Buy to let replacing first time buyers

System

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I have not yet seen anyone from the industry suggest FTB's can be dispensed.

.

Agreed, but I don't think anyone here has said that either, I think the quote was that FTBers were not needed to see HPI or something similar to that. Not that FTBers are not needed ever.

Graham_Devon

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Agreed, but I don't think anyone here has said that either, I think the quote was that FTBers were not needed to see HPI or something similar to that. Not that FTBers are not needed ever.

For now, right now, you don't need FTB's. I.e this is a very short sighted timeframe, which may help prices meandre along.

Liek the Economist article stated though. At some point, things have to return to normality. I don't think anyone, apart from hardened VI's who don't give a damn what happens to society, would want to see the types of problems we currently face in housing and buying carry on for the next decade.

It would have large detrimental effects on savings, pensions, taxpayer subsidys etc.

Unfortunately at the moment, the market and those working within it seem adamant to do anything they can to hit the right price (peak price) and higher. At some point, something will happen, and it will tumble again. It has too. Too many issues.

Meanwhile America, Ireland, will have have their sharp shock, and will have become stable again....while we continue to just try and tweak something, anything, to prolong the fall and squeeze any potential drop out of the system we can.

This BTL replacing FTB's is just that. It's not going to last. it can't last. People need to sell second and third homes, and if there are not people coming up the chain behind them, everyone is stuck.

I do understand why it's cheered on at the moment though. It protects people from the falls that would otherwise happen for a while longer.

Also, is there THAT many people going into BTL? Or are a lot of them people who have decided not to sell their homes. Also, were talking low mortgage figures. So these low figures may be made up predominently by BTL mortgages, but compare those BTL mortgages to 4-5 years ago, and I very much expect they would look positively tiny. Just looks like a large part of the current low figures we have.

FTBFun

ultrawomble wrote: »

So, if you can afford to buy the product, you can have it. A bit like buying a Rolls Royce.

Yeah that's pretty much it.

I'm curious as to what point you're trying to make?

IveSeenTheLight

Turnbull2000 wrote: »

The future is here...

http://www.moneyhighstreet.com/buy-to-let-news/buy-to-let-investors-ousting-first-time-buyers/

I've been saying for a whole now were likely to see a reduction of the owner occupancy percentage an an increse in the rental market percentage..

It's fairly clear this is how things will go unless there is a change in the findamentals (credit availability, property supply etc)

System

I also agree it won't last, I suspect it'll last until the lenders reduce their deposit requirements and lending criteria to FTBers, which at a guess will be when they are more confident about house prices looking forward and the economy in general.

IveSeenTheLight

ILW wrote: »

Strict licensing for landlords would be a good start.

There already is this requirement in some parts of the UK

Landlord Registration Scotland

It seems there were plans to develop a similar registration in England and Wales until the coalition ditched the plan in Jun 2010
http://www.lettingfocus.com/pages/myarticles7.html

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

So all we need to do is stop BTL landlords buying everything and all will be fine?

Your advocating stopping owners from being able to sell their property to the best (maybe only) bidder.

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Your advocating stopping owners from being able to sell their property to the best (maybe only) bidder.

There was talk, can't remember who was talking about it in the press, of restricting BTL to one per person.

That was unless it was done through a proper letting company. I.e. it was a proper business.

Not sure what happened to the talks, but I guess it was frought with problems. Could have even been one of those groups against landlords standing up for tenants rights doing the talking. I dunno.

Theory is, you don't need to stop people selling for the best offer. Just like with second homes, you can reduce the numbers with simple tax implications.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

There was talk, can't remember who was talking about it in the press, of restricting BTL to one per person.

That was unless it was done through a proper letting company.

Not sure what happened to the talks, but I guess it was frought with problems. Could have even been one of those groups against landlords standing up for tenants rights doing the talking. I dunno.

It could never happen, it would be complicated to implement at this stage and there would be ways around it.

Even getting a company registered name as you suggest is extremely easy and relatively cheap (Standard Service £40, same day service £100)

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/infoAndGuide/companyRegistration.shtml

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/infoAndGuide/companyRegistrationPaper.shtml

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Theory is, you don't need to stop people selling for the best offer. Just like with second homes, you can reduce the numbers with simple tax implications.

As seen by other "tax" introduction on BTL, it doesn't have the desired effect.
Many advocated a host of people releasing BTL's with the CGT changes - it didn't happen and indeed the BTL market is expanding.

Anyone with an ounce of business sense can see the gap in the market with an increasing population, restriction of property building and a restriction in credit availability is prime for an increase in retnal demand

ultrawomble

FTBFun wrote: »

Yeah that's pretty much it.

I'm curious as to what point you're trying to make?

The point is that there is NO mortgage rationing. Similarly Rolls Royce's aren't rationed. Either you can afford the product or you can't. The suggestion that FTBs are being prevented from getting on the ladder due to 'mortgage rationing' is just hot air. There is no divine right to be able to borrow money.