday 19 January 2018.

The bill seeks to update the law requiring rented homes to be presented and maintained in a state fit for human habitation - updated because the current law only requires this of homes with a rent of up to £80 per year in London, and £52 elsewhere!

Read more

National study finds tenants optimistic but rental market oppressive

Every year the government runs the English Housing Survey. General findings are published in February, then, to the delight of housing geeks, the juicy detail on the different subsections of the market arrives in July. We've taken a look at the findings for 2015-16, published last week.

Read more

Queen's Speech 2017: are you listening Westminster?

Before today's Queen's Speech, which set out the government's parliamentary programme for the next two years, there were two theories about how housing and private renting might feature, and what kind of prominence it would be given.

Read more

If London housebuilding is reliant on overseas investment, where do we go from here?

Commissioned in Autumn 2016, the final report of the London Mayor’s investigation into the role of overseas investment in housing was published last week – but its findings can be read in very different ways.

Based on research by the LSE, its major conclusion and argument is that off-plan and pre-sales to the overseas market are integral to the current development model in London – and therefore also key to leveraging more affordable housing through section 106 agreements on those sites. 

Read more

Renters vote - and cause another political upset

The results are in, and the UK's voters have delivered yet another shock.

The dust still has to settle but one thing is already apparent: the votes of renters had an impact yesterday. Twenty of the 32 seats that the Conservatives lost to Labour and the Liberal Democrats had more renters than average. Back at the 2011 census, those 32 seats had an average private renter population of 19% - it was 16% in the country as a whole.

Read more

The choice tomorrow

We haven't been posting much on here for the past few weeks as we have joined forces with ACORN on #RentersVote for the duration of the election. 

There we have analysed each of the 5 UK-wide parties' manifestos and pulled it all together into one big graphic, so you can see what we made of their housing commitments side-by-side.

Policy_matrix.png 

Read more

Save £404 when you move after fees ban

Tomorrow is the final chance to respond to the government's consultation on their proposals to ban letting fees.

Ahead of this we have published our latest research from lettingfees.co.uk, which features in today's Times (£), Guardian and i. We have also published an update to last year's report.

Our main findings are that the government's proposals will save the average tenants £404 when they move, and an average £117 every 6 or 12 months to renew the tenancy.

Read more

3.4m private renters risk losing their vote

With one week until voter registration closes, we've estimated that more than three million private renters in England are at risk of losing their vote at the General Election.

1.8m private renters have moved home since the 2016 Referendum and must therefore register again. Private renters are typically on tenancy agreements of no longer than 12 months and are six times more likely to move in a given year than homeowners.

Read more

Twitter