Tuesday, 1 October 2019

Loko Polo: First, afford the harm.

Here's one for der Pinkler, should I get round to it; for a city's housing policy shouldn't be seen as independent of its homelessness. The following translation is mine:
The Berliner Tenants' Association (BMV) is outraged. "The idea that the rent cap would mean the loss of the basis of business [frustration of purpose] and that tenancies could simply be terminated upon its enactment is pure nonsense under tenancy law and is obviously only intended to frighten tenants and confuse political opinion," says BMV Managing Director Reiner Wild.

A mass termination of rental relationships could only be described as a "wrong-way ride down a one-way street in terms of housing policy", which would ultimately harm the owners and landlords themselves, Wild said.

"After all, a notice of termination initially only causes vacancy, because the landlords are also subject to the rent cap in the event of re-letting".
What Mr. Wild ain't saying, but should be obvious, is that there are plenty of property owners, i.e. investors, who'd make use of frustration of purpose out of pure spite. That's one of the costs of doing business. Tell me I'm wrong.