Parents, you're just making it worse! Please STOP!

moggins

I agree with both the council housing situation and the BTL being to blame. The lack of council housing allowing the BTL explosion to happen. I paid £32,500 for my house 7 years ago. This was the cheapest area around and the only one we could afford to move into but because it was all owned houses then there was a great community feel to the area. Then the BTL'ers moved into the area and property prices leaped to where my house has now been valued at £129,000 but the houses around have all been let to people who don't give a damm about the houses or the area, including a huge number of refugees. There are constant fights in the street, loud music, vandalism from people who have no respect for anything because they've never had to work for anything they own, drugs and prostitution are rife but as prices have also risen elsewhere (although not as steeply as this area) we cannot afford to move out.

I sincerely hope all the BTL'ers get what is coming to them

PoorDave

moggins wrote:

I agree with both the council housing situation and the BTL being to blame. The lack of council housing allowing the BTL explosion to happen. I paid £32,500 for my house 7 years ago. This was the cheapest area around and the only one we could afford to move into but because it was all owned houses then there was a great community feel to the area. Then the BTL'ers moved into the area and property prices leaped to where my house has now been valued at £129,000 but the houses around have all been let to people who don't give a damm about the houses or the area, including a huge number of refugees. There are constant fights in the street, loud music, vandalism from people who have no respect for anything because they've never had to work for anything they own, drugs and prostitution are rife but as prices have also risen elsewhere (although not as steeply as this area) we cannot afford to move out.

I sincerely hope all the BTL'ers get what is coming to them

Which is what, exactly? (I am not a BTL'er, BTW)

moggins

Huge taxes from the government hopefully which will mean they sell off all the properties and we no longer have to live like prisoners in our own homes.

nelly_2

BobProperty wrote:

So, like I said, tell me how the legislation will be worded without ensuring that you alienate a large proportion of the electorate and guarantee losing the next election?

Sinse when has it bothered this government about alienating anyone?

heres how it'll be worded.

Right peasants, when you were thick enough to belive our bullsh1t about not putting 1 single penny on income tax you fell for it.

Heres the list of other taxes we had to invent instead, I've had to write it on a bog roll cos its that long.
So now we are doing a new one called "taxing people with houses who dont work in whitehall", basically it means you pay more and we dont.

We know this is a tried and tested system cos we did it when we awarded ourselves a pay rise and pension rise, where as you lot have no pension and dont earn as much as us and you never will, now sod off, do as your told, and get your hand in your pockets.

They might put a few big words in there but it'll basically add up to the same result.

lynzpower

I tihnk if anything the RTB was the most repsonsible for the increase in BTLs, after all the ability for the gov to provide for those on low incomes. I agree with clutton entirely, without BTL LLs most of the single parents, low income families, adults with disabilities would either a) be living in downright dangerous B&B for all eternity or b) be street homeless.

I have placed the vast majority of clinets in private tenancies, and its a bloody good job there are still LLs out there who will accept HB. Or else wed have an even bigger divide than we already have.

dunstonh

Problem is, how are people supposed to save for retirement? Pensions are useless, savings accounts offer meagre returns.....despite the tax hosuing at the moment still offers good returns...though like anything there is a risk, but in 20 years unless you are unlucky, housing should better returns.

Pensions are not useless. Investments are not useless. Pensions are just a form of tax wrapper and exactly the same investment funds are available on pensions as they are on ISAs, Unit Trusts and Investment bonds. You could have easily achieved returns in excess of 10% p.a. even if you had put a lump sum in at the worst point in 2001 before the stockmarket crash.

If you haven't achieved that, it means that your investments within the pension are not right. It doesnt mean pensions are not right.

I'm afraid your response is no surprise as the media has gone on about pensions being bad without actually defining which pensions they are on about. So, whilst some have suffered, they have given the impression all are bad.

Whilst the pension tax wrapper is not as desirable as it used to be, investing is just as desirable as it always has been.

Ems*Honie

vishpatel wrote:

yep - I do. If there wasn't so many of these external factors skewing the market (ie. parents providing financial help, shared ownership etc..) it would NATURALLY CORRECT.

If you don't mind me asking, why couldn't you afford to pay the deposit & solicitors fees yourself?

Surely these are not the only times in which parents have lent money/ financially helped their children buy a house? Is it not something that is normal and part of being a family?

sanfrancisco

PoorDave wrote:

Who says rate rises are coming?

Japan. Were global now. Get reading.

I totally agree with vishpatel. Everything you say is spot on.

BobProperty

nelly wrote:

Sinse when has it bothered this government about alienating anyone?.....

Anytime it stops them getting re-elected. Goes for most if not all governments. The example I gave about NI on dividends was true. The tories briefly thought about it in the 80's to get round a common method of avoiding paying NI. Then someone with a brain pointed out that by doing so they would alienate nearly every tory voter from the "little old lady" with a handful of shares which supplemented thier pension, to the city fat cats (who'd probably find a way round it).

BobProperty

vishpatel wrote:

yep - I do. If there wasn't so many of these external factors skewing the market (ie. parents providing financial help, shared ownership etc..) it would NATURALLY CORRECT.....

One of the things that I believe has skewed the market in the last few years has been the increasing availability of IO mortgages and the increase in the limits on the income multiples that are being allowed. These days it appears you can get an IO mortgage of 5 times income, a product which wouldn't have existed 5 years ago. The only way a crash is going to be postponed is by lenders offering American style "exotic" mortgages and god help anyone who takes one of those out in the next 5 years. If we go along that route, the crash will be more like an earthquake when it happens.