Insane rent increase.

OpenToSuggestions said:
For the middle class owning a house or two as BTLs, which I would love to do as a pension booster.
If you live in Dubai and own 200 houses in a limited company then the tax changes don't apply annoyingly.

The only scenario I see where BTL could work for me is if my girlfriend moves in then keep this house in my name, with her saving up 25% for a BTL deposit. This would avoid getting spanked for stamp duty.

I cannot comment on the south as I know prices are mental, but for anyone claiming they cannot buy a house in Stoke/Burton/Derby then they really need to have a look in the mirror. A friend just (as in <6m ago) sold her parent's two bed terrace with a garage in Fenton for 77k.
Click to expand...

I live in Oxford/ Reading and the prices are mental here. That would be about 300 here I'd say.
 
OpenToSuggestions said:
For the middle class owning a house or two as BTLs, which I would love to do as a pension booster.
If you live in Dubai and own 200 houses in a limited company then the tax changes don't apply annoyingly.

The only scenario I see where BTL could work for me is if my girlfriend moves in then keep this house in my name, with her saving up 25% for a BTL deposit. This would avoid getting spanked for stamp duty.

I cannot comment on the south as I know prices are mental, but for anyone claiming they cannot buy a house in Stoke/Burton/Derby then they really need to have a look in the mirror. A friend just (as in <6m ago) sold her parent's two bed terrace with a garage in Fenton (Stoke) for 77k and there was nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...

77k

For anyone who can work remote that's an absolute bargain
 
cheesyboy said:
“I already explained why it's inherently immoral:”
Click to expand...
No you didn’t successfully explain. I don’t accept what you said as inherently immoral in all regards.


cheesyboy said:
” You're just going to ignore that?”
Click to expand...
That doesn’t appear to be relevant or true in regards to everyone. It’s an over negative viewpoint that only represents part of the market and part of the situation not representing everyone. It doesn’t mean all landlords are inherently immoral in all regards or all landlords are greedy.



cheesyboy said:
“Tbh, I don't see holding a potential home back from a new owner-occupier family is an especially moralistic position. That's a bit of a clutching at straws scenario really.”
Click to expand...
Well that because you appear to be negative and are coming at it from an immoral position when it’s not remotely immoral or greedy. I don’t see it as clutching at straws. Having a family home that goes back generations with multiple generations living in it with a lot of family history and renting it out in the small gaps between the family using it to cover running costs is not immoral or greedy. Likewise having a 2nd home that you only use part of the year and rent out the rest of the year is not automatically immoral or greedy.



cheesyboy said:
What's the difference please
Click to expand...
One is possibly greed driven and possibly immoral and the other is not immoral or greed driven in most cases.
 
Last edited:
One thing I do want to do in my lifetime is move up north to Manchester, get a utd season ticket and live in a bigger house.. prices down here are stupid
 
Pottsey said:
No you didn’t successfully explain. I don’t accept what you said as inherently immoral in all regards.
Click to expand...
To be clear, I said that landlording is immoral because you need to outcompete owner-occupiers to buy a house, which they want to make a home (or, let's widen it to include other scenarios, landlords are to withhold property from the market) and rely on a supply of priced-out owner occupiers to ensure rent yield will support the investment.

The landlording beast, therefore, feeds itself at both ends by both pushing up house prices, and increasing supply of renters to push up rent yields.

And we're not talking benign investment in commodities or shares or some such, we're talking actual roofs over peoples heads, the establishment of family lives. And you think it's not immoral to treat it as a greedy cash grab?
 
I'd go back with a in-between offer, the landlord is better off with a bit more money and a long term tenant that going without for a month or two while a new tenant is found and moved in.

I was a landlord for a while and just happy to have a long term good tenant. Out of it now, because we're all bad for doing it. Never made anything out of it monthly but did make on the gain in property price over time. Would never do it again!
 
cheesyboy said:
To be clear, I said that landlording is immoral because you need to outcompete owner-occupiers to buy a house, which they want to make a home (or, let's widen it to include other scenarios, landlords are to withhold property from the market) and rely on a supply of priced-out owner occupiers to ensure rent yield will support the investment.

The landlording beast, therefore, feeds itself at both ends by both pushing up house prices, and increasing supply of renters to push up rent yields.
Click to expand...
That’s the bit I don’t agree with. Landlording doesn’t need or always outcompete owner-occupiers to buy a house. You seem to be coming from point of view that all renters want to own a property and that all renters would buy a property if they could, well that’s not right. Along with all landlords are competing against owners buying a house well that’s not correct. It is correct in some areas and some situations but it’s not a blanket statement that is correct all over in all areas.

Land lording is not in all areas stopping people from buying a house and in fact in some situations is helping. I know plenty of people who wouldn’t own their own house if they didn’t first rent cheaper then a mortgage of what they ended up buying. Allowing them to build up a pot to buy with a mortgage.

I don’t agree that in all areas the so-called landlord beast feeds into both ends pushing up house prices, and increasing supply of renters to push up rent yields.


cheesyboy said:
“We're talking actual roofs over peoples heads, the establishment of family lives. And you think it's not immoral to treat it as a greedy cash grab?”
Click to expand...
Of course it’s immoral to treat is at a greedy cash grab, what I don’t agree is all land lording is immoral and greedy cash grabs. Just because some are it doesnt mean all are.
 
cheesyboy said:
Thats not what's happened.

House prices have surged, which has cut more people out of owner occupation, forcing people into rent. Growth in buy to let has slowed, mostly because the number of properties going on the market during covid has stalled, so the whole market has ****** itself.
Click to expand...
Sure is the cause https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...-crisis-Available-properties-record-lows.html

The amount of people returning to the cities is huge right now and a lot of BTL owners (inc. myself) have left the market as it’s prohibitive from a tax point of view plus the new legislations coming in for EPC etc. are making it harder in future. Everything for sale is being snapped up really fast and they aren’t building much (plus materials and labour shortages are slowing things). It’s a recipe for very expensive rental and property prices. The demand is there, properties are getting incredible demand with 28 people for each rental and similar demand for buyers. Don’t forget a lot of people have been able to save a lot of money over the last couple of years so there’s a lot of new blood coming into the market which can sustain itself very easily without them so it’s adding pressure to prices.

My place shifted within a week and as recent buyers of a house we are about to move into we had to cope with very few properties on the market and what was on there we had to fight with so many other buyers. We lost out on a lot of properties within days of them being listed.
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
You seem to be coming from point of view that all renters want to own a property and that all renters would buy a property if they could, well that’s not right. Along with all landlords are competing against owners buying a house well that’s not correct. It is correct in some areas and some situations but it’s not a blanket statement that is correct all over in all areas.
Click to expand...

Exactly this. A lot of my previous tenants have been transient workers at the nearby hospital who are just looking for somewhere to live temporarily. My current tenants are an elderly lady and her son who cares for her. She sold her house after her husband died to move to rented.
 
Pottsey said:
Of course it’s immoral to treat is at a greedy cash grab, what I don’t agree is all land lording is immoral and greedy cash grabs. Just because some are it doesnt mean all are.
Click to expand...
Where do you draw that line?

One person buying one property as a buy to let as an investment isn't any different, mechanically, to one person buying 50 buy to let properties as an investment.

There are 2.6 million landlords in the UK, most of which own one btl property. That has a pretty big impact on a total uk housing stock of 24 million.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom