Is BTL Immoral?

Generali

People keep banging on about the morality of BTL. Ascribing a moral status to BTL seems deeply suspect to me as an idea as there is no moral imperative for people to be able to own a house in a particular area or indeed at all.

I think it's a lousy investment but that's not about morality, just an opinion.

Cleaver

P!ss off to the beach and leave us alone. Mate.

I love your cheeky, short poll threads Gen.

Of course it isn't. When I moved in with my girlfriend at 22 I didn't want to buy a place, I wanted to rent. When I was a student I didn't want to buy, and again, renting made perfect sense. Without 'BTL' we wouldn't have been able to get the service we wanted.

What I would class as 'immoral' would be setting up a business, especially one that provides a basic need such as housing, without knowing what you're doing so that you treat people badly. That is quite immoral in my eyes.

To take this theory further, it would also be immoral to set up a water providing business and then sell contaminating water, to set up a heating company and then cause the death of elderly people by messing up your heating supplies or opening up a food shop and selling out of date food that makes people ill.

But setting up a water, heating or food company is not at all immoral if done correctly. Indeed, you'd be providing a service / product that people would be grateful for. Same as buy to let.

Radiantsoul

No

Nah, although it makes for crappy telly.

Radiantsoul

No

Radiantsoul wrote: »

Nah, although it makes for crappy telly.

On second thoughts Sarah Beeny's tits are great telly.

PasturesNew

The concept of a professional businessman/landlord, providing good quality accommodation to people in the long-term is a good thing.

The concept of "make money fast ... because I'm worth it" is immoral. People borrowing shedloads of dosh to snap up places as they'll become rich ... is immoral.

lostinrates

No

I voted strightfoward no. PN gets closest to what I think: but still not quite there....I don't care if a landlord gets rich, and quickly, if they are providing a good and legal service. I do care that so many do it poorly.

Degenerate

No

This poll reminds me of ConDem electoral maths - the percentages don't add up.

Cleaver

P!ss off to the beach and leave us alone. Mate.

PasturesNew wrote: »

The concept of "make money fast ... because I'm worth it" is immoral. People borrowing shedloads of dosh to snap up places as they'll become rich ... is immoral.

Why is making money fast, or snapping up plases to become rich, 'immoral'? I don't understand this.

Let's say I research a share, decide it's worth a punt and invest £10k. A year later and it's risen by ten times, I sell, and walk away with £100k. Is this immoral? I wouldn't say that it is at all.

Generali

Morality has nothing to do with it

Degenerate wrote: »

This poll reminds me of ConDem electoral maths - the percentages don't add up.

It's because I let people vote more than once.

For example, you can agree with me and at the same time suggest some more time spent by me on the beach and a little less on this forum would be more agreeable to you.

FWIW, a couple of hours at Edward Beach are planned tomorrow pm following 4 hours of refereeing so the 4th option is really just a lifestyle endorsement.

PrivatisetheNHSnow

Cleaver wrote: »

Why is making money fast, or snapping up plases to become rich, 'immoral'? I don't understand this.

Let's say I research a share, decide it's worth a punt and invest £10k. A year later and it's risen by ten times, I sell, and walk away with £100k. Is this immoral? I wouldn't say that it is at all.

that example is not the same as btl.

btl is borrowing money to buy an house, committing a small amount of your own capital, then extracting rent from that asset from someone with does not have the ability to borrow money to buy a house themselves, in order to pay off your debt (the btl mortgage), then pocketing any capital appreciation yourself when you eventually sell the property.

applied to your example it would be:

buying shares on margin at 90% leverage (or whatever the equivalent percentage to the ltv on a btl mortgage is), lending the shares to someone who pays you a recurring payment for the use of those shares, which pays off your debt to the broker, then selling the shares later and pocketing the capital appreciation.

Cleaver

P!ss off to the beach and leave us alone. Mate.

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

buying shares on margin at 90% leverage (or whatever the equivalent percentage to the ltv on a btl mortgage is), lending the shares to someone who pays you a recurring payment for the use of those shares, which pays off your debt to the broker, then selling the shares later and pocketing the capital appreciation.

Sorry, but I don't think buying shares on leverage is immoral either. It's risky, stupid and ill-advised (as many BTL ventures can be) but it's not 'immoral'.

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

btl is borrowing money to buy an house, committing a small amount of your own capital, then extracting rent from that asset from someone with does not have the ability to borrow money to buy a house themselves, in order to pay off your debt (the btl mortgage), then pocketing any capital appreciation yourself when you eventually sell the property.

That's a pretty perfect description of BTL, and I don't think a single bit of it could be classed as 'immoral'. Do you think it's immoral then?

As another example, I borrow £20k from my bank, add this to the £10k I already have and start a lovely pet shop. I sell rabbits, guinea pigs and goldfish at reasonable rates to kids and adults. They like my prices and customer service and the business is a success. I make £80k profit the next year, pay back the bank and pocket the rest.

Contract this to a BTL landlord who borrows £90k from the bank, adds this to the £45k he already has and buys a lovely flat. He gets some tenants, looks after them really well and makes a success of the business. Five years later the flat has risen in value, he sells, pays back the bank and pockets the rest.

These scenarios are both the same: people borrowing money to fund a business.

So as a question to you Privatise, are both of these businesses immoral, one of them immoral or neither of them immoral?