How buy-to-let turned into a mug’s game

stevetodd

manchestermike wrote: »

Always nice to see a thread of people laughing at other's misfortune... :silenced:

Forgive me if I hope karma (if such a thing does exist) comes back and bites the OP hard in the backside

Whilst I experience absolutely no pleasure in the misfortune of others. As far as the Wilsons go I don't think they treated their tenants very well. I am a landlord myself and know that tenants can sometimes make complaints about landlords without merit, the Wilson's however featured on Watchdog, I am sure that Watchdog would have done their homework before going on air.

brit1234

manchestermike wrote: »

Always nice to see a thread of people laughing at other's misfortune... :silenced:

Forgive me if I hope karma (if such a thing does exist) comes back and bites the OP hard in the backside

Sorry but the Karma is the other way round. Many first time buyers including myself for years and the others who have bought have purchased at vastly inflated prices facing negative equity.

I only want the welfare of the mases and future generations, I care little for those greedy individuals who operate destroying society.

brit1234

Riq wrote: »

He has 3 monitors. He is more of a man than any of you will ever be

"One monitor, two monitor, three monitor, four monitor, ha ha ha"



Sesame Street guide to counting

manchestermike_2

brit1234 wrote: »

Sorry but the Karma is the other way round. Many first time buyers including myself for years and the others who have bought have purchased at vastly inflated prices facing negative equity.

I only want the welfare of the mases and future generations, I care little for those greedy individuals who operate destroying society.

I've bought at a large price 6 years ago, I'm also buying a new property as we speak at an expensive price and probably face negative equity on it as I'm sure that the value will drop in the short term. But I've bought it as I want it and can afford it.

Unless I sell the first house I'll keep it and rent it out too, it won't cover the mortgage but in the long run it'll be beneficial.

If you only want welfare of the masses then maybe you're living in the wrong country, China or Korea might be more to your taste. We live in a country where you fend for yourself and those you love, good on those people who get off their backsides and go out there to make money... it's just wrong the successful ones get taxed more...

These people don't set out to "destroy society" just to make life better for those important to them. And good luck to them, nothing wrong with that

Sir_Humphrey

manchestermike wrote: »

I've bought at a large price 6 years ago, I'm also buying a new property as we speak at an expensive price and probably face negative equity on it as I'm sure that the value will drop in the short term. But I've bought it as I want it and can afford it.

Unless I sell the first house I'll keep it and rent it out too, it won't cover the mortgage but in the long run it'll be beneficial.

...

These people don't set out to "destroy society" just to make life better for those important to them. And good luck to them, nothing wrong with that

Why the heck did you do that? If you are interested in making life better people who are important to you, you must have very low self-esteem!

I know Manchester pretty well, and it is obvious that there is no shortage of housing there thanks to Urban Splash etc.

stevetodd

manchestermike wrote: »

I've bought at a large price 6 years ago, I'm also buying a new property as we speak at an expensive price and probably face negative equity on it as I'm sure that the value will drop in the short term. But I've bought it as I want it and can afford it.

Unless I sell the first house I'll keep it and rent it out too, it won't cover the mortgage but in the long run it'll be beneficial.

If you only want welfare of the masses then maybe you're living in the wrong country, China or Korea might be more to your taste. We live in a country where you fend for yourself and those you love, good on those people who get off their backsides and go out there to make money... it's just wrong the successful ones get taxed more...

These people don't set out to "destroy society" just to make life better for those important to them. And good luck to them, nothing wrong with that

I see the sense in what you are saying regarding your position and I would probably do the same, if I was improving my lifestyle (and my wifes)

But I honestly don't think you know just how bad the Wilsons were, I can't remember everything that i saw on watchdog but I was pretty well disgusted at how they treated their tenants, and these were people who could not afford to be screwed in that way. At that time the Wilsons were flying financially and did not need to do things like that (even if they did it would not have excused it).Their tenants weren't asking for charity just a fair deal. As I remember it they were not only keeping the deposits but also sending out dubious redecoration bills and threatening court action. I remember thinking oh how I wish one of those tenants would stand up to them in court because it looked like a total bluff to me.

manchestermike_2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Why the heck did you do that? If you are interested in making life better people who are important to you, you must have very low self-esteem!

I know Manchester pretty well, and it is obvious that there is no shortage of housing there thanks to Urban Splash etc.

You've lost me... do what? Buy another house?

Simple really, I liked it and could afford it. It's in an area I like and is a great opportunity that wouldn't be there in a few months as it would have sold. It may not come up again, so strike while the iron is hot and get it.

As for keep my other one?

I've got it on the market, if it sells it does, if not I'll rent it out and sell down the line when the market picks up. No bother either way.


Why would someone who wants better for the people important to them have a low self esteem? Very confusing that one


And yep, plenty of apartments etc in the city centre available and there will be for a while, not for me though, unless an absolute bargain appears in a few years

manchestermike_2

stevetodd wrote: »

I see the sense in what you are saying regarding your position and I would probably do the same, if I was improving my lifestyle (and my wifes)

But I honestly don't think you know just how bad the Wilsons were, I can't remember everything that i saw on watchdog but I was pretty well disgusted at how they treated their tenants, and these were people who could not afford to be screwed in that way. At that time the Wilsons were flying financially and did not need to do things like that (even if they did it would not have excused it).Their tenants weren't asking for charity just a fair deal. As I remember it they were not only keeping the deposits but also sending out dubious redecoration bills and threatening court action. I remember thinking oh how I wish one of those tenants would stand up to them in court because it looked like a total bluff to me.

I don't know how bad they are/were, but what about the others? My point was why revel in the misfortune of others

Sir_Humphrey

manchestermike wrote: »

I've got it on the market, if it sells it does, if not I'll rent it out and sell down the line when the market picks up. No bother either way.

From what you said, it sounded like you were trying to keep hold of the other one.

Had that been the case, you would have had low esteem as you have been harming yourself (in other words your own welfare would have been unimportant.) I hope that explains the joke.

But please do not give me any of that "helping your own and !!!!!! the rest" nonsense, you could justify anything with that argument.

stevetodd

manchestermike wrote: »

I don't know how bad they are/were, but what about the others? My point was why revel in the misfortune of others

Well personally I am not. But I can well understand how some might especially their ex tenants.