2 out of 3 young adults living at home

The problems you mention for tenants must be balanced with owners rights to recover their properties when they/their families need it, or when they want to sell. You can’t have it all in favour of the tenant. At present, there are significant reasons not to rent, not least is the difficulty in ending tenancies and regaining vacant possession. If the process was made easier, you probably would have more owners who want to rent properties remaining in/entering the rental sector.

If you want rental properties for tenants, then the case for buying to rent it out instead of owner occupancy is easily made. I don’t think I need to provide an explanation/case for that, it should be self explanatory.
It would be naive to think in a country where 94% of the rental sector is provided by as you call them, amateur LLs, that the fund-based investor would come anywhere remotely close to replacing/providing that coverage. Besides, a small landlord is not going to be able to compete with/prevent a fund based investor from buying any property, they can most likely outbid amateurs on any property they set their sights on and in a lot of cases, before the property even reaches the market for sale.

Another potential scenario, LLs lose almost all of their rights including the right to vacant possession the day a tenant moves in, then there are decreasing numbers of LLs for the tenants to rent from. As I said earlier, if you want rental properties, then you must have some balance.

A point oft made, but rarely acknowledged by those with only one perspective, when a LL who had 4 tenants exits the rental sector, the number of people now looking for a new property is often greater than the number of people buying the house.

You must also consider that not all LLs exiting the market are selling, they may be going to SLs/family occupancy/leaving the property empty.

The state needs to get involved in the rental sector in a big way again. State builds homes, people rent them from the state.

We need to get rid of the Tom, Dick and Harry non-professional Landlord who's only interested in making a quick buck off of desperate people while the LL's sit on their arses.

What could possibly go wrong? Do you see the State currently evicting LA tenants who don’t pay their rents?
I suspect people with your viewpoint want the State to hand them a home, charge them low rent, knowing that the last thing the State will want is to evict people.

At least be honest about it.

You don’t see the issue with institutional funds buying up new developments for rental income on which they don’t pay tax in this State? Do you think they are more likely to offer lower rents?

I also find that statement at odds with your desire for owner occupiers to be able to buy, surely the financial might of institutional investors would outbid owner occupiers, and they benefit from keeping more people looking to rent rather than being able to buy.

I really don’t think the thread is now benefitting from this back and forth, so maybe it’s time others chimed in.

The house we recently bought has just the two of us living in it now. It was rented to 3 couples and when one half of one of them moved out the other decided not to pay the rent. Then the rest of the people in the house decide to join them in not paying the rent. Three and a half years the former owner was telling me it took to evict them.

He came up to take away an old shed a week after we bought it that he didnt get around to before we closed and we had a good chat. He definitely didnt enjoy being a landlord.

Certainly from a tenant's point of view, other things being equal, the professional institutional landlord is preferable since some loopholes that amateur landlords can use to evict don't apply.

The way I think the rental market needs to go (over time) is to have the bulk of rentals being either institutional funds, housing associations, or local authorities, with amateur landlords making up a small minority. I would see these groups trading units with tenants in situ and rental agreements preserved.

You think increasing supply causes prices to go up?