86% Drop in Bath Council Houses in the Last 40 Years

  • In 1981, 23.8% of properties in Bath (Bath and the North East Somerset District as a whole) were council houses. Today, that figure stands at 3.4%, a proportional drop of 86%.
  • Why has the number of council houses dropped so much in those 40 years?
  • How has that changed the dynamics of the Bath property market in those 40 years?

The ability of local authorities to build council houses came into law in July 1919 with the 1919 Housing and Town Planning Act. It was one of the most important pieces of domestic legislature passed after WW1 and was the first time in the UK that a nationally public funded system of providing homes was made for the masses. It was paid for mostly by central government and provided by local authorities (councils) and public utility societies (which in later years became today’s housing associations).

Between 1919 and 1979, 6.94 million council houses were built.

Just over 1 million council houses were built between 1920 and 1939, whilst 5,804,150 council houses were built between 1946 and 1979. This is compared to 4,533,440 private homes and 260,910 housing association properties in the same time frame (’46 to ’79).

So, between 1946 and 1979, the council house was the dominant force of British housing. But that all changed in 1979!

Many people believe it was Margaret Thatcher who was the architect of allowing the sitting tenant of a council house to buy their home. Interestingly, council house tenants have been able to buy their council house from as early as the mid 1930s, albeit with little or no discount. Also, as late as 1977, the Labour Housing Minster published a Green Paper extolling the virtues of homeownership and council tenants being able to buy their home at a discount.

But after the General Election of 1979, the new Tory government drafted the Housing Act 1980, which gave the Right to Buy, which became law in the autumn of 1980. Then things really took off!

This new law established a right for most council tenants who had been in their home for three years or more to a discount. The discount started at 33% and increased by 1% for each extra year, up to a maximum of 50%. If the tenant sold the house within the first five years of ownership, a prorated repayment of their discount was required.

Between 1980 and 1989, 970,558 council houses nationally were sold at a discount.

But the issue was that when a council house was sold, it took that house out of the council’s portfolio for future generations. From the start, there were limitations on local authorities’ use of monies from the council house sales as most of it had to be given to central government in London, meaning only 390,560 new council houses were built between 1980 and 1989. Looking at the numbers locally …

In 1981, there were 13,891 council houses in Bath and North East Somerset, today it’s 2,528.

No wonder the country has a housing crisis… but as my regular readers know – the devil is in the detail… and that devil is the humble housing association.

The Tory General Election Manifesto in 1979 had proposed the rights for both council house and housing association tenants to buy their own house under the Right to Buy scheme. The Conservatives argued housing associations, who obtained government funding, should be subject to the same Right to Buy proposals as councils. The Government won the vote in the Commons, yet lost the vote in the Lords, meaning housing association tenants could not buy their homes at a large discount.

At the time, there were only 400,000 housing association properties in the country, so the Government was not that worried. But the significance of housing associations developed in the 1980s and beyond as they were allowed to borrow money from the private sector.

Between 1949 and 1979, the average number of housing association properties built annually was 8,524. Since 1979 to today, it has been 25,062 per year (and 31,606 per year in the 2010s).

Also, the Government encouraged councils to transfer their remaining council houses to housing association schemes from 1986. The advantage to these ‘stock transfers’ was the Government allowed housing associations to access private funding to improve their existing properties and buy new ones (good news for existing tenants complaining that the local authority never upgraded their homes).

Moreover, the Tory Government liked stock transfers, as it allowed them to dismantle council housing from the inside. Interestingly, Labour expanded the ‘Stock Transfer’ process in 1997 and further reduced the eligibility for council tenants’ Right to Buy, meaning the number of council tenants exercising their Right to Buy declined considerably.

Meaning today, even though the provision of council housing has dropped like the proverbial stone…

The number of housing association properties in Bath and North East Somerset has increased from 996 in 1981 to 8,086.

So, how has this changed the dynamic of the Bath property market in the last 40 years?

Would it surprise you to learn that the number of people who own their own home in Bath today is very similar to what it was 20 years ago before the property boom started? It’s just that even though we’ve had a large drop in the number of council houses and an increase in the number of housing association properties, the number of people owning their own home has remained relatively the same (in some areas of Bath this has actually increased), the significant issue is the growth of the private rented sector.

It’s almost as if people who used to rent from the council now rent from a private landlord.

The question is, is it right for private individuals to make money from tenants who rent from them as opposed to the local authority? Or are private landlords providing better types, choices and quality of accommodation for these tenants, albeit at a higher rental rate than if they rented a council house?

I really do believe if it wasn’t for the growth of the buy-to-let landlord, which began in the early 2000s, we would have an even bigger housing crisis on our hands than the one we have currently.

Both local and central government have had their hands tied behind their backs since 2008 with a lack of funding, and it’s the private landlord who has stepped up and supplied in excess of 2.3 million additional rental properties since 2001, housing nearly 5,520,000 Brits.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

General Election 2019

WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE PRIVATE RENTAL SECTOR

Heated debates over Brexit and the future of the NHS may have dominated headlines in the run-up to this year’s snap General Election, but when voters go to the polls on 12 December they will also have their say on a broad spectrum of policies which will plot the direction of the United Kingdom for the foreseeable future. Flagship housing policies have been announced by all of the main parties, each of which would mean significant changes for the private rental sector. Change is coming for landlords and tenants alike, regardless of who has the Downing Street keys come the New Year.

Armed with a strong brew and a highlighter, we trawled the manifestos to bring you a summary of the main partys’ plans for the sector.


The Conservative Party

Before an election had even been called, the Conservatives outlined their intention to abolish Section 21, or ‘no-fault’ evictions; their manifesto follows through on this promise. It is expected that Section 21 of the Housing Act will be replaced by a reworked version of Section 8, which would allow landlords to take back possession of their property if they had a valid reason, for example a breach of contract or to sell. The government sold this as a fairer solution for both tenants and landlords by promising greater security to tenants, and a simpler, faster eviction process for landlords with a genuine reason for seeking possession.

We will bring in a Better Deal for Renters, including abolishing ‘no fault’ evictions and only requiring one ‘lifetime’ deposit which moves with the tenant.

The Tories’ manifesto also plans to introduce a ‘lifetime’ deposit which moves with the tenant from property to property, also known as tenant deposit passports. In practice, this will allow a tenant to port their existing security deposit to their next tenancy; it is not yet known how deposit deductions or tenancy overlaps will work. A working group formed of the various deposit protection schemes had been due to report back to the government in the autumn, but the election has forced the Conservatives’ hand.

The only other reference to the sector in the Tory manifesto is an allusion to a policy introduced in 2015, protecting tenants from ‘revenge evictions’. We can only assume that legislation and enforcement of this issue will be tightened to give tenants greater protection against unscrupulous and ill-informed landlords.


The Labour Party

Jeremy Corbyn’s manifesto says that the UK’s 11 million tenants are ‘at the sharp end of the housing crisis’, and promises urgent action to protect private renters. Plans for open-ended tenancies will mean an end to no-fault evictions, echoing the Conservatives’ intentions to scrap Section 21, whilst rent increases would be capped at inflation. Labour would also give local authorities powers to introduce rent caps, should rents locally be deemed excessive against the national average.

We will take urgent action to protect private renters through rent controls, open-ended tenancies, and new, binding minimum standards.

An annual property ‘MOT’ would replace current landlord safety requirements, with hefty fines, landlord licensing and renters’ unions in place to hold sub-standard homes and rogue landlords to account. One of the party’s more radical policies is the introduction of national licensing for landlords.

Labour would abolish the Conservatives’ contentious Right to Rent policy, which in March 2019 was found to be in contravention of human rights law. This would remove the burden on a landlord to check the immigration status of their tenant before and during their tenancy.


The Liberal Democrats

Jo Swinson’s most eye-catching policy for the private rental sector is the introduction of a Help to Rent scheme, which would provide government-backed deposit loans to first-time renters under the age of 30. This has drawn criticism from some who believe the government should be supporting the younger generation into home ownership; however, Swinson maintains that increasing numbers of young people require state support in order to break into the rental market.

To reform the private rental sector, we will help young people into the rental market by establishing a new Help to Rent scheme to provide government-backed tenancy deposit loans for all first-time renters under 30.

The Liberal Democrats complete the triumvirate of major parties who have pledged greater security to tenants in the form of longer-term tenancies. Whilst they have not explicitly pledged in their manifesto to remove Section 21, the party voted in favour of doing so at their Bournemouth conference last September. They would also introduce a cap on annual rent increases, linked to inflation.

The Lib Dems’ final flagship rental policy is the mandatory licensing of all private landlords, in order to improve enforcement of current regulations.


What does it all mean?

Regardless of your political inclinations, landlords should accept that changes will be made to the sector after the 12th of December, but behind the dramatic headlines are policies which will have little impact on most conscientious landlords.

Section 21 evictions are going to be abolished, regardless of who holds the keys to Number 10, but landlords should find succour in the fact that reforms to Section 8, if done correctly, may actually simplify the eviction process for landlords with a legitimate reason to seek possession of their property.

Proposed rent controls will restrict annual rent increases to inflation, however most standard tenancy agreements already cite RPI as the bellwether by which to gauge rent reviews.

All three parties are seeking to make life more difficult for ‘rogue landlords’, their message being that dutiful landlords with a keen awareness of their obligations should have nothing to fear. Proposed landlord licensing or tightening of legislation is intended to clamp down on those landlords with little care or knowledge of the law.

Whilst it is not included in any manifestos, it is still widely expected that all letting agents will be required to comply with the recommendations of the RoPA Report, which proposed mandatory qualifications and licensing for all professional agents; something which Reside already complies with by virtue of our ARLA Propertymark membership.

With changes to the sector undoubtedly coming soon, and strict enforcement of housing legislation being proposed, there has never been a better time for landlords to employ a qualified, knowledgeable and regulated letting agency.

If you are a landlord with property to rent in Bath, please don’t hesitate to contact us – we would love to help.