I'm not in the bashing landlords game, I see a game of musical chairs where there just are not enough properties to go around. Secret schemes and boosting rent allowance helps a particular subset of people chasing the number of chairs. But will boosting rent allowance bring more chairs into play?That's another issue, supply, but not all landlords are anti rent allowance tenants, that's what I'm talking about, they are not even at the table in ability to view never mind rent what is available. I've also commentated on how to increase supply. Not just on this thread but a couple of years ago, a bedsit thread if I can remember properly. Right now if I asked for market rent people would be inable to rent in the city where my property is. People like to bash landlords but the truth is the problem would be a lot less if we demanded market rent. That is why the government has a 'secret' scheme to increase the ceiling if the landlords threaten eviction. My own tenants when we asked them to try and break the ceiling had already known about this from other tenants.
If the RA tenant is evicted, is the landlord letting the property go idle? Is it being rented out to professionals or sold on to someone as their PPR? I think that's the key question. Just because the property is no longer let to an RA tenant, it doesn't mean it's no longer lived in.
We need to bring more capacity into play - totally agree with you on the bedsits and any similar regulations that have been OTT in taking safe livable properties off the market.