The joy of being a landlord

[Hodders]

Anyone here who owns 1 or more "second" properties is right near the top of the pile.

I have zero problems paying more tax as long as those even nearer the top pay proportionately more.

Grief knows public services need more money - of course management may have inefficiencies, but more money is a good short term fix.

 

[ci_newman]

Let's try and keep this on topic please

 

[chrcoluk]

I really feel for renters as the government has really screwed them over via their landlords. I’m selling up myself after being a landlord for eight odd years. One of the hardest things I had to do was let my tenant know what was happening. I think he’s having to apply to the council for a home as he’s priced out of the rental market.

Everyone is in the market sorts it self out mindset.

My recent agreement with my LL gives me hope I can stay out of the worst of it, as he made the agreement even with me over £100 below his marketed properties. It will probably be over £300 below by the end of the agreement.

 

[Bluecube]

Anyone here who owns 1 or more "second" properties is right near the top of the pile.

I have zero problems paying more tax as long as those even nearer the top pay proportionately more.

Grief knows public services need more money - of course management may have inefficiencies, but more money is a good short term fix.

I also have zero issues paying more tax. However I have serious issues with how our tax money is wasted. We are all paying for the inefficiencies and ineptitude of the public sector

 

[Freakbro]

When my old tenant moved out I whacked the rent up considerably to cover the **** show that’s coming from our financially illiterate govt.

Lol, Truss was financially illiterate, Reeves seems pretty sensible with what she's done.

I said earlier in this thread that if they want to treat my rental like a cash cow then I’ll milk that cow for all I can get, and I will.

You were saying?

Seems your 'whacking up the rent' was somewhat premature and unjustified in the context of why you were doing it.

 

[EddScott]

Seems your 'whacking up the rent' was somewhat premature and unjustified in the context of why you were doing it.

You certainly relish in the anti-private landlord rhetoric.

So few people want to be private landords these days. And the alternative? Build more social housing? With what? This budget isn't going to magically build 100000s of required houses.

The money is in the private sector. It should have been allowed to cultivate, not become some kind of smear of an individuals integrity if they admitted to being a private landlord.

 

[JonRGV250]

Seems your 'whacking up the rent' was somewhat premature and unjustified in the context of why you were doing it.

Heard of CGT?
Also, as I’ve previously said, I put it up to market value.

So few people want to be private landords these days. And the alternative? Build more social housing? With what? This budget isn't going to magically build 100000s of required houses.

Don’t confuse him with common sense, he’ll froth himself out in a minute.

 

[Freakbro]

You certainly relish in the anti-private landlord rhetoric.

Not particularly, I'm a private landlord, I just have an issue with the "oh woe is me" rhetoric from my peers on what is on the whole an easy way to make money.

So few people want to be private landords these days. And the alternative? Build more social housing? With what? This budget isn't going to magically build 100000s of required houses.

The money is in the private sector. It should have been allowed to cultivate, not become some kind of smear of an individuals integrity if they admitted to being a private landlord.

Like I said, I'm a private LL, I feel no smear to my integrity in being one.

 

[JonRGV250]

lol, so what exactly was the point in your previous post?
The mind absolutely boggles reading some of the stuff you post.

 

[Freakbro]

Heard of CGT?

Yes, and how is that affecting your rental profits?

Also, as I’ve previously said, I put it up to market value.

But if you were ok with where it was for the last, 8 yrs wasnt it?, you didnt need to. Like I pointed out, every business has different levels of overheads.

You even admitted that you did it because you thought the Govt would milk you, so you'd now milk your tenants.

 

[JonRGV250]

I was going to sell this year (as you’d know if you hadn’t cherry picked what you’d read) but the lease extension wasn’t completed, hence me renting it for another 12 months (the tenant wanted that term).
The “milking” was more tongue in cheek, and as a consequence of CGT or whatever increase, hence I put it up to market value.
And no, I didn’t need to (I own the place outright), so could have reduced the rent to half, but why on earth would I?
Unless of course I wanted to virtue signal what a great guy I am.

 

[Freakbro]

Unless of course I wanted to virtue signal what a great guy I am.

If you did virtue signal it, it'd be false advertising

 

[JonRGV250]

lol, you’re not wrong.

 

[Freakbro]

So looking at it, did anything in the budget change for landlords or was all the panicking for nothing?

 

[chrcoluk]

You certainly relish in the anti-private landlord rhetoric.

So few people want to be private landords these days. And the alternative? Build more social housing? With what? This budget isn't going to magically build 100000s of required houses.

The money is in the private sector. It should have been allowed to cultivate, not become some kind of smear of an individuals integrity if they admitted to being a private landlord.

To be fair, one only has to look at MSE to see how jumpy some (many?) LL's are.

S21 is been looked at but we dont know yet full implementation. - must sell up.
Can still evict via S8 and will be ways to recover property if no longer want to rent it out. - must sell up. it must be S21 or nothing.
We going to improve right to negotiate and appeal rent increases. - I'm out of here.

Then you have all the LL's that think they being reasonable by using a very high market rate as fair rent. This seems to be a comfortable majority.

I consider myself more rational than the 100% anti LL crowd though, I will point out we currently need LL's due to the almost abandoning of building social homes, I also try to point out if you tax LL's or impose costs on them, that the most likely affect of this will be passing on those costs to tenants. I also recognise there will be some good LL's out there.

Ironically we actually now have had the chance to announce building of these social homes, Labour made adjustments to how we budget to allow for money to invest in infrastructure, but they have chosen to spend it elsewhere (they do seem to love spending on transport), so once again its political decisions that have stopped it. Instead they will provide trickle funding via inflation busting rent increases in the social sector.

Where I would say I disagree with you is that I think the private sector will never be adequate for long term housing of such a big amount of the population, even in its best days prior to the Osborne tax, it still had major issues with maintenance, conditions of properties in general, and lack of security in AST's. I think if the social housing stock was there, private renting would just be for the high end of the market and those who actually like to move around a lot.

 

[Bald-Eagle22]

To be fair, one only has to look at MSE to see how jumpy some (many?) LL's are.

S21 is been looked at but we dont know yet full implementation. - must sell up.
Can still evict via S8 and will be ways to recover property if no longer want to rent it out. - must sell up. it must be S21 or nothing.
We going to improve right to negotiate and appeal rent increases. - I'm out of here.

Then you have all the LL's that think they being reasonable by using a very high market rate as fair rent. This seems to be a comfortable majority.

I consider myself more rational than the 100% anti LL crowd though, I will point out we currently need LL's due to the almost abandoning of building social homes, I also try to point out if you tax LL's or impose costs on them, that the most likely affect of this will be passing on those costs to tenants. I also recognise there will be some good LL's out there.

Ironically we actually now have had the chance to announce building of these social homes, Labour made adjustments to how we budget to allow for money to invest in infrastructure, but they have chosen to spend it elsewhere (they do seem to love spending on transport), so once again its political decisions that have stopped it. Instead they will provide trickle funding via inflation busting rent increases in the social sector.

Where I would say I disagree with you is that I think the private sector will never be adequate for long term housing of such a big amount of the population, even in its best days prior to the Osborne tax, it still had major issues with maintenance, conditions of properties in general, and lack of security in AST's. I think if the social housing stock was there, private renting would just be for the high end of the market and those who actually like to move around a lot.

And you hit the nail on the head right there . Today I was in full lube mode expecting the worst , I'm shocked to say the least that nothing said today will effect me . As the owner of 3 BTL I'm not selling or buying anymore.

Now with regards to the abolishment of AST'S . What a totally moronic thing to do , marketing and vetting tennants is expensive - The Tennant fee act of 2019 placed all the cost back to the lanlords so my average cost if said marketing and vetting is effectively a months rent - around £1000 . With no AST in place to cover this cost guess who's going to feel the pain . This could in my case in the extreme cost £6000 a year ! Tennant moves in and instantly gives 2 months notice X6 .

Might have to think of inventive ways to get around this but rest assured rents will increase for new tennants.

 

[Mr Badger]

And you hit the nail on the head right there . Today I was in full lube mode expecting the worst , I'm shocked to say the least that nothing said today will effect me . As the owner of 3 BTL I'm not selling or buying anymore.

Now with regards to the abolishment of AST'S . What a totally moronic thing to do , marketing and vetting tennants is expensive - The Tennant fee act of 2019 placed all the cost back to the lanlords so my average cost if said marketing and vetting is effectively a months rent - around £1000 . With no AST in place to cover this cost guess who's going to feel the pain . This could in my case in the extreme cost £6000 a year ! Tennant moves in and instantly gives 2 months notice X6 .

Might have to think of inventive ways to get around this but rest assured rents will increase for new tennants.

The BTL landlord's mantra. Regardless of the question, the answer is "Put up the rent".

 

[andybird123]

So looking at it, did anything in the budget change for landlords or was all the panicking for nothing?

CGT has gone up a few percent for those that sell, stamp duty has gone up for those that buy. Income from rentals is taxed as income so they can't put up income tax without putting up income tax.

Renters reform bill is a separate thing (and not to do with tax anyway).

 

[Nitefly]

So looking at it, did anything in the budget change for landlords or was all the panicking for nothing?

Stamp duty on buying second homes increased significantly.

 

[Bald-Eagle22]

The BTL landlord's mantra. Regardless of the question, the answer is "Put up the rent".

Yep , government want to milk me dry I'm just the middleman .

Point I'm trying to make is everything the government have intervened with in regards to renting out a BTL ( because leftys like you think its immoral) has backfired on them and just screwed over the Tennant.