BTL, vile lowlife business, nobody wants to be living under their roofs

Cleaver

DervProf wrote: »

Because there is a shortage of property, I would have thought that a fairer system would be to ration home ownership. The chap I met yesterday is increasing the shortgage of property available to buy. The gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" is widening. I don't think this is something to celebrate, but other forum members seem to love it (probably because they are lucky enough to be one of the "haves").

Derv, I think there is a middle ground of people (maybe like me) who feel uncomfortable about the issue of mass-BTL and second homes but also feel uncomfortable about the rationing of home ownership. Neither ends of this spectrum seem that appealing.

There is something in this about changing the culture of our society, and that isn't in my opinion about laws, legislation and rationing in the main.

My Dad has a second home (a holiday home) and I know that he wrestles with this morally, especially as he came from a very humble background. My parents bought this place after my Mum became ill and they wanted somewhere where they could spend weekends and weeks away from their busy worklives and leave everything behind. He probably feels a bit guilty about owning this place and is very aware that he is depriving a local person from owning a house. Should he have been stopped from buying the house? How would this work? I see the idea behind it, but just can't see how it would work. I'm also not sure how my Dad would feel about paying 40% in tax to the state for all his life, but then being told what he can and can't do by the state with the 60% that he's allowed to keep.

Linton

DervProf wrote: »

I`ll reply to my own post.

Because there is a shortage of property, I would have thought that a fairer system would be to ration home ownership. The chap I met yesterday is increasing the shortgage of property available to buy. The gap between the "haves" and the "have nots" is widening. I don't think this is something to celebrate, but other forum members seem to love it (probably because they are lucky enough to be one of the "haves").

The shortage of property is one key point I believe. The other is the increasing wealth gap. Put the two together and you have the getting wealthier wealthy people happy to outbid each other on the housing they want which distorts the whole market, particularly in London.

Inflation at the top increases the value of houses one step down etc and also makes it more financially rewarding for the builders to build larger & more expensive houses.

But how would you ration property? A conclave of councillors and local clergy deciding on who is the most deserving? Or government inspectors coming round to confiscate 4 bedroom houses being occupied by a couple?

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

I'd say that's a knockout punch. :T

well seeing that you posted a follow up to that post i knew it would be more fabrication from another crashaholic...

Crisis don't do those days...
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/general-volunteeer.html
anyway off you go Prof jog on now and be a good little lad...

Linton

DervProf wrote: »

I don't think I`ve ever known so many people to be multiple home owners. Up until about 10 years ago, I didn't hear much about a property shortage. Places like Cornwall were where Cornish people lived and owned property. Bradford & Bingley weren't advertising "Get someone else to pay your mortgage", and I didn`t hear people saying "it's my pension, init".

I guess it was fewer landlords owning much larger amounts of housing. Probably inherited wealth helps there.

It can reasonably be argued that the main cause of property shortage was the decision by Mrs T and the then Conservative goverment to pull out of most state provision of housing.

chucknorris

jennikitten wrote: »

See, now that is exactly the kind of thing I'm interested in hearing about. How about starting a thread asking what other people are doing to help others out over the festive period?

I would be happy to come and join you if I didn't live so far away. I have a commitment to helping the local animals in my area over Christmas (strays as well as the ducks/swans/deer/even seagulls) who are finding the cold weather challenging & extremely difficult to find food at the moment. I've also donated to various charities (UK and abroad). Only wish I had more free time to physically help out, although my boyfriend is doing a lot with his spare time, including volunteer work I found for him teaching at a local charity-run college. Also donated some money this month to help a single parent take her disabled son to Disneyland for Christmas.

Anyone else like to share?

Nice one Jenni!

I do home checks for various dog rescue centres (when I am not fleeing angry tenants trying to burn me that is) I too wish I had more time to give. I do get out to houses asap as I always try and stop a dog spending another night in shelter rather than a loving home. I donate cash too, I favour the last chance rescue centre as they tend to rescue dogs from Welsh council pounds that are about to be put to sleep.

Percy1983

To put it simply houses should be homes and not investments.

As soon as people understand this all wil correct itself.

Cleaver

I would love to lie and say that I spend my Christmas Eve saving distressed swans from frozen lakes and then normally go and read stories to disabled children with poor haircuts on Christmas day, but I don't. I feel a bit bad now. And I used to own a BTL. Ye gods, I am evil.

wotsthat

Cleaver wrote: »

I would love to lie and say that I spend my Christmas Eve saving distressed swans from frozen lakes and then normally go and read stories to disabled children with poor haircuts on Christmas day, but I don't. I feel a bit bad now. And I used to own a BTL. Ye gods, I am evil.

My names's wotsthat and apart from not drinking over Christmas because I'll be providing a taxi service for extended family I won't be doing anything charitable either. I'm thinking about buying a holiday home in Cornwall as well.

I feel bad now as well.

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

well seeing that you posted a follow up to that post i knew it would be more fabrication from another crashaholic...

Crisis don't do those days...
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/general-volunteeer.html
anyway off you go Prof jog on now and be a good little lad...

"Crashaholic" ?

Nah, I`m not wishing or waiting for a property crash.

Oh, and did you accuse me of "fabrication" ? What did I fabricate ?

Graham_Devon

Accountant_Kerry wrote: »

I choose burned at the stake as it seems that this sort of extremist view is what the OP is suggesting!

New tax legislation would affect any business start up of course, BTL included. But how many are currently entering BTL at the moment? This does not deal with the historic BTL issue surely?

As I said, the ones arguing with the OP using the same tactics will be the ones proving his point

I don't think it's particularly fair, or sensible to simply apply a tax retrospectively to BTL landlords. You could do this to second / holiday homes, giving maybe a year or two warning.

However, going forward, you could apply something to every new BTL & second home purchase. That's fair. People know where they stand.

Also like cleavers thoughts on the register, including stuff such as equity held. Would help the tennant immensly in deciding whether to take on a let or not.

Many many things that can be done, but BTL seems to be on the the least legislated in this country, and one which has a massive impact on the stability of the country (banks, house prices etc) and massive impact on families (priced out, speculative bubbles, busts etc).

Not blaming BTL for it all. But BTL has been a major part of speculation and ramping.

Presumably someone thought it would be a good idea to give the poster I was speaking to earlier a second mortgage for a second home, though apparently she couldn't afford to rent. That's madness. The poster is now left with large debts and assets they can't release themselves of, hoping for more price rises, which will only trap more people. This is the craziness I'm talking about, that legislation would have held back slightly, IMO.