I now own. But I'm not going to evict my tenant while she's paying rent and on benefits.
I now own. But I'm not going to evict my tenant while she's paying rent and on benefits.
Not this year. And only just last year. You seem to object to people making a profit, so I guess you're willing to work for free, right?
Really? My flat in Aberdeen has lost around £50k - and that's not accounting for inflation.
Then we're done.
Unless you bought 2 weeks before the 2008 crash. I don't even know how this is possibleWilling to donate £50 to a charity of your choice if you can prove it
I bought at the peak, £230k. Neighbouring flats are being advertised for £180k.
Agreed. My tenant is on benefits and has been good. A big problem with tenants on benefits is that insurers can charge more.
There's plenty of housing in Aberdeen, low prices too. Someone on minimum wage can get themselves on the housing ladder. But employers don't want to move here, and given the SNP's attitude to wealth creation and interference with local rates, I can understand why.
How do you think he's going to fund that £4000 energy conversion?
But he isn't making a profit of £100 a month. There may be a surplus of £100 a month but there's still the odd £4000 energy conversion to fund and that's over 3 years of that surplus gone.
Easily. It can take a long time to evict a non-paying tenant. Even a paying tenant can damage the property. And so on.
You have no idea of the amount of damage a tenant can do to a property.
Yes, but people look at it just in terms of the rent and the mortgage paid, without reference to anything else. Look upthread where one landlord's tenant is looking for them to spend £4k on something which will take years to recoup.
Don't forget that the mortgage isn't the only cost: consider insurance, agent's fees, maintenance, etc. And that if it's a private landlord the mortgage is paid out of net income, not gross income.
Correct. However if you are a company you do get to pay the mortgage gross.
This is often not the case. For example, if you're going to be out of the country for an extended period of time, what else do you do with your house?
Properties do not always appreciate.
Holiday homes being repossessed for first time in years, landlords warned
Crushing repayments are squeezing buy-to-let investors, letting company says
www.telegraph.co.uk
And from here:
Or, you know, their relatives could take them in. The state even pays a carer's allowance.
Scary, but true.
It's what happens elsewhere. It's what used to happen in the UK.
I was talking about single older people, not families. Families are an entirely different matter.
Why are you assuming an equity increase?
Rubbish. If you massively increase state housing, people have to suck up to the politicians and profess the right political views and you make private housing rarer. If you massively increase corporate housing you make it more difficult for private citizens to own their own homes.
There is nothing wrong with being a landlord. Being able to let your home is massively useful. Consider the diplomat sent abroad for several years. Or the person working abroad. Or the person working abroad. Or the person working the other end of the country; out of commuting distance, anyway. Do you really want them to not have a home to which to come back? Do you want to force them to sell their home? A house that may have been in their family for generations. Selling a house is neither quick nor cheap.
Private landlords provide flexibility on both sides.
It's very simple: you make yourself known to your local councillor, or their party, make sure you volunteer etc "I can't afford party membership but I can give some of my time...." and when you need accommodation you ask for their help. Preferably not in writing. Job done.
There are bad council officers too. Humans are humans.