Buy to let replacing first time buyers

geneer

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Perhaps I'm mistaken but isn't this exactly why people were saying FTBers aren't required for the market to pick up?

I ask as this was fiercely denied but no one has a problem with his particular article.

They also said that FTBs weren't required to stop the market from crashing.

geneer

FTBFun wrote: »

Not necessarily, as I suspect investors have better access to funds for a healthy deposit.

How is this different from what it used to be?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

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

Reason being, at some point, FTB's are needed. Even if it's at a second level. You need FTB's to turn into Second time buyers.

Unless you believe that BTL landlords will eventually take the place of FTB's, 2TB's, 3TB's and also buy up the last level of retirement type bungalows etc.

BTL is currently a minor sticking plaster for the lack of FTB's....but that is all it will ever be. Unless like I say, BTL takes over every rung of the ladder and we all end up renting.

Indeed. That never happened before they started handing out BTL mortgages like sweeties to numpties.
Who should it happen now?

geneer

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

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..

Gosh. Really stuck your neck out with that one didn't you.
Everyone else was assuming that those who couldn't afford or didn't want to buy would be living in tents instead.

Sigh.

diable

Percy1983 wrote: »

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

Nope a virus that wipes out half the population would be better as then there would be too many properties so rents will fall as well as house prices..............

LydiaJ

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Those are of course one definition of rationing, assuming there is sufficient for all.
Alternatively, by imposing restrictions, you are rationing the supply.

To try and explain in your terms, the next time you see a disaster on TV and aid people rationing the supply they have, think about those that are left there withiout any rations after the supply was distributed.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Oh good grief.

Aid is rationed to those most in need.

There is no mortgage rationing. There IS mortgage eligibility.

100% mortgages are not being rationed. They are simply not there. They have been removed at the present time.

Whether or not there is enough to allow everyone to have the ration of whatever-it-is, the point of rationing is that those who can afford more are not allowed to buy more. The ration is 4oz of sugar and 2oz of butter a week (or whatever) and once you've had yours, you can't have any more, regardless of whether you have stacks of cash to pay for it. This improves the chances that poorer people will be able to get their ration, even if it doesn't make it certain.

This is not what is happening with mortgages.

On the subject of what should be done, I would like to see

a) Licensing of LLs so that nobody can let a property without being made aware of all their responsibilities and the laws by which they will be expected to abide
b) Improved rights for tenants who pay on time, don't trash the property, etc, so longer notice period, etc
c) Faster procedure for LLs to evict tenants who don't pay on time, do trash the property, etc
d) Licensing of LAs with a robust system to strike the dodgy ones off the register

Cleaver

Percy1983 wrote: »

Houses should be homes, not investments.

But you know what? Sometimes it's necessary to create a marketplace where investors can buy a property in order that someone else can make it their home.

Cleaver

diable wrote: »

Nope a virus that wipes out half the population would be better as then there would be too many properties so rents will fall as well as house prices..............

Well that's a lovely solution to a very complex social and economic problem.

new_home_owner_3

I ve just noticed this story, my friends a landlord and hes been doing it for a few years now, he has bought 5 houses since 2007 and they have all been first time buyer properties the way he sees it hes getting a 3 bed house between 70- 90000.

There not in the greatest areas, but he knows he will get the rent from dss tenants and hes happy with that.

Hes looking long term, so if hes making a profit from the rent and he keeps the houses for over 20 years im sure the capital should give him a good return.

Turnbull2000

http://www.ftadviser.com/FTAdviser/Mortgages/Products/BuyToLet/News/article/20110421/fb1a264e-6bf5-11e0-8843-00144f2af8e8/Riskaverse-lenders-help-BTLs-remarkable-recovery.jsp

geneer

Turnbull2000 wrote: »

http://www.ftadviser.com/FTAdviser/Mortgages/Products/BuyToLet/News/article/20110421/fb1a264e-6bf5-11e0-8843-00144f2af8e8/Riskaverse-lenders-help-BTLs-remarkable-recovery.jsp

according to Assetz.

with Assetz recording

More crucially, Assetz said

claimed Assetz.

Stuart Lawz, chief executive of Assetz, said

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Lest we forget.

Stuartz Lawz sayz:

Interest rates now to fall - house prices will be stable and then begin to grow again

19 November 2007

Housing supply being squeezed - prices will rise

24 January 2008

House prices have started growing again - you heard it here first

18 February 2008

</H2>