Thanks Labour..really!!

[Jeffa]

Just wanted to put it out there I vote blue not red...buuutttt! I'd personally like to thank Labour Phil Twyford,P.M JC, for over the past 18 months my rents have increased over 2 properties $5200 p.a this year and $2120 p.a last year (Wellington area) after bringing them up to healthy homes standard, after refinancing at the non advertised rate of %3.55, over 25 years for healthy homes requirements..its an excellent roi...I'm not going to lose sleep this time next year if Labour gets another term...keep up the great work Cindy lol.

[Bob Kane]

It's often said that property investors make more money under a Labour govt than under National.
Basically, Labour hates landlords and tries to hurt them which results in a shortage of rentals which helps landlords.

[Keys]

Sent in via the OIA last week.

Good afternoon.

There are rumours around that the Government is proposing to change the Residential Tenancies Act to remove the right of Landlords to offer Fixed Term Tenancies to tenants.

This right is specifically referred to in Section(s)

2, 5, 5A, 7, 9, 13A, 24, 25, 26, 50, 50A, 58, 59, 59A, 60A, 61, 66, 66A and Schedule one and possibly more.

My questions of you are these.

1. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the benefits, to the tenant, of removing Fixed Term Tenancies.
2. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the benefits, to the landlord, of removing Fixed Term Tenancies.
3. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the benefits, to the tenant, of keeping Fixed Term Tenancies.
4. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the benefits, to the landlord, of keeping Fixed Term Tenancies.
5. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the detrimental effects, to the tenant, of removing Fixed Term Tenancies.
6. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the detrimental effects, to the landlord, of removing Fixed Term Tenancies.
7. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the detrimental effects, to the tenant, of keeping Fixed Term Tenancies.
8. Please supply me with data and specifics relating to the detrimental effects, to the landlord, of keeping Fixed Term Tenancies.

All data and specifics must be supplied with reference to recognized collection methods and citing sources.

Since this is an issue which was brought up last year in the discussion document then I am sure there is (or should be) data to supply.

Kind Regards

[donna]

Well done Keys - we'll be keen to know their answers.

Seems an odd move given their tenant bias. I suppose another question would be what's replacing the 'fixed term tenancies'? There was talk of it being impossible to remove tenants unless they choose to leave or you're selling up (or something along the same line).

cheers,

Donna

[artemis]

For the record, recent answer to a written Parliamentary question that seems to raise more questions than answers. (My emphasis on last sentence.)

27162 (2019). Hon Judith Collins to the Housing (Associate Minister (Public Housing) - Kris Faafoi) (16 Jul 2019): Does she agree with the previous Minister of Housing and Urban Development who said, "Insecurity of housing is one of the biggest problems we have"?

Hon Kris Faafoi (Housing (Associate Minister (Public Housing) - Kris Faafoi)) replied: Your question has been referred for my reply as the matter you have raised falls within my portfolio responsibilities as Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing). Evidence suggests that tenants do not have strong security of tenure in New Zealand. The most common length of a tenancy in New Zealand is about 12 months. Statistics New Zealand’s General Social Survey shows that the most common reason for movement in the rental market is due to landlords ending tenancies.

Tenants experiencing insecure tenure may be displaced due to a competing demand for the property they live in and this leads to negative impacts on health, education and employment outcomes. Insecure tenure has a disproportionate impact on Māori as they are over represented in homelessness and housing stress statistics.

This is why the primary objective of the reform of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 is to improve security and stability of tenure for tenants while maintaining adequate protection of landlords' interests.

[klauster]

Labour has deepened the shortage of rentals that helps to improve not only housing but also income potentials.

Removing home owner’s control in terms of how long they intend to let their house to renters will remove all temporary rentals by people e.g. who stay overseas, home & income homes under special family circumstances etc.

How will govt force the stability of tenure – maybe with penalty charges for empty houses?

[artemis]

.... How will govt force the stability of tenure – maybe with penalty charges for empty houses?

The discussion document is here, long closed for submissions -

https://www.hud.govt.nz/news-and-resources/consultations/consultation-reform-of-the-residential-tenancies-act-1986/

It is fairly waffly, putting forward various idea and proposals and asking for input. Nearly 5.000 submissions were received, and the government is still considering these. It does indicate government thinking though.

Covers proposed changes to tenancy agreements and only specific reasons able to be used to terminate tenancies. And maybe only then by order of the Tenancy Tribunal, presume on application. So termination with no reason given will not be permitted. (How about landlords have to be given justifiable reasons for tenants leaving, with recourse to the TT, haha.)

But who knows. If the government gets spooked by number of landlords exiting the sector, and putting expensive pressure on social housing, they might oh I don't know, set up a working group to report back in 2021 or 2022.

[PC]

Less rentals. Higher rents. Makes more poor people.
The poor, stupid & lazy vote for more socialism.
So high rents are great for increasing Labours voter base.

[jimO]

i just sold mine

[Don't believe the Hype]

I suspect the Ministers of Housing (there are 3 at last count) will put their collective heads together then their Boss will work out that this battle with landlords is not helping their cause.

They'll get a working group together to work out how to attract landlords to the market to make things better for renters.

They've started to see that renters need help with their KIWIBUILD MK2 - the rent to buy scheme that has had as much thinking behind it as their 100,000 homes over 10 years plan.

They'll work out shortly that rent to buy for 4000 renters will help about 4000/600,000 (0.67%) of people currently renting and if you subsidise the rent to buy till these folks can get bank finance it could be 5 years or more to recycle the funding to more rent to buyers we might see 8000 over the 10 yrs we were supposed to see 100,000 KIWIBUILD homes or 1.3% of current renters. Leaving 592,000 renting households assuming ZERO growth in the number of rentals in NZ.

You can then look over at the Minister of Immigration (Mr Soubrek or something I think his name is) who just allowed low income workers to bring in their families - sounds like more rentals needed - and made some claims that 30,000 companies will have more certainty when it comes to applying for foreign worker permits - assuming each of these businesses applies for and gets one more worker in who bring their families with them they're gonna need 30,000 more rentals...

So we have 8,000 rent to buy over 10 years... taking rentals down to 592,000 & the Minister of reducing immigration increasing the demand for rental houses by 30,000 or more... so the no. of NZ rentals rise to approx 622,000

There is only one way to fix this - subsidies for private landlords or skyrocketing rents

My bet - BOTH

[PC]

Nah. Rent controls and removal of 90 day notice.
It's all about "fairness".

[Davo36]

Nah. Rent controls and removal of 90 day notice.
It's all about "fairness".

Lol, like it.

[Davo36]

I suspect the Ministers of Housing (there are 3 at last count) will put their collective heads together then their Boss will work out that this battle with landlords is not helping their cause.

They'll get a working group together to work out how to attract landlords to the market to make things better for renters.

They've started to see that renters need help with their KIWIBUILD MK2 - the rent to buy scheme that has had as much thinking behind it as their 100,000 homes over 10 years plan.

They'll work out shortly that rent to buy for 4000 renters will help about 4000/600,000 (0.67%) of people currently renting and if you subsidise the rent to buy till these folks can get bank finance it could be 5 years or more to recycle the funding to more rent to buyers we might see 8000 over the 10 yrs we were supposed to see 100,000 KIWIBUILD homes or 1.3% of current renters. Leaving 592,000 renting households assuming ZERO growth in the number of rentals in NZ.

You can then look over at the Minister of Immigration (Mr Soubrek or something I think his name is) who just allowed low income workers to bring in their families - sounds like more rentals needed - and made some claims that 30,000 companies will have more certainty when it comes to applying for foreign worker permits - assuming each of these businesses applies for and gets one more worker in who bring their families with them they're gonna need 30,000 more rentals...

So we have 8,000 rent to buy over 10 years... taking rentals down to 592,000 & the Minister of reducing immigration increasing the demand for rental houses by 30,000 or more... so the no. of NZ rentals rise to approx 622,000

There is only one way to fix this - subsidies for private landlords or skyrocketing rents

My bet - BOTH

I'm starting to wonder if they'll see sense.

How long have they been in for now? 2 years? And despite all their interventions (actually because of them) rents have only gone up.

[sidinz]

The most common length of a tenancy in New Zealand is about 12 months. Statistics New Zealand’s General Social Survey shows that the most common reason for movement in the rental market is due to landlords ending tenancies.

WFT!? All the statistics I've ever heard say the exact opposite - that the bulk of tenancies are ended by the tenant. And I'm pretty sure the tenancy compliance guy who spoke to our local PIA last week said the same!

[artemis]

WFT!? All the statistics I've ever heard say the exact opposite - that the bulk of tenancies are ended by the tenant. And I'm pretty sure the tenancy compliance guy who spoke to our local PIA last week said the same!

Minister Faafoi is either muddled or deliberately misrepresenting this. The latest General Social Survey (to March 2019) says something very different. See the link to the data on housing quality and tenure security at the below link. Not only is landlords terminating tenancies not the main reason, but add the other reasons together to get tenant driven tenancy ending.

It is reported there that -

Tenancy ended by landlord 17.7
Moved from rental to owned dwelling 20.6
Social reasons 12.8
Education or work-related reasons 10.3
To move to a better quality home (e.g. warmer) 8.6
To move to a more suitable home (e.g. more accessible/better size) 11.4

The notes to the data expand on eg social reasons.

https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/wellbeing-statistics-2018