Wilsons Selling Up. The Lot. All 700 Houses.

PasturesNew

Cleaver wrote: »

Me not like buy to let. Buy to let not good. Evil people are buy to let. Grrr. Hate. Buy to let evil. Not good. Hate. Me not like. Not good. Hate. Hate. Debt is bad.

Other business good. No debt. No buy to let. No buy to let is good. Happy me make. Cheap stuff. Different as not buy to let. Me likey stuff not buy to let. Me not see any same stuff. No same stuff. Other business good. Buy to let bad.

Bad buy to let. Me no likey buy to let. Evil. Landlord. Evil. Me like other things that are not buy to let. No propety. No property rental. Me no rental property. Cheap things yes. Buy to let no. 700. 700 houses. Grrr. No houses. No rental houses. Cheap laptopy me likey. Debt mountain. Houses. No equity. They go bust me happy. Me happy man.

Wilson. Grrr. Wilson. Arghh. Real hate. Real hate. Me real hate. Wilson. No. Tesco. Yes. Wilson. No. Tesco. Yes. Cheapy Laptop. Cheapy Laptop. No bad Tesco. No bad Tesco. Gooood Tesco. Oooooh debt mountain. Grrr. Calamitous rental. Unsustainable rental. Me no like. Me really no like.

Valued at market. £100 million. No no no. No no no. 700 properties me no like. Me really no like. Cheap stuff yes. Yessy yes yes. More yes. Property rental no. No no no. Fergus. Ooooh Fergus. Me no Fergus. No like Fergus. Bad trousers Fergus. They make no money. Ahhh no money. Please they make no money. Hope they make no money. Bankrupt yes. Ooooh yes. No money yes. Hate hate hate. No money. Please no money make. Daily Mail article. £100 million. No no no. No money make.

Buy to let. Ummmmmm. Buy to let. Noooo. No No No. No buy to let. Sales no cover debt. Me hope they have debt. Debt no cover sale. Sale hope they not get. Dont get sale. Dont get sale. Debt. Debt Debt.

Cheap laptop. Cheap laptop. Yes. Yes. Yes. Buy to Let. No. Yes. Laptop. Buy to let no good. No good buy to let. Cheap stuff yes yes yes. Fergus no. Maths teach no. Figures no add up. Ash. Ashford. Ashford no. £100 million no.

Buy to let. Grrrr. Real grrr.

<end>

... I read this one.



Brilliant.

LydiaJ

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

I would say if an investor bought the properties - they (the tenants) would stay exactly where they are - unless they wanted to move.

I think you're probably right.

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

The only way they would have to move out in reality is if someone bought one of the houses to live in.

If someone bought a house to live in, they would have to give the tenants notice as per the AST (usually 2 months if on rolling contract), which would be horribly inconvenient for the tenants but nothing like as catastrophic as what happens to the tenants if the property is repossessed - in which case tenants can be evicted with almost no notice at all (maybe 2 weeks I think).

I hope this situation works out OK somehow for the Wilsons' tenants. I also think that given the possible rise in repossessions of BTL properties that some people are forecasting, we urgently need legislation to make the terms of an AST binding on a lender repossessing a property with tenants in it.

guppy

bo_drinker wrote: »

Maybe Grant Bovey could buy them ???

Get with the program, Bo

His new company has gone bust...once is unfortunate, twice seems a little careless!

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article6806477.ece

P.S. Could all the people jabbering about Tesco do it elsewhere...dull, dull, dull compared to Fergus Wilson's antics.

mewbie_2

guppy wrote: »

He's gone bust...again!

Imagine that...

dopester

shakerbaby wrote: »

Why are they selling? I thought people who own property were in it for the long run?

They keep chopping and changing and backtracking from what they've said in the past.

Sudden change about deciding to sell in the first place with some explanation about tax... an now hoping to sell to in a big deal to buy-to-let investors using an explanation of "protecting existing tenants."

That is some turnaround from their previous exit strategy.

'All our properties are houses, with a bit of grass and parking,' says Fergus. The starter home market was always their exit strategy and first-timers would overwhelmingly prefer a house to a flat.

Generali

dopester wrote: »

They keep chopping and changing and backtracking from what they've said in the past.

Sudden change about deciding to sell in the first place with some explanation about tax... an now hoping to sell to in a big deal to buy-to-let investors using an explanation of "protecting existing tenants."

That is some turnaround from their previous exit strategy.

The thing I noticed from the article was this:

'All are new properties - we only ever bought new-build...

How does that tally with that annecdote about buying a place for £55,000 then the one down the road for £30,000 and getting a mortgage for a squillion quid to spend on more houses?

It stinks I tells ya, stinks.

dopester

Daily Mail has the story now.

Mr Wilson, 61, said: 'The time is right for us to go. It will break my heart to say goodbye to all the houses we have but you cannot take them to the grave with you.'

Average property asking prices leapt from £209,000 to £221,000 between June and the end of July while UK property prices went up 1.7 per cent in the month up to July.

Mr Wilson said: 'At that rate we made more than £1million this July whereas we did not make a penny in July 2008.'

By Silvercar's theory, paper-profit is perfectly acceptable (and you can MEW it) but a loss on paper is never a real loss. Only a loss if you crystallise it by selling. Even Fergus, prefers to say he didn't make a penny, rather than he took a loss, but never slow to promote a slight paper profit on one month.

dopester

PasturesNew wrote: »

They won't in any case .... they have two teacher pensions coming in for life.

When that subject came up 8 months ago, I provided you with this info, which suggests at least one of their teacher pension funds went in supporting their house buying.

The two former maths teachers have amassed their wealth over a relatively short period, Judith investing her teacher’s pension fund in their first semi-detached house.

http://www.gullands.com/news/view/129/Buy-to-Let-millionaires-Choose-Gullands

As they were both so convinced with houses forever going up in value, I'd bet both their teachers pensions went in, even though I've no idea how a teacher's pension gets 'released' towards buying a house.

Zandoni

Not read all the thread yet but there is a very important difference between Tesco and the wilsons.

You can shop in Tesco's every week and be sure that they will not sue you. Rent a house from the Wilsons and who knows..........

carolt

carolt wrote: »

They do look stupid, though, don't they?

Sorry to quote myself, but mulling over this story, I was struck by just how astonishingly unattractive and badly presented, even badly-maintained they are - like some of their rental properties, I suspect. (Peach bathroom suites, anyone?)

If I had 70 million quid in the bank, I'd spend it on some decent clothes, get a chef to provide me with a healthy, calorie controlled diet (if I was the size of a bus, like Mr W) and generally get a rather expensive makeover (esp if I was as unprepossessing-looking as Mrs W).

I know they're ex-maths teachers, who - let's face it - aren't famed for their sartorial elegace - I mean maths teachers are ex-maths students :eek: after all..... But still - I just don't see how they can be as rich as they claim and look that bad.

Or does it take lots of money to buy clothes that bad? I'm sure they don't sell anything as horrid as Mrs W's outfits even if you dress exclusively from Tesco's. Even raiding charity shops - you'd be up for a real challenge to find an outfit more ..sorry, lost for adjectives, honestly... hideous than Mrs W's.