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

Cleaver

WhiteChristmas wrote: »

The objection is not to... private letting, it is specifically to BTL

Would you be able to outline the difference to me between BTL and private letting? My understanding of any private rental is that someone buys a house to let out, they let it out, therefore somene is renting that house privately. BTL is private letting.

Do you see something different?

WhiteChristmas

Folk letting houses which are actually owned by their banks in a market which has only been made possible by removing all protection for the poor mugs with no alternative but to rent... what am I doing? You don't need me to explain.

Incidentally, my apologies for not checking the date; I hadn't realised I was dragging up ancient history.

I'm lucky. I (nearly!) own my house, I earn a decent living from a job I love (with a final salary pension scheme that might just last untl I retire); I don't need to exploit the less fortunate to be assured a comfortable old age. My yin and yang are -- and will remain -- in harmony.

I hope, however, that those who have been dumping from a great height on their tenants are making sure their insurance policies are all in order because, when the cuts start to bite and tempers start to fray, there will be a plague of moonlight flits leaving trashed premises all over the country.

Cleaver

WhiteChristmas wrote: »

Folk letting houses which are actually owned by their banks in a market which has only been made possible by removing all protection for the poor mugs with no alternative but to rent...

Sorry, but I'm still not really clear.

Let me give you example. Back in 2000 I went to Uni, and my friends and I wanted to rent a house for a year. Luckily there were private lettings available, and we rented a house that had a rental price we were happy with. It mattered not to us what business plan the landlord had. What I mean is, whether the owner had a mortgage or was a cash buyer was none of our concern, in the same that when I buy a sandwich from a sandwich shop it's none of my concern whether that business owner has taken out a loan to fund that sandwich shop or whether they have funded their shop through their own capital.

Technically speaking, many products and services you buy or use will be 'owned by the banks'. The plumber you use may have taken a business loan to set up. The shop you buy clothes from rents from a landlord who has a commercial mortgage. The television you buy was made by a company who operate with a level of sensible credit line from their bank. Pretty much all businesses are 'owned by the bank' if we use your logic. As a consumer who chooses to use these products and services I don't really need to concern myself with their credit arrangements with their financial backers, as it's the financial backers who choose to take the risk about whether they lend the business money or not.

I think what you're saying is that you don't like the fact that landlords over the past ten years had access to a variety of credit options that you feel shouldn't have been available to them, as this increased house prices. I'm inclined to agree to an extent, in that this probably contributed slightly to house prices rising, but there were many, many other reasons why house prices rose.

The system isn't perfect. But just out of interest, what's your alternative to BTL landlords? Or what changes would you put in place to the current system?

WhiteChristmas

Cleaver wrote: »

I think what you're saying is that you don't like the fact that landlords over the past ten years had access to a variety of credit options that you feel shouldn't have been available to them, as this increased house prices. I'm inclined to agree to an extent, in that this probably contributed slightly to house prices rising, but there were many, many other reasons why house prices rose.

I agree there are numerous contributing factors to the house price increases we've seen in the last 15 or so years; my concern is less with the mechanism than the effect. From my nice, comfortable, unexposed perch, I can see an awful lot of vocal (and unrepresentatively influential) folk who have put all their eggs in the property basket and are willing to **** over their fellow man to avoid making a big omelette.

Cleaver wrote: »

The system isn't perfect. But just out of interest, what's your alternative to BTL landlords? Or what changes would you put in place to the current system?

We've both rented when it suited us and now don't have to, but renting should be a realistic long-term - even permanent - option to those who want it. The housing market and "gotta own" mentality in this country is pretty much unique in the developed world. Even the Americans think we're bonkers.

Secured tenancies, tenants' rights, rent controls; oh, and I could go on for hours about how the proceeds of the RTB sell-off should have been allowed to be spent on more social housing; but the usual suspects would just dismiss me as another socialist dinosaur.

But for every area that's been "gentrified" there's one that's been turned into bedsit land by the BTL brigade. One former 6-bed family home on the street is converted into one bedroomed flats and within three or four years beautiful detatched Victorian villas have no value other than as "development opportunities".

That's where I get bitter; architectural vandalism. Our heritage sacrificed on the altar of failed pension schemes.

twadge_face

Cleaver wrote: »

Sorry, but I'm still not really clear.

Let me give you example. Back in 2000 I went to Uni, and my friends and I wanted to rent a house for a year. Luckily there were private lettings available

Hahaha. Luck? Right.

Universities have relied on halls/digs since their very inception. Luck has nothing to do with it. Else they couldn't've survived...

Ste.._2

tartanterra wrote: »

What are you on about????

You want to legalise the wrecking of other peoples property?

Absolute nonsense.

<facepalm>

ninky_2

WhiteChristmas wrote: »

One former 6-bed family home on the street is converted into one bedroomed flats and within three or four years beautiful detatched Victorian villas have no value other than as "development opportunities".

That's where I get bitter; architectural vandalism. Our heritage sacrificed on the altar of failed pension schemes.

nonsense. people just don't have the family structures / household sizes for 6 bed homes these days. far better to make the property serve modern needs than to keep it as a museum to the past.

WhiteChristmas

Another convert to the "market knows best" doctrine, eh?

A conversion into 2x three bed homes might help fulfill a much more pressing need and maintain the local community, but the developer will make bigger and quicker profit from smaller units and a quick tenant turnover so b*gger the neighbours.

What it does, of course, is inflate prices for the fewer remaining larger properties in other areas, further ghettoising (is that a word? It is now) the town; so it's social and cultural, as well as architectural, vandalism.

julieq

make more households than houses and you need to make better use of the houses you have, that means smaller units.

The future is leased condos in urban locations, same as elsewhere in the world.

ninky_2

WhiteChristmas wrote: »

Another convert to the "market knows best" doctrine, eh?

A conversion into 2x three bed homes might help fulfill a much more pressing need and maintain the local community, but the developer will make bigger and quicker profit from smaller units and a quick tenant turnover so b*gger the neighbours.

What it does, of course, is inflate prices for the fewer remaining larger properties in other areas, further ghettoising (is that a word? It is now) the town; so it's social and cultural, as well as architectural, vandalism.

not at all. i just don't have a luddite nostalgia for the past. neighbourhoods change. people have more transient lifestyles. personally i dont' mind that. you can still find community if you want it. i certainly wouldn't want to live in victorian style community thankyou very much.