Connect with us

Published

on

Almost one million private renters in England have been handed no-fault evictions since the Conservative government promised to abolish them, new data has shown.

Research carried out by YouGov on behalf of homelessness charity Shelter – and shared exclusively with Sky News – showed that since April 2019 a total of 943,000 people had been given Section 21 notices, which is the equivalent of more than 500 renters every day.

Politics live:
Sunak and Starmer trade jibes in ‘very personal’ PMQs

The figures also showed unwanted moves were costing private renters in England £550m a year, with 830,000 people having to move in the last 12 months alone due to either their fixed tenancies coming to an end, being priced out by rent increases or being served with a Section 21.

Add in the soaring upfront costs for rents and deposits and unwanted moves are costing more than £1bn a year – or an average of £1,245 per person.

Polly Neate, Shelter’s chief executive, said tenants were “bearing the cost of the government’s inaction” and warned any further delays to banning no-fault evictions would see more people “tipped into homelessness”.

But Levelling Up minister Jacob Young defended the government. He said abolishing Section 21s was “the biggest change to the private rented sector in more than 30 years” so it “takes time to make sure we get it right”.

Pic:: iStock
Image:
In England, the equivalent of more than 500 renters a day are being evicted through no fault of their own. Pic: iStock

A Section 21 notice is the legal mechanism allowing landlords to evict tenants without providing a reason, which creates uncertainty for those who rent their homes.

The government first promised to ban them five years ago this week – back when Theresa May was still in Number 10.

Yet despite subsequent Conservative leaders pledging to see through the policy, it still hasn’t come into law – with the housing secretary announcing an indefinite delay to the Renters Reform Bill last month.

‘I had a meltdown’

Natalie was served with two Section 21 notices within 18 months.

The 47-year-old from Brighton told Sky News she received the first one just after COVID and she took it in her stride. She said: “It wasn’t an ideal rental, it was quite dilapidated… but I had got into quite a good relationship with the landlord and I wasn’t freaking out. They just wanted to sell their flat and get out of the rental market.”

However, the relationship soon soured and turned into a “nasty environment” as she struggled to find a new home in a market with soaring costs and poor quality places.

“You couldn’t even see a property without having a £35k guarantor or you would have to have a whole year’s rent in advance and it just turned into a figures game,” said Natalie.

“If you don’t look good on paper, you are not going to get to see a flat, you are not going to be considered for it. You are not going to tick all the boxes. It is financial discrimination.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Natalie faced two no-fault evictions within 18 months

After staying with friends for two months, Natalie found a new property, but in the first three weeks, it had flooded, and she noticed day by day the “shoddy workmanship”.

And after a year, again through no fault of her own, she got a call from the estate agent to say the rent was going up by £150 a month and she would need to leave.

Natalie said she had a “meltdown”.

“It’s an awful thing, not feeling like you’re an adult and not being able to support yourself or find space in a location you have decided is home – finding out that it doesn’t mean anything that you have been living there for 21 years,” she said.

She added: “I’d like people to be able to have a home if we are living in a so-called civilised society. How’s anybody supposed to get anywhere without having their home? It should just be like water and air – we all need that to function.

“Something really drastic needs to be done.”

Tories criticised for ‘excuse’ holding back change

Mr Young, the Levelling Up minister, told Sky News his “hope” and “primary focus” was to see the bill passed, banning Section 21s for new tenancies before the next general election – which must take place before the end of January 2025.

But he couldn’t “give a commitment on a solid date” for the ban to also apply to existing tenancies, meaning millions – including Natalie – would continue to be at risk of losing their homes.

“We have to do this in a proportionate and phased way, working with the sector to make sure our reforms are actually effective,” he told Sky News.

“If we were to abolish everything straightaway, that would create a lot of uncertainty in the sector.”

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

However, Shelter’s Ms Neate argued the reason for the delay was not about getting the legislation right, but about “bowing to backbench landlords”.

A group of Tory MPs – a number of whom are landlords themselves – raised concerns the courts were not prepared for the legal cases that could result from the simpler mechanism being outlawed.

As a result, the government said Section 21s would remain in place until an assessment had been made of whether the legal system could handle the changes.

But Ms Neate called it an “excuse”. She said: “The reason why they’re delaying is because they’re under pressure from their own backbenchers, many of whom are landlords, who just don’t want to see no-fault evictions ending.

“Why you would want the right to evict somebody for absolutely no reason is beyond me, frankly.”

She added: “Our frontline services every single day are seeing the worst effects of this.

“Section 21 no-fault eviction is one of the leading causes of homelessness in this country. And that’s why we’re so eager for the government to end it.”

Read more:
‘Buying a flat ruined my life’ – leaseholders speak out
How to tackle ‘out of control’ rent hikes immediately

Government still ‘committed’ to abolishing no-fault evictions

Mr Young denied there were “vested interests” in his party and said he did not “begrudge” his colleagues for having rental properties.

He said: “We can’t just listen to one side of the sector in this argument. It has to be that we’re delivering a bill that benefits both tenants and landlords.

“This bill is about protecting good tenants and landlords, and pitting them against the rogue actors in the system.”

Revealing his own aunt had been subject to a Section 21 just before Christmas, Mr Young added: “It takes time to make sure that we get it right. There are 11 million renters in the country. If we get it wrong for those 11 million renters, that doesn’t help them at all.

“I know the uncertainty that [Section 21s] can provide to families. That’s why I’m committed to abolishing it. That’s why I’m focused on delivering this.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Conservative minister Jacob Young defended the government, despite his aunt being subject to a Section 21 before Christmas

Matthew Pennycook, Labour’s shadow minister for housing and planning, said his party is committed to ending the “ever-present fear” of Section 21s “immediately” if it gets into power – and would put forward amendments for government legislation to speed up the process.

He told Sky News the abolition of no-fault evictions could be done “overnight” if the Conservatives chose to, leading to “a stable private rental system… [where] families can live and thrive in what should be their homes, not just an asset that can just be taken back at a moment’s notice”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Labour promises ‘immediate’ end to no-fault evictions

Mr Pennycook also said he believed the court system could “cope” with the changes, but added: “I think what private tenants would argue is [the government has] had five years to get to the point where that they can introduce a system to honour this commitment to abolish Section 21 notices, and they’ve played around for far too long.

“We think they’re selling out to vested interests in bringing these changes forward.”

Continue Reading

Business

Chair candidates battle to check in at Premier Inn-owner Whitbread

Published

on

By

Chair candidates battle to check in at Premier Inn-owner Whitbread

Two chairs of FTSE-100 companies are vying to succeed Adam Crozier at the top of Whitbread, the London-listed group behind the Premier Inn hotel chain.

Sky News has learnt that Christine Hodgson, who chairs water company Severn Trent, and Andrew Martin, chair of the testing and inspection group Intertek, are the leading contenders for the Whitbread job.

Mr Crozier, who has chaired the leisure group since 2018, is expected to step down later this year.

The search, which has been taking place for several months, is expected to conclude in the coming weeks, according to one City source.

Ms Hodgson has some experience of the leisure industry, having served on the board of Ladbrokes Coral Group until 2017, while Mr Martin was a senior executive at the contract caterer Compass Group and finance chief at the travel agent First Choice Holidays.

Under Mr Crozier’s stewardship, Whitbread has been radically reshaped, selling its Costa Coffee subsidiary to The Coca-Cola Company in 2019 for nearly £4bn.

The company has also seen off an activist campaign spearheaded by Elliott Advisers, while Mr Crozier orchestrated the appointment of Dominic Paul, its chief executive, following Alison Brittain’s retirement.

More from Money

It said last year that it sees potential to grow the network from 86,000 UK bedrooms to 125,000 over the next decade or so.

Mr Crozier is one of Britain’s most seasoned boardroom figures, and now chairs BT Group and Kantar, the market research and data business backed by Bain Capital and WPP Group.

He previously ran the Football Association, ITV and – in between – Royal Mail Group.

On Friday, shares in Whitbread closed at £25.41, giving the company a market capitalisation of about £4.5bn.

Whitbread declined to comment this weekend.

Continue Reading

Business

Bank chiefs to Reeves: Ditch ring-fencing to boost UK economy

Published

on

By

Bank chiefs to Reeves: Ditch ring-fencing to boost UK economy

The bosses of four of Britain’s biggest banks are secretly urging the chancellor to ditch the most significant regulatory change imposed after the 2008 financial crisis, warning her its continued imposition is inhibiting UK economic growth.

Sky News has obtained an explosive letter sent this week by the chief executives of HSBC Holdings, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest Group and Santander UK in which they argue that bank ring-fencing “is not only a drag on banks’ ability to support business and the economy, but is now redundant”.

The CEOs’ letter represents an unprecedented intervention by most of the UK’s major lenders to abolish a reform which cost them billions of pounds to implement and which was designed to make the banking system safer by separating groups’ high street retail operations from their riskier wholesale and investment banking activities.

Their request to Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, to abandon ring-fencing 15 years after it was conceived will be seen as a direct challenge to the government to take drastic action to support the economy during a period when it is forcing economic regulators to scrap red tape.

It will, however, ignite controversy among those who believe that ditching the UK’s most radical post-crisis reform risks exacerbating the consequences of any future banking industry meltdown.

In their letter to the chancellor, the quartet of bank chiefs told Ms Reeves that: “With global economic headwinds, it is crucial that, in support of its Industrial Strategy, the government’s Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy removes unnecessary constraints on the ability of UK banks to support businesses across the economy and sends the clearest possible signal to investors in the UK of your commitment to reform.

“While we welcomed the recent technical adjustments to the ring-fencing regime, we believe it is now imperative to go further.

More on Electoral Dysfunction

“Removing the ring-fencing regime is, we believe, among the most significant steps the government could take to ensure the prudential framework maximises the banking sector’s ability to support UK businesses and promote economic growth.”

Work on the letter is said to have been led by HSBC, whose new chief executive, Georges Elhedery, is among the signatories.

His counterparts at Lloyds, Charlie Nunn; NatWest’s Paul Thwaite; and Mike Regnier, who runs Santander UK, also signed it.

While Mr Thwaite in particular has been public in questioning the continued need for ring-fencing, the letter – sent on Tuesday – is the first time that such a collective argument has been put so forcefully.

The only notable absentee from the signatories is CS Venkatakrishnan, the Barclays chief executive, although he has publicly said in the past that ring-fencing is not a major financial headache for his bank.

Other industry executives have expressed scepticism about that stance given that ring-fencing’s origination was largely viewed as being an attempt to solve the conundrum posed by Barclays’ vast investment banking operations.

The introduction of ring-fencing forced UK-based lenders with a deposit base of at least £25bn to segregate their retail and investment banking arms, supposedly making them easier to manage in the event that one part of the business faced insolvency.

Banks spent billions of pounds designing and setting up their ring-fenced entities, with separate boards of directors appointed to each division.

More recently, the Treasury has moved to increase the deposit threshold from £25bn to £35bn, amid pressure from a number of faster-growing banks.

Sam Woods, the current chief executive of the main banking regulator, the Prudential Regulation Authority, was involved in formulating proposals published by the Sir John Vickers-led Independent Commission on Banking in 2011.

Legislation to establish ring-fencing was passed in the Financial Services Reform (Banking) Act 2013, and the regime came into effect in 2019.

In addition to ring-fencing, banks were forced to substantially increase the amount and quality of capital they held as a risk buffer, while they were also instructed to create so-called ‘living wills’ in the event that they ran into financial trouble.

The chancellor has repeatedly spoken of the need to regulate for growth rather than risk – a phrase the four banks hope will now persuade her to abandon ring-fencing.

Britain is the only major economy to have adopted such an approach to regulating its banking industry – a fact which the four bank chiefs say is now undermining UK competitiveness.

“Ring-fencing imposes significant and often overlooked costs on businesses, including SMEs, by exposing them to banking constraints not experienced by their international competitors, making it harder for them to scale and compete,” the letter said.

“Lending decisions and pricing are distorted as the considerable liquidity trapped inside the ring-fence can only be used for limited purposes.

“Corporate customers whose financial needs become more complex as they grow larger, more sophisticated, or engage in international trade, are adversely affected given the limits on services ring-fenced banks can provide.

“Removing ring-fencing would eliminate these cliff-edge effects and allow firms to obtain the full suite of products and services from a single bank, reducing administrative costs”.

In recent months, doubts have resurfaced about the commitment of Spanish banking giant Santander to its UK operations amid complaints about the costs of regulation and supervision.

The UK’s fifth-largest high street lender held tentative conversations about a sale to either Barclays or NatWest, although they did not progress to a formal stage.

HSBC, meanwhile, is particularly restless about the impact of ring-fencing on its business, given its sprawling international footprint.

“There has been a material decline in UK wholesale banking since ring-fencing was introduced, to the detriment of British businesses and the perception of the UK as an internationally orientated economy with a global financial centre,” the letter said.

“The regime causes capital inefficiencies and traps liquidity, preventing it from being deployed efficiently across Group entities.”

The four bosses called on Ms Reeves to use this summer’s Mansion House dinner – the City’s annual set-piece event – to deliver “a clear statement of intent…to abolish ring-fencing during this Parliament”.

Doing so, they argued, would “demonstrate the government’s determination to do what it takes to promote growth and send the strongest possible signal to investors of your commitment to the City and to strengthen the UK’s position as a leading international financial centre”.

Continue Reading

Business

Post Office to unveil £1.75bn banking deal with big British lenders

Published

on

By

Post Office to unveil £1.75bn banking deal with big British lenders

The Post Office will next week unveil a £1.75bn deal with dozens of banks which will allow their customers to continue using Britain’s biggest retail network.

Sky News has learnt the next Post Office banking framework will be launched next Wednesday, with an agreement that will deliver an additional £500m to the government-owned company.

Banking industry sources said on Friday the deal would be worth roughly £350m annually to the Post Office – an uplift from the existing £250m-a-year deal, which expires at the end of the year.

Money latest: ’14 million Britons on course for parking fine this year’

The sources added that in return for the additional payments, the Post Office would make a range of commitments to improving the service it provides to banks’ customers who use its branches.

Banks which participate in the arrangements include Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest Group and Santander UK.

Under the Banking Framework Agreement, the 30 banks and mutuals’ customers can access the Post Office’s 11,500 branches for a range of services, including depositing and withdrawing cash.

More on Post Office Scandal

The service is particularly valuable to those who still rely on physical cash after a decade in which well over 6,000 bank branches have been closed across Britain.

In 2023, more than £10bn worth of cash was withdrawn over the counter and £29bn in cash was deposited over the counter, the Post Office said last year.

Read more from Sky News:
Water regulation slammed by spending watchdog
Rate cut speculation lights up as economic outlook darkens

A new, longer-term deal with the banks comes at a critical time for the Post Office, which is trying to secure government funding to bolster the pay of thousands of sub-postmasters.

Reliant on an annual government subsidy, the reputation of the network’s previous management team was left in tatters by the Horizon IT scandal and the wrongful conviction of hundreds of sub-postmasters.

A Post Office spokesperson declined to comment ahead of next week’s announcement.

Continue Reading

Trending