Renting - "no children" discrimination

Captain_Mainwaring_2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I think based on the comments from landlords on this thread we can summarise by saying that allowing use of your countries housing stock to be dictated by the personal prejudices of private landlords is a very bad idea. But everyone knows that anyway, especially the government.

The BTL experiment hasnt worked, private landlords have been given the opportunity to take over previously socialised housing and have blown it spectacularly. The result has been an unsustainable rise in prices followed by a house price crash and a demographic crisis as large numbers of people demand a resolution from the state.

With the government dying to levy new taxes to shore up the black hole theyve created in the UK finances I woudnt be at all surprised if there arent some significant changes to the tax benefits surrounding renting out mortgaged premises soon.

This is not a good time to be relying on property for a stable income.

You'd love to kid yourself I'm sure. I must say I didn't think that the crash was due to BTL'ers, I thought it was due to terrible greed fueled by cheap borrowing as a result of low interest rates from a government desperate to remain popular.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

mrs-puff wrote: »

Only spectacularly rivalled by yours. :eek:

Love Thy Neighbour ran until 1977 ie 31 years ago not 40.( Checked Wikipedia ). Next time you want to deride and give someone a public 'ticking off' on a forum you may want check your own facts first. YOUR facts were wrong on this occasion, not mine.

To the OP I agree with you and I've said all I want to on the subject without getting drawn into a petty tit for tat thing.
To Captain whatever, you are very amusing. Remind me of my Grampa. I have no doubt we'll meet again on other threads around the board.

Started 1972, which would make it closer to 40 than 30 years old.

It really doesn't change my assertion that you were talking tosh, which I assume is because you are jealous of BTL'ers, and possible even property owners.

ruggedtoast

bookduck wrote: »

'Given the opportunity' - Don't make me laugh, the government washed it hands of it and farmed the rest out to housing associations

There is a big difference between being a decent landlord, and offering a care in the community service. There is a post where a LL made her property accessible for a womans charity, then tenant did not pay and months later tenants daughter burnt the place down - think it on this site somewhere. Councils can afford this, but us small folk can't

Exactly, private landlords are ok for tenants who want to rent privately, as a choice. Unfortunately social stock is so low now that theyre expected to provide housing for people who have to.

Most dont want these people, are unprepared to make the allowances necessary to accommodate them, and are financially not stable enough to sustain the risks of housing anything other than fully employed childless professionals. And theres going to be a lot less of those around in the next few years.

So whats the outcome?

A.) Government buys back or builds hundreds of thousands of houses and flats. Local authorities are increasing stock but not on a significant scale. There is little money for this.

Large numbers of people become homeless or unhouseable. Not that likely in the runup to the election when half the electorate are packing themselves about losing their jobs.


Or, C) the regulatory and business environment for private landlords becomes far less permissive. Most landlords simply dont have the nose spiting face option of leaving their property empty anyway and arent now likely to get a hand "controlling" sub-prime tenants that the government cant cope with.

I dont think a lot of people have really grasped the implications of how much things are likely to change in this country compared to the last ten years.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

izzybusy23 wrote: »

You may have no say in that matter very soon... the economy will take that decision right outta ya hands!

You fail to understand that some of us can just padlock the place up and not worry dealing with vexatious little people. The rental income pays for trinkets and amuse-gueule's about the place, but it wouldn't really make a lot of difference if I didn't receive it.

The economic situation will only place more properties in the hands of landlords, and more ex-property owners will become tenants.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Or, C) the regulatory and business environment for private landlords becomes far less permissive. Most landlords simply dont have the nose spiting face option of leaving their property empty anyway and arent now likely to get a hand "controlling" sub-prime tenants that the government cant cope with.

I dont think a lot of people have really grasped the implications of how much things are likely to change in this country compared to the last ten years.

You try and force regulation like that onto BTL'ers and you will have a house price crash the like of which you can only dream of.

mrs-puff

which I assume is because you are jealous of BTL'ers, and possible even property owners.

Why would you 'assume' that Capt ?

I don't think it's fair that families with kids are barred at the starting gate of even applying to be considered for a rental. I think it sniffs of discrimination against a section of society based on predjudice and negative assumptions about that particular section of society.

Nothing to do with jealousy of anyone. Do stop drawing me in, you're irresisitible ! I love a good debate but keep my personal circs out of it it. You know nothing about me.

( Oh and 31 years ago Love Thy Neighbour was still showing on UK tv screens, that makes YOU wrong, it didn't stop showing 40+ years ago.. but I'll accept your apology :rolleyes: )

Captain_Mainwaring_2

mrs-puff wrote: »

Why would you 'assume' that Capt ?

I don't think it's fair that families with kids are barred at the starting gate of even applying to be considered for a rental. I think it sniffs of discrimination against a section of society based on predjudice and negative assumptions about that particular section of society.

Nothing to do with jealousy of anyone. Do stop drawing me in, you're irresisitible ! I love a good debate but keep my personal circs out of it it. You know nothing about me.

( Oh and 31 years ago Love Thy Neighbour was still showing on UK tv screens, that makes YOU wrong, it didn't stop showing 40+ years ago.. but I'll accept your apology :rolleyes: )

Which is unfortunate because I didn't tender it. Still, we have at least clarified one point that you didn't deny :-

It really doesn't change my assertion that you were talking tosh

ruggedtoast

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

You try and force regulation like that onto BTL'ers and you will have a house price crash the like of which you can only dream of.

Thats right, we do agree on something.

mrs-puff

It really doesn't change my assertion that you were talking tosh

Do you now.. :rotfl: Well you're entitled to your opinion.

bookduck

ruggedtoast wrote: »

.....fully employed childless professionals. And theres going to be a lot less of those around in the next few years.

I actually do not rent out to a family, but rooms to single people (HMO). A significant proportion of divorcees after paying child support are financially unable to afford accommodation. This is a gowning problem and with the economic downturn and greater stress/divorce will be a growing market.

I'm sure things will change, but currently here in London the influx of Eastern European workers is keeping the rental market high. HMO legislation has forced the price up for everyone, and made less properly available. It has taken choice away from people, you can no longer really choose to live cheap and dingey. Many people have stopped renting rooms as it is too much trouble. A coat of magnolia paint and a bit of chrome and the professional market opens up.