1-12 of 12 results for subject:Rents
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.216 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.005 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Rents
- We searched for
- subject_t:Rents OR subject_t:"Domestic rents" OR subject_ses:92811
Primary member
X
Gardner of Parkes, Baroness
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Gardner of Parkes, Baroness (12)
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
My Lords, I declare my interests as in the register. Can the Minister comment on what plans the Government have to assist small and medium landlords who are unable to recover Covid-related rent arrears and face potential enforcement action by their mortgage providers? Might the Government persuade mortgage providers to extend their overall repayment period in these cases, instead of seeking to enforce the mortgage?
My Lords, I declare my interests as in the register. Can the Minister comment on what plans the Government have to assist small and medium landlords who are unable to recover Covid-related rent arrears and face potential enforcement action by their mortgage providers? Might the Government persuade mortgage providers to extend their overall repayment period in these cases, instead of seeking to enforce the mortgage?
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Procedure
Virtual contributions
Answered on
20 May 2021
My noble friend will be pleased to know that, to support landlords, mortgage lenders have agreed to offer payment holidays of up to six months, including for buy-to-let mortgages. Although that is available only until July 2021, from 1 April 2021 there have been moves to enable forbearance options tailored to the individual landlord.
Subjects
Arrears; Disease control; Private rented housing; Rents; Coronavirus
Date
20 May 2021
Reference
812 c685
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, is it not essential in producing this final scheme that it should be as fair and as protected as the deposit protection schemes which exist for tenants’ deposits at present? In particular, there needs to be some kind of recognition that estate agents have to receive money in order to get the security checks, references and other things they need. They have to be carefully considered as well. It has to be fair to all parties.
My Lords, is it not essential in producing this final scheme that it should be as fair and as protected as the deposit protection schemes which exist for tenants’ deposits at present? In particular, there needs to be some kind of recognition that estate agents have to receive money in order to get the security checks, references and other things they need. They have to be carefully considered as well. It has to be fair to all parties.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
28 March 2017
My Lords, it certainly does need to be fair to all parties. The evidence from the consultation was that about 85%, if I am not mistaken, backed the need for enforcement in this area, so that obviously was a key factor. I agree with my noble friend that the consultation will need to ensure that it is fair and equitable across a wide variety of people.
Subjects
Deposits; Letting agents; Insurance; Landlords; Tenants; Rents; Client money protection
Date
28 March 2017
Reference
782 c467
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Does the Minister agree that it is extremely difficult for small landlords who may not be using an agency to know where to go for these deposit schemes? I use an agent, but I went on the internet to try to locate details of these schemes, and found it extremely difficult. What will the Government do to publicise this arrangement so that people know where they stand?
Does the Minister agree that it is extremely difficult for small landlords who may not be using an agency to know where to go for these deposit schemes? I use an agent, but I went on the internet to try to locate details of these schemes, and found it extremely difficult. What will the Government do to publicise this arrangement so that people know where they stand?
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
29 March 2010
My Lords, as part of our broader response to the Rugg review, we have outlined a package of measures including not only a national register for landlords and regulation of letting and managing agents but setting up a private sector tenants’ helpline, which we are hoping to have in place by the end of this year.
Subjects
Assured tenancies; Landlord and tenant; Rented housing; Rents; Shorthold tenancies; Impact assessments
Date
29 March 2010
Reference
718 c1186
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords—
My Lords, will the Minister assure me that that will be in place by the time the scheme is introduced, which he originally said would be October? Now he says that we will know about it by the end of the year.
My Lords—
My Lords, will the Minister assure me that that will be in place by the time the scheme is introduced, which he originally said would be October? Now he says that we will know about it by the end of the year.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
29 March 2010
My Lords, I was talking about one particular component of the package of measures—the private sector tenants’ helpline. This is an ongoing proposition which will be available to tenants for years to come. However, the point about making sure that tenants and landlords are fully aware of this when it comes into operation on 1 October is a fair one.
Subjects
Assured tenancies; Landlord and tenant; Rented housing; Rents; Shorthold tenancies; Impact assessments
Date
29 March 2010
Reference
718 c1186
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
I thank the Minister, but really the notice has been quite short. That was obviously tabled after my Question. Is he aware that the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors said that London will be the most adversely affected and that it says: "““The Government needs to ensure that landlords and agents dealing with these properties are aware of the changes and will have time to access a relevant scheme.””"
How much time is he proposing to allow?
I thank the Minister, but really the notice has been quite short. That was obviously tabled after my Question. Is he aware that the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors said that London will be the most adversely affected and that it says: "““The Government needs to ensure that landlords and agents dealing with these properties are aware of the changes and will have time to access a relevant scheme.””"
How much time is he proposing to allow?
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
29 March 2010
The consultation around these proposals shows that there was very broad support for raising the threshold. So far as timing is concerned, these will not come into effect until 1 October 2010, which gives time for landlords to enter into arrangements, particularly around security for tenants’ deposits, which I think is the point being pressed by the noble Baroness.
Subjects
Assured tenancies; Landlord and tenant; Rented housing; Rents; Shorthold tenancies; Impact assessments
Date
29 March 2010
Reference
718 c1184-5
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to alter the present annual rent limit of £25,000 for assured shorthold tenancies; and what impact assessment of any such change has been carried out.
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest which is in the Register.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to alter the present annual rent limit of £25,000 for assured shorthold tenancies; and what impact assessment of any such change has been carried out.
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest which is in the Register.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord McKenzie of Luton
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
29 March 2010
Answered on
29 March 2010
My Lords, the Minister for Housing made a statutory instrument on 22 March raising the annual rental threshold for assured tenancies to £100,000 from 1 October 2010. This will extend the framework of assured and assured shorthold tenancies to the majority of private lettings as the original legislation intended. An impact assessment was published alongside the SI and placed in both Houses’ Libraries.
Subjects
Assured tenancies; Landlord and tenant; Rented housing; Rents; Shorthold tenancies; Impact assessments
Date
29 March 2010
Reference
718 c1184
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Certainly, many people are very unhappy to see such high rents; the highest are in Ealing, where just under £150,000 a year is paid for one family, and in Kensington and Chelsea there is that widely publicised rent of £97,500 a year. Although people would like to see help for the homeless, many think that it is ridiculous that the properties that are provided are places that they could not dream of living in themselves, and they are struggling to pay their mortgages. Will the new scheme bring flexibility for local authorities to allow them to use this money with greater discretion and not to have to tell the landlord in advance the maximum that they can pay, which seems absurd?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Certainly, many people are very unhappy to see such high rents; the highest are in Ealing, where just under £150,000 a year is paid for one family, and in Kensington and Chelsea there is that widely publicised rent of £97,500 a year. Although people would like to see help for the homeless, many think that it is ridiculous that the properties that are provided are places that they could not dream of living in themselves, and they are struggling to pay their mortgages. Will the new scheme bring flexibility for local authorities to allow them to use this money with greater discretion and not to have to tell the landlord in advance the maximum that they can pay, which seems absurd?
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
20 January 2009
My Lords, the noble Baroness makes an important point about making sure that the system produces fairness between those in work, and what those families can afford, and those on benefits. Last October, the Secretary of State announced that the local housing allowance levels will be capped at the five-bedroom rate from next April, so that any new claimants in respect of properties larger than that will have a cap on their benefit. We have already identified that, in a handful of cases at the margins, the scheme provides for very high rents in some parts of London. That is what we are seeking to address.
Subjects
Benefits rules; Housing benefit; Greater London; Rents; Cost effectiveness; Eligibility
Date
20 January 2009
Reference
706 c1549
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Whether, in view of its place as a national tourist attraction, they will put forward proposals to ensure that the London Eye will continue to operate in its present location.
Whether, in view of its place as a national tourist attraction, they will put forward proposals to ensure that the London Eye will continue to operate in its present location.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Procedure
Topical questions (HL)
For answer on
24 May 2005
Answered on
24 May 2005
My Lords, the Government recognise the importance of the London Eye as a national tourist attraction. Current negotiations between the Eye and the South Bank Centre on rent for the Jubilee Gardens site are a commercial matter. We understand that these are progressing well despite media reports to the contrary. My right honourable friend is monitoring progress very closely.
Subjects
Location; Rents; Southbank Centre; London Eye
Date
24 May 2005
Reference
672 c352-3
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. It is very important that we retain the London Eye, particularly as it is an essential part of our Olympic bid for 2012. But is the Minister aware that the little patch of disputed land is metropolitan open land? Nothing can be built on it. It is not therefore a commercial proposition, and that should surely make a difference to the rent.
Can the Minister explain to us what the situation really is, because we keep reading reports and denials? We are told that the rent requested is £2.5 million. That is denied by the South Bank Centre. We are then told that no notice of eviction has been issued, yet possession of a letter from Herbert Smith solicitors has revealed quite clearly that the Eye has been asked to vacate that piece of land by 1 July at latest. What is the truth of all this, because the public are not just concerned, but even outraged, at the thought that the Eye might be threatened?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. It is very important that we retain the London Eye, particularly as it is an essential part of our Olympic bid for 2012. But is the Minister aware that the little patch of disputed land is metropolitan open land? Nothing can be built on it. It is not therefore a commercial proposition, and that should surely make a difference to the rent.
Can the Minister explain to us what the situation really is, because we keep reading reports and denials? We are told that the rent requested is £2.5 million. That is denied by the South Bank Centre. We are then told that no notice of eviction has been issued, yet possession of a letter from Herbert Smith solicitors has revealed quite clearly that the Eye has been asked to vacate that piece of land by 1 July at latest. What is the truth of all this, because the public are not just concerned, but even outraged, at the thought that the Eye might be threatened?
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 May 2005
My Lords, I think that it will be recognised that part of the reason why newspapers are able and feel obliged to speculate is that the two parties are engaged in a commercial negotiation, and neither of them have made direct comments to the press about its process. I think that we would all understand why.
I can, however, clear up two matters. No notice of eviction has been issued. What has been brought to the attention of the Eye is the fact that the lease has expired, a lease which involved a rent of only £65,000. So it is not the case that the South Bank Centre has been exploiting the position—very far from it. That seems a very low rent indeed when one recognises that the Eye takes £40 million in receipts during the course of a year. So there is clearly a case for an increase in the rent, but the figure of more than £2 million that the noble Baroness quoted is quite fictitious.
Subjects
Location; Rents; Southbank Centre; London Eye
Date
24 May 2005
Reference
672 c353
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
In view of the publication on 21st May of the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions' consultation paper Limiting Fair Rent Increases, what estimate they have made of the impact of these proposals on future investment in the private rented residential sector.
In view of the publication on 21st May of the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions' consultation paper Limiting Fair Rent Increases, what estimate they have made of the impact of these proposals on future investment in the private rented residential sector.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Answered by
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
2 July 1998
Answered on
2 July 1998
Subjects
Investment; Private sector; Regulation; Rented housing; Tenancy agreements; Rents
Date
2 July 1998
Reference
591 c828-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
1st supplementary that proposals are a discouragement, and possibly, positive disincentive to further investment.
1st supplementary that proposals are a discouragement, and possibly, positive disincentive to further investment.
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
2 July 1998
Subjects
Investment; Private sector; Regulation; Rented housing; Tenancy agreements; Rents
Date
2 July 1998
Reference
591 c828-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
If under proposals for recovery of capital charges in NHS & Community Care Bill, Institute of Dental Surgery at present housed entirely in NHS accommodation provided by Eastman Dental Hospital Special Health Authority will be required to pay full economic rent in future
If under proposals for recovery of capital charges in NHS & Community Care Bill, Institute of Dental Surgery at present housed entirely in NHS accommodation provided by Eastman Dental Hospital Special Health Authority will be required to pay full economic rent in future
Asked by
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
Answered by
Baroness Hooper
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
15 January 1990
Answered on
15 January 1990
Legislation
National Health Service and Community Care Bill 1989/90
Subjects
Capital investment; Capital; Finance; Fees and charges; NHS; Rents; Eastman Dental Hospital
Date
15 January 1990
Reference
514 c509-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords