Tory Challenges Government’s Property Restrictions as Infringement on Landlords’ Rights

Charles Amos, who studied Political Theory at the University of Oxford has openly criticised the government’s recent proposals affecting landlords, notably the plans to require planning permission for converting houses into short-term lets for more than ninety days a year, and the move to ban no-fault evictions. Michael Gove, in defense of these policies, argues they are designed to support local residents in buying or renting homes and to enhance tenant security. Amos, however, views these measures as unjust intrusions on landlords’ rights, equating them to “legalised theft.”

The Crux of the Controversy
The Department for Levelling Up and Housing asserts that the new regulation for short-term lets aims to preserve community living spaces. However, Amos challenges the premise that locals have an inherent right to affordable living in their birthplaces, suggesting such a stance could lead to extreme measures infringing on homeowners’ rights. He further critiques the rationale behind restricting short-term lets, arguing that doing so based on the disruptive behavior of a minority is unjust and overlooks the potential benefits of a free market in determining housing supply and demand.

The Debate on Evictions
The contentious issue of no-fault evictions is another battlefield. Amos contests the notion of a tenant’s right to security of accommodation, drawing parallels to personal property loans to illustrate his point. He challenges the socialist viewpoint that diminishes property rights in matters significantly affecting people’s lives, defending landlords’ rights to manage their properties as they see fit, including the termination of tenancies at agreed-upon times.

Broader Implications
Amos warns that such government interventions not only undermine individual rights but could also lead to adverse outcomes for the housing market. He explains that the removal of Section 21 notices, facilitating easier eviction of problematic tenants, could deter landlords from the rental market, thereby reducing housing supply and potentially raising rents. This, he argues, would ironically harm the very tenants these policies aim to protect.

A Call to Action
Asserting that the government’s stance could lead to broader infringements on property rights, Amos calls for a liberal society to staunchly oppose these “wretched restrictions.” He argues that true respect for private property and individual rights is essential for maintaining the integrity and freedom of homeowners and landlords alike.