should we get rid of our tenants in order tosell quick?

brit1234

franklee wrote: »

This makes my blood run cold as there must be many others in exactly this position making the LL at risk of repossession, even bankruptcy and the tenants at risk of homelessness. (It's all been caused by the unsustainable house price boom that should have been curtailed before it got this far yet the government have done all they can over the last few years to keep it inflated drawing ever more people in).

Don't forget greedy landlords or stupid landlords. They have a significant responsibility of this giant housing bubble as well as the banks. It was their choice, they weren't forced into it.:mad:



To blame solely the government for this is deluded when the blame falls at so many other actors as well.

franklee

brit1234 wrote: »

Don't forget greedy landlords or stupid landlords. They have a significant responsibility of this giant housing bubble as well as the banks. It was their choice, they weren't forced into it.:mad:

To blame solely the government for this is deluded when the blame falls at so many other actors as well.

Who said solely? In no way was that post I made meant to be a comprehensive list.

Sure there's been a lot of greed from buyers/landlords, the lenders have played a huge part also with irresponsible lending. Again not a comprehensive list, that would be for another place. But I think the OP here wasn't in the greedy landlords category, overstretched though.

Trollfever

Put it up for auction with the tenants in situ and let somebody else take the pain.

littlemissmoney

nugget08 wrote: »

if we didnt take a mortgage break and suddenly found ourselves without tenants, we would have to pay £850 a month for that place, plus the £100 council tax etc,

I don't think you pay council tax on an empty flat... something to check.

Gorgeous_George

Trollfever wrote: »

Put it up for auction with the tenants in situ and let somebody else take the pain.

I cannot believe that I have read all this thread only to find trollfever gave the right answer before I had the opportunity.

You have, IMHO, two sensible options

1. Continue renting to good tenants and squeeze maximum rent.

or

2. Sell at auction. Be prepared to sell at 20% below valuation and let the monkey go.

GG

franklee

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

2. Sell at auction. Be prepared to sell at 20% below valuation and let the monkey go.

Good point GG, are there many LLs buying ATM?

Purchase price (4 years ago) £135k.
Valuation last year £150 - 155k.
Valuation now £170k.

So 20% below valuation at auction would give 170000-34000 = 136000. Just about doable, but doesn't sit that well with "hubby also wants a really good price for it" from post #1.

Gorgeous_George

I think that would be a 'really good price'. In a few months' time, even 'hubby' may agree.

GG

franklee

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

I think that would be a 'really good price'. In a few months' time, even 'hubby' may agree.

GG

Watchit, on this thread bears are considered stupid stuff and their being all over the place is frowned upon

neverdespairgirl

franklee wrote: »

Valuation last year £150 - 155k.
Valuation now £170k. .

Unlikely it's gone up £20k in the last year.

franklee

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Unlikely it's gone up £20k in the last year.

Yes I thought that odd too yet would think the days of EAs overvaluing to win business are over as they've already got plenty of stock not selling. I wonder which of the valuations is "right".