Select committee: Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee
Conclusion 17
Fifth Report - Reforming the Private Rented Sector
Published 9 Feb 2023
Paragraph 105
Addressed to Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee Reforming the Private Rented Sector All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
The data suggests that the reduction in the size of the PRS, which the Minister partly attributed to the covid pandemic, began three years before the pandemic, in 2016–17. For this reason, we see little reason to believe the decline is short term, although the pandemic may have exacerbated the trend. The only certainty is that the Government does not know what is happening in the PRS and has not said what role it wants it to play in the wider housing mix. In particular, it is difficult not to suspect, given the changes to how the buy-to-let sector is taxed, that the Government would like landlords with smaller portfolios to leave the sector. Whatever the Government’s ultimate intentions, however, there can be no doubt that landlords with small portfolios are currently critical to the provision of private rented accommodation, and the impact of any measures that could make the sector less attractive to them should be carefully thought through.
From: Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, Fifth Report - Reforming the Private Rented Sector (HC 624), paragraph 105, 9 February 2023
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 20 October 2023 (deadline 9 April 2023).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government welcomes "the thrust of the report" and accepts or reflects the Committee's aims in several areas, but declines a number of recommendations, including on student tenancies, a Housing Court and rent review clauses.
- On antisocial behaviour, it "fully agree[s] with the intent" of the recommendation but proposes a different approach: it will lower the threshold for Ground 14 and maintain judicial discretion instead of making the ground mandatory.
- On courts, it says "We do not agree that introducing a Housing Court is the best way", and it "would not be practical" to prioritise rent arrears cases. It will not proceed with the abolition of section 21 "until reforms to the justice system are in place".
- It does not support retaining fixed terms for students, saying it "would unfairly lock students into contracts". It will instead introduce a new ground for possession to facilitate the yearly cycle of student tenancies.
- On enforcement funding, it will ensure that "where necessary" new costs to local authorities "are fully funded", in accordance with the New Burdens Doctrine. It has "no current plans to criminalise non-payment of a civil penalty".