Updating post from Reddit.

70
INFORMATION
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago
Labour MP (homeless minister) threw out her tenants & increased rent

MP values rental at £894k, but paid less than £594k in 2014, making over £27k a year in capital appreciation alone.

50% LTV at 4% is about £990 per month interest only, which was rented at £3,300 making £2.3k a month, increaseing to £3k a month with new tenants

47
19
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

> Labour homelessness minister Rushanara Ali threw four tenants out of her east London townhouse before relisting the property for £700 a month more in rent. The MPs’ register of interests shows that this is one of two rental properties owned by Ali, who has served as minister for homelessness since Labour’s election win in July 2024.

> Last March, Ali rented out the four-bedroom townhouse, less than a mile from London’s Olympic Park, for £3,300 a month.

> Tenant Laura Jackson, a self-employed restaurant owner and one of four people who rented the property, received an email in November telling her their lease would not be renewed and giving them four months’ notice to leave.

> Just weeks after they had left the property, Ms Jackson saw the house had been put back up for rent at nearly £4,000 a month.

> The property was managed on Ali’s behalf by two lettings agencies: Jack Barclay Estates and Avenue Lettings.

> At the time of ending the tenants’ contract, the firms also attempted to charge Ali’s tenants nearly £2,000 for the house to be repainted and £395 for professional cleaning. When Ms Jackson told the agencies they knew their landlord was a Labour MP, the fees were mysteriously dropped, she says. Under the Tenant Fees Act 2019, landlords are prohibited from charging their tenants for professional cleaning.

> The property is currently listed for sale at £894,995 – over £300,000 more than Ali paid for it in 2014, according to the Land Registry.

Reply
0
Posted by Anon 1 second ago
Reply
19
Posted by Academic_Matter_3903 2 weeks ago

Greed and corruption of politicians seems to be omnipresent irrespective of colour, gender, ethnicity, background, education, religion.

Reply
2
Posted by Klangey 2 weeks ago

I don’t want to have to defend MPs or landlords, but how exactly is this greed or corruption? The profit she is making on these houses is disgusting, but she isn’t responsible for our completely fucked housing market.

Reply
3
Posted by Brief_Principle9276 2 weeks ago

I'd agree, if she weren't the Minister for Housing.

Reply
3
Posted by Klangey 2 weeks ago

She’s not the minister for housing, that is Angela Rayner, she is the minister for Homelessness.

Not that that matters

Reply
3
Posted by Slightly_Effective 2 weeks ago

She's not exactly helping the stats.

Reply
0
Posted by uklandlords-ModTeam 2 weeks ago

This is a community for Landlords. You can be anti-landlord in other places like /r/HousingUK/

Reply
1
Posted by oldvlognewtricks 2 weeks ago

How is it greed and corruption to perform standard landlord activities?

Reply
12
Posted by Saliiim 2 weeks ago

Can't help but laugh at the hypocrisy of the government.

Reply
5
Posted by woodyus 2 weeks ago

They really aren't proving wrong the people who say all politicians are the same.

I'm so disappointed, why does the world have to be like this.

Reply
6
Posted by Maleficent-Amoeba351 2 weeks ago

I love property, investing in property, but this is disgraceful from Labour to be so hypocritical, what a disgrace.

Reply
0
Posted by oldvlognewtricks 2 weeks ago

How is it hypocritical, exactly? You can follow the rules while also arguing they should be changed.

Reply
6
Posted by NotAsBadAsBroccoli 2 weeks ago

The same article from another website over and over. Is this sub even moderated anymore?

Read passed the headline...

The tenants contract ended. She tried to sell while offering a rolling contract which they declined. Then ended up putting it back up for rent.

Edit: it's actually a different sub this time, but the same website. I'm not following this sub, but strangely fed anti-labour similar to ukpol and alike

Reply
4
Posted by travis_6 2 weeks ago

This needs to be higher up - headlines almost never match the actual story anymore

Reply
3
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

>The same article from another website over and over. Is this sub even moderated anymore?

  1. This is the only post on this sub about this topic.
  2. Only the Tenant or a Court can "end the contract", there is no offer required for a rolling contract, it just happens, the proposal alleged is leave now or leave when I sell it (she never sold it).
  3. It's about the hypocrisy. This set of events is in the future? Her regulations would result in fines.
  4. A mod posted it.
  5. Join, and relax. It is moderated; you didn't report it. Use the report button.
Reply
0
Posted by _DuranDuran_ 2 weeks ago

If she didn’t get a S21 they weren’t kicked out, end of. They decided to leave.

Reply
6
Posted by beardyjim 2 weeks ago

These numbers represent capital appreciation per year at 4.5%; the rental rate previously represented a 6.6% yield and, with the increase, is now at 8% on the initial investment and 5.3% in terms of the current value. For a desirable location in London, £4,000pcm rent may seem enormous relative to the rest of the UK, but remains normal for the city, which needs to build 66,000 homes a year to meet demand, but typically builds less than half this figure.

Whether you consider the residential lettings sector to be fundamentally exploitative or not - relative to the property investment sector, this represents nothing to write home about.

Reply
1
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

You add in the risk to that too - neither capital apprication or the renal income is guaranteed. House Prices could have gone down over that period and tenants dont always pay.

London Rental Yield is notoriosly terrible compared to the rest of the UK. It has high rents, but it also has high costs, meaning very low margins.

Reply
1
Posted by Manoj109 2 weeks ago

Is the 4.5% after inflation?

Reply
1
Posted by beardyjim 2 weeks ago

It is not!

Reply
2
Posted by Any_Meat_3044 2 weeks ago

5.3% return is probably similar to simply putting the cash in the bank after costs. It is a justifiable action as a landlord but it is shameful as a homeless MP.

Reply
4
Posted by blizeH 2 weeks ago

> Under the Tenant Fees Act 2019, landlords are prohibited from charging their tenants for professional cleaning.

Surely there are circumstances in which you can charge for a professional clean? Like if they trashed the place?

Reply
6
Posted by AarhusNative 2 weeks ago

Of course you can charge for damage and cleaning.

You cannot insist they pay for professional cleaning at the end of their tenancy, they clean it themselves to the standard they got the place in.

Reply
3
Posted by managedheap84 2 weeks ago

Typical landlord.

Commons is stuffed with them— wonder why our people are living in mouldy shitholes with zero protection.

Almost as if we live in a Neo Feudal system administered by and for the benefit of predators.

Reply
2
Posted by MactionSnack 2 weeks ago

Can't help but wonder if the letting agency were the ones who caused this. I would imagine someone in her position would know better than being this PR nightmare on herself.

I found myself as a landlord for about 9 months after a change in personal circumstances where my house that I had loved in for 8 years was going to be empty. The agency I was using were a nightmare of poor admin, not informing me of problems with the property and poor communication. I decided the stress wasn't worth it and sold, but they then advised me to try to deduct as much as possible from the deposit to cover cleaning costs (the house was spotless when they left).

I'm not saying she isn't responsible, and there are shitty landlords out there giving Decent ones a bad name. I can't help but feel that the management companies can be just as responsible In situations like this.

Reply
4
Posted by South_Plant_7876 2 weeks ago

Even the most dodgy agents don't just arbitrarily issue notices on their own initiative.

No excuses here. This sort of benefit of the doubt wouldn't be extended if it was a Tory or Reform MP.

Reply
2
Posted by Any_Meat_3044 2 weeks ago

EA are working on behalf of someone, they can advise what the landlord should do only. If they can't even make the right decision on their own expertise, how can we trust they can manage the country correctly?

Reply
1
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

Landlords take guidance from Letting Agents, its not the agents that make the decisions. They do require the landlords approval.

Reply
4
Posted by Melodic-Document-112 2 weeks ago

Not great optics 

Reply
4
Posted by Able_System_6767 2 weeks ago

Do as I say not as I do. Straight from the Marxist handbook. They make me 🤮

Reply
2
Posted by anggsta 2 weeks ago

Again and again. Don't they have any shame?

Reply
2
Posted by ihavenocluehelp999 2 weeks ago

Was this brought under the typical second home scam?

Reply
1
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

Maybe.. I imagine Vicky Spratt would have or will be checking.

Reply
1
Posted by cheesygazelle 2 weeks ago

She came in after the expenses scandal. They’ve only been able to rent second homes since then. In any case she’s a London MP so isn’t able to claim that allowance.

Reply
2
Posted by michalzxc 2 weeks ago

Nice, it is a duty of business to maximize the profits

Reply
4
Posted by Beer-Milkshakes 2 weeks ago

I think you were meant to get angry at the business owner being a Labour MP. You know, Labour, they're currently being held to the highest standard of ethics that any party has seen in the last half century.

Reply
3
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

The set of events includes situations where a tenant is asked to leave because "you are selling," but in reality, the property is not being sold and is instead being rented out at a higher rate. Would result in fines and penalties when Labour's housing bill is enacted.

It's about hypocrisy to me.

Reply
2
Posted by oldvlognewtricks 2 weeks ago

There was no eviction for sale in this story. No fault evictions exist. The tenant in this story decided to leave.

What exactly are you saying happened?

Reply
1
Posted by phpadam 2 weeks ago

>No fault evictions exist.

Today.

Reply
1
Posted by Relevant-Ad7738 2 weeks ago

This is why meaningful changes to help renters, social housing and homelessness will never be passed. Even without the incessant lobbying by firms and industry, the majority of MPs are landlords or their families are landlords. They use their allowances to buy more properties funded by taxpayers, they have a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

Reply
0
Posted by AromaticPatience693 2 weeks ago

But they don't like capitalism they say! You could not make it up! Only with these clowns dystopia is a reality

Reply
1
Posted by oldvlognewtricks 2 weeks ago

“You criticise capitalism yet you live under capitalism” — This genius, thinking they did something

Reply
0
Posted by StoicDreamxo 2 weeks ago

This MP has actually helped me when I was homeless and I will be forever grateful however this is shameful and greedy behaviour and I’m very disappointed. She should be held accountable.

Reply