I'll comment on this only.
Back in the, I think, 1960s and maybe 1970s in England there was a thriving rental market going on in the London area (maybe elsewhere, that's the one I experienced). It consisted of old buildings divided into small sections (sometimes one room) served by a single bathroom, and often poorly maintained. A particular landlord named Rachman overdid the extortion, including using force to evict tenants, to the point where the government stepped in and introduced lots of new regulations, including occupation security for tenants and "fair rents". All very well meant and it did put a lot of "slumlords" out of business, but ... All a tenant had to do after moving in was to trot down to the local council and have his rent reviewed. A mostly much lower rent would be forced on the landlord and he would be powerless to evict the tenant so long as the rent was paid. The result was that it became uneconomic to own rental properties and many landlords just dropped out of the business, particularly as the buildings themselves were worth a lot. Overall, it became close to impossible to rent at that level in the London area.
It was actually more complicated, but my thumbnail sketch will illustrate my point. When you try to fix things, beware unintended consequences.