Is it time to cap house prices?

m00m00

it's usually what the landlord hasn't done that annoys tenants so much

IveSeenTheLight

m00m00 wrote: »

it's usually what the landlord hasn't done that annoys tenants so much

We'll I'm genuinely interested to know as a landlord so that I do not make the same mistakes.

I always respond to tenants, immediately.
One in particular was very pedantic, but we catered to his needs and now he has settled down to be a good tenant.
I put it down to previous experiences with LL's and him not being used to having a good one

carolt

It's really an attitude thing - she (like some un-named posters on here!) treats us less like equals who happen to pay her money monthly for the use of her property, than slightly lower beings. She's v house proud and regularly rings us up to tell us she drove past and could we weed the drive, or some such. But she couples her houseproud-ness in terms of what we need to do to look after her house, with a general disregard for what she needs to do - does repairs, but tardily, and installs the cheapest and most rubbish white goods when they break etc. Gets her (unqualified) husband to try to fix things when they break (usually unsuccessfully). Luckily, the property was unfurnished, and our washing machine is ours, but the dishwasher/boiler are irritations.

Mainly just attitude. That, coupled with an unprofessional approach. First place with a garden I've lived in where a gardener wasn't paid for. In fact, only the second place where the landlord managed it themselves. That needn't be a problem - if the landlord is efficient and treats you as an equal or customer, rather than as an irritation.

As it is, I return the favour, and view her as an irritation. :rolleyes:

JonnyBravo

carolt wrote: »

If food prices were such that people in this country were starving, of course I would advocate food price caps! Wouldn't you? Wouldn't any sane, civilised human? Or would you rather watch your fellow human beings starve around you?

Mercifully, despite food price rises, we are not (yet) at that pass (although there certainly are parts of the world where that is the case).

Well so long as the people who can't afford food are in other countries that's ok eh? :rolleyes:

Or is it the fact, as has been suggested, that it's not so much the inequality of the situation, but more about how the inequality has affected you?




Is it the heat carolt? I know the murder rate always goes up in NY in heatwaves? You seem to be in ranting mode again. It's been a while I s'pose.


I think I've missed it actually.

carolt

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Well so long as the people who can't afford food are in other countries that's ok eh? :rolleyes:

Or is it the fact, as has been suggested, that it's not so much the inequality of the situation, but more about how the inequality has affected you?




Is it the heat carolt? I know the murder rate always goes up in NY in heatwaves? You seem to be in ranting mode again. It's been a while I s'pose.


I think I've missed it actually.

Of course you miss me. It's my time of the month, don't you know? (Nationwide results time.)

Of course I worry about people in other countries starving.. That's why I donate to charity? Don't you?

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

It's really an attitude thing - she (like some un-named posters on here!) treats us less like equals who happen to pay her money monthly for the use of her property, than slightly lower beings. She's v house proud and regularly rings us up to tell us she drove past and could we weed the drive, or some such. But she couples her houseproud-ness in terms of what we need to do to look after her house, with a general disregard for what she needs to do - does repairs, but tardily, and installs the cheapest and most rubbish white goods when they break etc. Gets her (unqualified) husband to try to fix things when they break (usually unsuccessfully). Luckily, the property was unfurnished, and our washing machine is ours, but the dishwasher/boiler are irritations.

Mainly just attitude. That, coupled with an unprofessional approach. First place with a garden I've lived in where a gardener wasn't paid for. In fact, only the second place where the landlord managed it themselves. That needn't be a problem - if the landlord is efficient and treats you as an equal or customer, rather than as an irritation.

As it is, I return the favour, and view her as an irritation. :rolleyes:

I am in a similar position.
One of my properties I rent out, the garden has not been tended to. I put a lot of effort into the garden to make it more homely for the tenants and left as part of the property all the tools to look after it.

So although it annoys me, I leave them to their peaceful rights as tenants.
I know when they move on it will take me a couple of days to correct and maybe I'll insert a clause saying they have to maintain for future tenants

It seems to be a close call as to whether as a tenant, they would be happy for the LL to pop round once a week to tend to the garden or enjoy their peaceful rights of privacy

JonnyBravo

carolt wrote: »

Of course you miss me. It's my time of the month, don't you know? (Nationwide results time.)

Of course I worry about people in other countries starving.. That's why I donate to charity? Don't you?

Ah! Of course!
Have to say I'm more interested in the Halifax tracker (it's the one I have money on... but they're usually close enough not to matter)


Good to hear you're managing to spare a £ or 2 from your large deposit fund for the starving.

Yes I do support charity (2 regularly) but not as it happens any which deal with famine etc. Perhaps it's something I should consider. :undecided

dopester

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What? Like Scotland having the lowest mortgage to earning ratio in the UK.

That doesn't mean much. You and I have absolute contrasting views on the extent to which UK property is overvalued. To me it is incredibly overvalued and my bets are on the credit crunch and the economic slowdown thereof, bringing this in to focus of all during the next 6 years.

I'm sure the Glasgow of Robert Louise Stevenson's day, a few years before change of economic circumstances hit (the depression), had many a well-to-do Glaswegian, which the workforce ticking away nicely in factories and shipyards and the like, thinking all was nice and dandy. Things can change quite rapidly.

There is much evidence that human expectations tend to be linear. Most of the time, most people expect current conditions to continue for the indefinite future. It is almost an unnatural act for a man to leave home with an umbrella on a sunny day. Call it optimism, faith in the future, or just reluctance to see the party end, there is a presumption that the environment is stable. This is why cities are built on floodplains and fault lines. A similar presumption makes the gambler double his bet or the farmer plant additional crops on reclaimed land the year after a good harvest.

Wherever prosperity exists, it is natural for people to expect prosperity to continue. For this reason, much of the history of human society is a record of astonishment. Time and again, people have marginalised their affairs, rendering themselves increasingly crisis-prone. They have gone into debt, extending their claims on resources to an extreme that could only be supported only if current conditions were sustained uninterrupted into the future. Time and again these hopes have been disappointed.

Whenever prosperity has seemed permanent, some apparent minute change - a shift in the wind patterns in the upper atmosphere that altered the fall of rains and the flow of rivers, a mutation in the genetic composition of a virus or bacterium to produce a new form of pestilence for which human beings or their food stocks had no defence, or a technological twist like the addition of a stirrup to the riding gear of horses - could produce astonishingly large nonlinear shifts in the organisation of human society.

The failure to recognise or anticipate these nonlinear transformations has been a common characteristic of almost all societies. In most times and places, the understanding of cause and effect has been too meagre to allow much grasp of the dynamic processes by which societies change. Our own period would be an exception, if not for a paradigmatic blind spot - our expectation that a complex machine like the economy functions on a linear basis, like a machine.

IveSeenTheLight

dopester wrote: »

That doesn't mean much.

Affordability doesn't mean much enough said

dopester

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Affordability doesn't mean much enough said

They are not really affordable now, and even if they are more affordable in Scotland, let us see how prices will be affected as the economy sheds millions of jobs, with fewer opportunities for the unemployed to get back in to paid employment.

It is not just Carol Voderman who is going to be asked to take 90% paycut to remain in that tv company's employ. Paycuts, less hours, mass redundancies... - that is how I see the future of the next 6 years.