House prices rose 7.3% this year, average now almost £250k

[Pudney]

Funny, because @Psycho Sonny is trying to convince us all it's a loss-making enterprise now

Generally rental profits are very low on residential properties. If you have a bad tenant that can easily wipe out several years of profits. The real value is in the capital appreciation.

Also, please stop banging on about renters paying off a mortgage. The majority of rental properties are on interest only, and if they're not the owners are numpties.

 

[pc-guy]

What are housing associations, then?

I don't recall btw saying that no enterprise should be profit making. Please do feel free to quote the post where I say that.

I rented from housing association before. I also did projects for housing associations for work. Just because they are called housing associations and have charity status don’t ever confuse them as Jesus. They are not. They are heartless.

They are just professional landlords who happen to enjoy a massive tax break by offering cheaper rental. They still make money and MAKE A LOT of it.

 

[FoxEye]

Generally rental profits are very low on residential properties. If you have a bad tenant that can easily wipe out several years of profits. The real value is in the capital appreciation.

Also, please stop banging on about renters paying off a mortgage. The majority of rental properties are on interest only, and if they're not the owners are numpties.

If I say instead, "renters are paying your mortgage" will that please and sparkle? Instead of "paying off your mortgage".

As well as paying a bit more on top so landlords don't have to use their own money on repairs, etc.

To be honest, I'd be happy if BTL genuinely was a loss-making operation in all cases. Ecstatic.

Home owners don't look for other people to pay their repair bills. Don't look for someone else to pay off their mortgage. Don't seek tax relief (when they could) for expenses related to their property.

Landlords, on the other hand, think all expenses should be borne by their tenants, so they can just sit back and have a nice asset accumulating in value that their tenants effectively subsidise for them.

It's so funny to see landlords calling us communists. Their idea of capitalism is having their tenants subsidise them.

 

[dowie]

My house went up £100k in value 5 years (a 40% increase). I have made £100k (on paper at least) by doing nothing. That is absolute madness - literally impossible for me if I was buying now. This is the sort of thing that people resent the market conditions for. I can’t blame them!!

Loopy times.

Yeah, my flat in London nearly doubled in value at one point, I'm sure it's dropped off a bit now (and sadly might fall a little bit more after the stamp duty holiday ends) but I've still got a hefty chunk of equity in it, the mortgage is below 30% LTV now.

I'm half tempted to go for a self-build property outside London - could be mortgage free so long as I don't get too carried away watching grand designs etc..

Wouldn't personally bother with BTL in London, yields look tiny to the point where I can believe the claims of some being unprofitable, various landlords perhaps bought a while back and have benefitted from the rise in prices. Some student areas up north probably do provide value for BTL investors and tbh.. in that case the arguments from Scam and Foxeye don't apply - students do need somewhere to rent and aren't usually in a position to buy anything - these aren't people blowing a chunk of their salary to pay off a landlord's mortgage when they could be paying off their own.

Personally, I might be tempted by commercial property, can even invest via your pension. Obvious risks with small businesses closing after Covid and the general decline of the high street but that could present some value too.

A friend of mine started getting into parking spaces - he bought a few flats and in one building there were additional parking spaces available to buy - firstly these things seem to have risen in value more than the flats, secondly, there is always an active market of renters whose landlords were too tight to buy a parking space with the flat in the first place! A parking space costing 15k at the time the flats were sold is now worth more like 50k.

 

[pc-guy]

Won't somebody think of the poor landlords, it's so hard to make a profit.

Yet oddly for something that's not at all profitable, houses keep being bought up for their rental value.

And sites like RightMove et al continue to highlight the rental value of each property they list..

Which is really weird for something that's completely not profitable Must be doing it for a hobby, right?

You implied in this response. Multiple mentions of non-profit.

c’mom mate.

 

[FoxEye]

I rented from housing association before. I also did projects for housing associations for work. Just because they are called housing associations and have charity status don’t ever confuse them as Jesus. They are not. They are heartless.

They are just professional landlords who happen to enjoy a massive tax break by offering cheaper rental. They still make money and MAKE A LOT of it.

But they aren't allowed to make a profit? Or are you saying they do?

I'm not sure why you're bringing Jesus into this btw..

You implied in this response. Multiple mentions of non-profit.

c’mom mate.

In the context of housing. This is perfectly clear. Mate.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Funny, because @Psycho Sonny is trying to convince us all it's a loss-making enterprise now

It is now unless you can guarantee capital gains or have substantial equity.

It's almost as if you're not even bothering to read posts and still just make up your own idea of how it works.

Like I said before the rent is taxable with very little now in terms of allowed expenses. 5 years ago you could claim 100% of the interest as an expense now none of it.

But your answer is more taxation. Brilliant. They have been doing that and all its done is stop the small fish from getting in on the act.

More taxation is actually doing the opposite of what you want. It's making the bigger players richer by using companies and trusts, etc and avoiding the taxes the small fish are paying.

If anything more taxation has made it worse as now only those that are cash rich are buying as they are the only ones who can afford to.

The funniest thing is for someone who wants to buy a home you haven't the foggiest how mortgages work either.

 

[stuman]

Generally rental profits are very low on residential properties. If you have a bad tenant that can easily wipe out several years of profits. The real value is in the capital appreciation.

Also, please stop banging on about renters paying off a mortgage. The majority of rental properties are on interest only, and if they're not the owners are numpties.

So most BTL landlords have a VERY vested interest in increasing house prices? As in, if they don't hold onto the properties, and force out the little guys, they will lose money.

The more you knew eh.

 

[pc-guy]

But they aren't allowed to make a profit? Or are you saying they do?

I'm not sure why you're bringing Jesus into this btw..


In the context of housing. This is perfectly clear. Mate.

They have to charge social rent worked out local level by some formula. That still has a margin in it one would expect.

they are free to set service charges. And those service charges go up and up and up.

Also they get massive tax breaks on their income. They also get tax breaks on land purchases which they can develop to build flats for “social renting” as well as private sale. Which they get tax breaks again.

if they don’t make money how are these associations expand? Who give them money.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

So most BTL landlords have a VERY vested interest in increasing house prices? As in, if they don't hold onto the properties, and force out the little guys, they will lose money.

The more you knew eh.

Nobody is forcing anyone out.

Foxeye hasn't been able to club 50p together whilst living at home. He has no intention of buying his own place.

He just wants a house given to him for free or in fact be paid to take one.

 

[FoxEye]

It is now unless you can guarantee capital gains or have substantial equity.

It's almost as if you're not even bothering to read posts and still just make up your own idea of how it works.

Like I said before the rent is taxable with very little now in terms of allowed expenses. 5 years ago you could claim 100% of the interest as an expense now none of it.

But your answer is more taxation. Brilliant. They have been doing that and all its done is stop the small fish from getting in on the act.

More taxation is actually doing the opposite of what you want. It's making the bigger players richer by using companies and trusts, etc and avoiding the taxes the small fish are paying.

If anything more taxation has made it worse as now only those that are cash rich are buying as they are the only ones who can afford to.

I did say I'd also ban corporate ownership of residential property, with exceptions for housing associations, govt offshoots, care homes, etc.

But I wouldn't let corporations own residential property.

Just look to the US and see the megacorps buying up entire suburbs.

My whole argument revolves around a swing to seeing housing as a human right, not a profit making venture, or an asset to invest in.

This is mostly because of the finite supply and the fact that we don't want to build houses all over the damn country. And even if we did, they'd just be bought up by overseas "investors" and other such people. Building houses on its own won't solve this problem. *Even* if you covered the whole damn country in houses.

But I'm clearly in the minority as most people are just happy to see prices inflate as much as they can, whilst rubbing their.. hands.

e: Actually I fib. My whole argument includes not exploiting those less fortunate than you are as well.

 

[stuman]

It is now unless you can guarantee capital gains or have substantial equity.

It's almost as if you're not even bothering to read posts and still just make up your own idea of how it works.

Like I said before the rent is taxable with very little now in terms of allowed expenses. 5 years ago you could claim 100% of the interest as an expense now none of it.

But your answer is more taxation. Brilliant. They have been doing that and all its done is stop the small fish from getting in on the act.

More taxation is actually doing the opposite of what you want. It's making the bigger players richer by using companies and trusts, etc and avoiding the taxes the small fish are paying.

If anything more taxation has made it worse as now only those that are cash rich are buying as they are the only ones who can afford to.

So why do it?

Why is forcing out the little guys a bad thing? Big corpo' cash buyers can also be leveraged. The continual increase in tax will eventually force even the corpo' landlords out as well. There should be a better way, to allow accidental landlords some wiggle room, but there should be no excuse for what we have at the moment with companies/prospectors exploiting the working class.

 

[pc-guy]

In the context of housing. This is perfectly clear. Mate.

NO, you were implying landlords should shut the trap or do it for nothing. That’s EXACTLY what you were implying written in black and white.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I did say I'd also ban corporate ownership of residential property, with exceptions for housing associations, govt offshoots, care homes, etc.

But I wouldn't let corporations own residential property.

Just look to the US and see the megacorps buying up entire suburbs.

My whole argument revolves around a swing to seeing housing as a human right, not a profit making venture, or an asset to invest in.

This is mostly because of the finite supply and the fact that we don't want to build houses all over the damn country. And even if we did, they'd just be bought up by overseas "investors" and other such people. Building houses on its own won't solve this problem. *Even* if you covered the whole damn country in houses.

But I'm clearly in the minority as most people are just happy to see prices inflate as much as they can, whilst rubbing their.. hands.

e: Actually I fib. My whole argument includes not exploiting those less fortunate than you are as well.

Even if we covered the whole country In houses. That wouldn't be good enough for you. You require a beachfront property in Cornwall and the beach is already taken

 

[Psycho Sonny]

So why do it?

Why is forcing out the little guys a bad thing? Big corpo' cash buyers can also be leveraged. The continual increase in tax will eventually force even the corpo' landlords out as well. There should be a better way, to allow accidental landlords some wiggle room, but there should be no excuse for what we have at the moment with companies/prospectors exploiting the working class.

It's been explained above.

Capital gains or you have substantial equity. Or both even

 

[FoxEye]

Nobody is forcing anyone out.

Foxeye hasn't been able to club 50p together whilst living at home. He has no intention of buying his own place.

He just wants a house given to him for free or in fact be paid to take one.

Sure. Just like your BTL scheme is losing you money, I've lost money living at home. Somewhat miraculously.

/Nods

We're both really bad at this aren't we? You can't make money on your large BTL portfolio, and I can't save money with almost no outlay!

 

[FoxEye]

Even if we covered the whole country In houses. That wouldn't be good enough for you. You require a beachfront property in Cornwall and the beach is already taken

Yeah and it's got to have a balcony and a gold plated loo. Or it's just not good enough.

And I want a pet shark!

These are all things I've actually said.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Sure. Just like your BTL scheme is losing you money, I've lost money living at home. Somewhat miraculously.

/Nods

We're both really bad at this aren't we? You can't make money on your large BTL portfolio, and I can't save money with almost no outlay!

You need to learn how to read.

Where have I stated I am making a loss?

Again you are clueless to the information being provided to you.

I said unless you are making capital gains or have substantial equity.

I've already told you mine has no mortgage.

Do I need to do the math for you?

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Yeah and it's got to have a balcony and a gold plated loo. Or it's just not good enough.

And I want a pet shark!

These are all things I've actually said.

Well I thought we had turned this into a let's just make things up thread as that's what you are doing.

 

[Pudney]

If I say instead, "renters are paying your mortgage" will that please and sparkle? Instead of "paying off your mortgage".

Renters are paying the loan interest for another person. That's what they're doing.

As well as paying a bit more on top so landlords don't have to use their own money on repairs, etc.

Maybe. Maybe not. I've certainly seen enough examples of landlords being loss making over a number of years. 4 figure profits can be easily wiped out by 5 figure repairs, and that isn't unusual levels.

To be honest, I'd be happy if BTL genuinely was a loss-making operation in all cases. Ecstatic.

Home owners don't look for other people to pay their repair bills. Don't look for someone else to pay off their mortgage.

A fundamental part of our country is that payment is given in return for goods or services.

Don't seek tax relief (when they could) for expenses related to their property.

Homeowners get 100% tax relief on the sale of their property. Not sure what bigger tax relief they could get.

Homeowners have a job to pay for these things.

Aah, yes, they seek others to give them payment in order for them to pay for their household expenses.

Landlords, on the other hand, think all expenses should be borne by their tenants, so they can just sit back and have a nice asset accumulating in value that their tenants effectively subsidise for them.

Yes, in return for the provision of a house a tenant pays. Some costs are borne by the landlord, some by the tenant, depending on what each provides.

It's so funny to see landlords calling us communists. Their idea of capitalism is having their tenants subsidise them.

You're not a communist. You're an eternal victim who isn't responsible for their own life.

So most BTL landlords have a VERY vested interest in increasing house prices? As in, if they don't hold onto the properties, and force out the little guys, they will lose money.

The more you knew eh.

I don't know many landlords who intentionally hold on to property to force up prices. Prices go up for a variety of factors, they don't need to take any action to encourage that growth.