New Landlord Database - roll out dates announced

[WayOutWest]

Not so much the straw that broke the camel's back as much as another lead brick.

https://www.nrla.org.uk/news/landlord-database-rol...

Besides the admin aggro and cost this is also a massive breach of privacy of landlords which could be used by those with nefarious aims as, beyond government use, public-facing search capabilities will follow.
While some of you will be thinking cry me a river for landlords, this will result in higher rents and homelessness as landlords sell up and redeploy to other asset classes.

Full details on BTL Property youtuber James Nicholson's channel - the comments on it just about sum up what will happen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB92UTC1_u8

First offence £7,000 fine for landlords who fail to register their properties or attempt to market/advertise a property without a registration number.
Severe/Repeat Offences: Fines can scale up to £40,000, alongside a total ban on seeking property possession orders.

[Countdown]

That's weird. I'm not sure why this is the first time I've heard of it

[LooneyTunes]

WayOutWest said:

While some of you will be thinking cry me a river for landlords, this will result in higher rents and homelessness as landlords sell up and redeploy to other asset classes.

Even if landlords don't sell up, the £65 + cost of time to enter/manage will still eventually end up being borne by tenants.

[Hawkshaw]

It will be interesting to see how this pans out, and I doubt if all councils have the resources or even the incentive to implement it.

I have some inherited rental property. If I sold it, I would have to pay CGT, so on balance it's better to keep it. I have good tenants who wish to stay long term, they are hard-working, not claiming benefits, and they are younger than me. The rent is well below market for the area, but I make enough out of it, and I do any repairs, gas safety, etc. promptly.

I am considered locally to be a good landlord, and the tenants are happy with the situation. We have a good business relationship, and it is nothing to do with the council. I am not comfortable registering my details with a corrupt and incompetent organisation who cannot be trusted with the information. There is nothing in it for me, and I resent the interference. You can't run a business like that.

The ownership of the property is not registered to my current address due to a previous oversight, so the council would have some difficulty in finding me, if they even had a reason to look. It will only become an issue if I need to evict, or re-let the property, or possibly if one of the tenants needs to claim benefits. None of this is likely at the moment, so I'll worry about that when it happens. By then, the rules will probably have changed again.

I think I'll keep my head down.







.

[WayOutWest]

LooneyTunes said:

Even if landlords don't sell up, the £65 + cost of time to enter/manage will still eventually end up being borne by tenants.

It's not even just the £65 and time, it is the greater financial risk from fines, fraud and other malicious acts where the info is used against them that they will be exposed to. They are not going to just add on a pound or so a week to rents.

I have some relatives who were content to keep rents way below market for years for long term tenants before the Renters Rights Act came in, but will be either hiking by about 30% or selling and getting out.

[WayOutWest]

Hawkshaw said:

It will be interesting to see how this pans out, and I doubt if all councils have the resources or even the incentive to implement it.

I have some inherited rental property. If I sold it, I would have to pay CGT, so on balance it's better to keep it. I have good tenants who wish to stay long term, they are hard-working, not claiming benefits, and they are younger than me. The rent is well below market for the area, but I make enough out of it, and I do any repairs, gas safety, etc. promptly.

I am considered locally to be a good landlord, and the tenants are happy with the situation. We have a good business relationship, and it is nothing to do with the council. I am not comfortable registering my details with a corrupt and incompetent organisation who cannot be trusted with the information. There is nothing in it for me, and I resent the interference. You can't run a business like that.

The ownership of the property is not registered to my current address due to a previous oversight, so the council would have some difficulty in finding me, if they even had a reason to look. It will only become an issue if I need to evict, or re-let the property, or possibly if one of the tenants needs to claim benefits. None of this is likely at the moment, so I'll worry about that when it happens. By then, the rules will probably have changed again.

I think I'll keep my head down.

CGT is pretty much the only reason my relatives have not yet sold.

[Hawkshaw]

WayOutWest said:

CGT is pretty much the only reason my relatives have not yet sold.

There's a bit more to it than that. I might at some stage have to sell up, and stomach the CGT. But if I do that, the tenants will have to pay market rents, which I don't think is entirely fair to them. And I will have to invest the proceeds elsewhere, which I am not competent to do - property is what I know about. So I will have to pay someone to handle it, and hope they don't rip me off. If they don't, then the returns may be better than from the property, but I'll just have to pay more tax, and my income is already sufficient for my needs. I would rather have it in bricks and mortar, for the long term.

[thekingisdead]

is this being done so HMRC can cross reference against self assessment for rental income? (or probably an additional benefit)

[jmn]

Lettings Agents already have to supply HMRC with a list of all the properties on their books, and rents charged.