The Wilsons are going under.

Mr.Brown_4

chucky wrote: »

you're point is perfectly valid but doesn't really apply to these two chancers.

they have a business that generates a lot of cash regularly from rent that they receive from many properties - this cash will have been used to sort themselves out very nicely in the event they lost the business. if they didn't do that they're muppets.

I appreciate they generate a lot of cash. I guess, but don't know if they have a lot of mortgages to pay or what those interest rates area. I am not aware of their financial details.

They are not business gurus, they are maths teachers. Their business model consisted of the same BTL process that has seen off other people - borrow, buy, remortgage, borrow, buy and so on. They just did it on a very large scale.

I assume Grant Bovey had accountants and so on, but didn't he have to downsize when it all went wrong for him? Who knows what will happen to them. If they have done a dodgy deal with Russian finance there could be no limits.

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

you're point is perfectly valid but doesn't really apply to these two chancers.

they have a business that generates a lot of cash regularly from rent that they receive from many properties - this cash will have been used to sort themselves out very nicely in the event they lost the business. if they didn't do that they're muppets.

Unlikely. They most probably became addicted to purchasing property. As their target at one time was to reach a 1,000 properties. So most of the rental income would have been reinvested back into further property.

chucky

Mr.Brown wrote: »

I appreciate they generate a lot of cash. I guess, but don't know if they have a lot of mortgages to pay or what those interest rates area. I am not aware of their financial details.

They are not business gurus, they are maths teachers. Their business model consisted of the same BTL process that has seen off other people - borrow, buy, remortgage, borrow, buy and so on. They just did it on a very large scale.

I assume Grant Bovey had accountants and so on, but didn't he have to downsize when it all went wrong for him? Who knows what will happen to them. If they have done a dodgy deal with Russian finance there could be no limits.

it seems that they've wrapped their properties in their Ltd Co just like Bovey did.
they may lose the business but they keep the past profits and anything they've taken out of the property..

they also get to keep the money they've pushed into their pensions as Harry P points out. this is all untouchable - as long as they've done it legally of course..

Mr.Brown_4

chucky wrote: »

it seems that they've wrapped their properties in their Ltd Co just like Bovey did.
they may lose the business but they keep the past profits and anything they've taken out of the property..

they also get to keep the money they've pushed into their pensions as Harry P points out. this is all untouchable - as long as they've done it legally of course..

I wonder if they have a mortgage on their own residence?

Any sleuths on MSE today?

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

it seems that they've wrapped their properties in their Ltd Co just like Bovey did.
they may lose the business but they keep the past profits and anything they've taken out of the property..

they also get to keep the money they've pushed into their pensions as Harry P points out. this is all untouchable - as long as they've done it legally of course..

As they never actively sold property they've realised little profit. Their profit is in the main tied into the capital appreciation of the houses. So the value is in the business. Which of course depends on the amount of debt that underpins the empire.

As they hit cashflow problems. Its a fair assumption that the rental income of the empire was insufficent to service the loan repayments and operational costs of the company.

In selling a property to raise cash they might crystallise a CGT liability, which reduces the cash realised, and of course reduces the potential for rental income.

A fair guess is that they lost control of their empire with the buying spree in more recent years. By remortgaging existing property gains to fund deposits.

Harry_Powell

Thrugelmir wrote: »

In selling a property to raise cash they might crystallise a CGT liability, which reduces the cash realised, and of course reduces the potential for rental income.

A fair guess is that they lost control of their empire with the buying spree in more recent years. By remortgaging existing property gains to fund deposits.

If they have the properties within a limited company framework, will they be subject to CGT? Surely any profits are taxed as Corporation tax, and they could easily skim any profit from sales into company pensions, debt repayment and 'admin' fees, thus reducing their corporation tax bill.

Thrugelmir

Mr.Brown wrote: »

I wonder if they have a mortgage on their own residence?

Any sleuths on MSE today?

Found this.

This certainly doesn't look like the stately pile of a billionaire. There's no gold jacuzzi, no personal tanning salon (like Simon Cowell), no £16m private jet (like Sir Philip Green), not even a Rolls-Royce (like Del Boy).

The only indication that the owners have a bob or two - as I pull up the gravel drive of an unremarkable suburban house in Boughton Monchelsea, near Maidstone, Kent - is the tired-looking Jaguar X-Type outside.

Even this, however, is parked next to a battered old Land Rover. So battered, in fact, that the wing mirrors are attached with sticky tape. It is hard to believe that this is the home - albeit the second home and office - of Judith and Fergus Wilson, proud owners of a £180mn property empire.


In fact, their fortune probably peaked at a staggering £250m - although that doesn't stop property experts labelling them Britain's first buy-to-let billionaires.

They even overtook the Beckhams in the 2007 Sunday Times Husbands And Wives Rich List.

But you couldn't tell from their lifestyles. They haven't holidayed for more than 20 years - 'Why would we want to leave Kent?' - they shop at the local supermarket, and even their choice of biscuits, Rich Tea, is rather humble.
But they are now planning their biggest luxury to date: retirement.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages-and-homes/buy-to-let/article.html?in_article_id=491788&in_page_id=56

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A fair guess is that they lost control of their empire with the buying spree in more recent years. By remortgaging existing property gains to fund deposits.

according to this forum and a couple others they lost control a couple of years ago...

surprisingly they're still there and probably will be for the next couple of years.

maybe saying "that they lost control of their empire" is a bit of an exaggeration and even not actually true.

Mr.Brown_4

chucky wrote: »

according to this forum and a couple others they lost control a couple of years ago...

surprisingly they're still there and probably will be for the next couple of years.

maybe saying "that they lost control of their empire" is a bit of an exaggeration and even not actually true.

Maybe they lost control a couple of years ago, or last year, or perhaps it will happen next year. I would say the chances are that they are going to go spectacularly bankrupt once the bank(s) are forced to take the hit.

Are they still looking for that Russian businessman who was apparently lined up to save them?

Couple of maths teachers. 800 houses.

You do the maths Chucky....

Thrugelmir

Harry_Powell wrote: »

If they have the properties within a limited company framework, will they be subject to CGT? Surely any profits are taxed as Corporation tax, and they could easily skim any profit from sales into company pensions, debt repayment and 'admin' fees, thus reducing their corporation tax bill.

What difference does putting capital assets into a Ltd Company framework make?

Corporation tax is akin to Income tax.

If they traded property then yes Corporation Tax would be payable. Though this was clearly what they didn't do. Their plan was long term.

Repayment of debt is not a tax deductible item. Capital repayment is effectively made from after tax income.

I would imagine that running an empire of 900 properties had signficant operational overheads. Employing staff for example.