Surely Discrimination?

Gadge0275

Hi this is my first post. I have 11 flats in Bristol which I have a commercial loan. They were a new build and in a block. I am now looking to add to my portfolio by buying more property when I can afford the deposits. I am now at the stage to buy another flat but find that buy to let mortgages are very expensive. My question is why are we treated differently than others that borrow money? I can understand that investors in the past may of been too greedy and purchased property beyond their means but why should the rest of us be punished. Even the set up fees for a simple 75K BTL are around £2K-£3K and normally fixed for 2 years. This seems to me to be discrimination. At least we supply housing for those that can't afford a mortgage so we should in all fairness have the same mortgage rights!

dunstonh

This seems to me to be discrimination.

You havent indicated any form of discrimination.

I can see three potential areas. 1) new build 2) flats 3) buy to let. However, all three carry risks which need to be considered by a lender. That is not discrimination. They price their product to cover the risks and to be profitable. Much the same as you do when you set your rents.

At least we supply housing for those that can't afford a mortgage

You are a landlord that makes money off other people. Don't make out that you are doing some public service. Buy to lets are part of the reason people cannot afford a mortgage.

handytips

Agree with the above wholehearedly. You have a choice pay the arrangement fee or funnily enough...not. Buy to let mortgages are also unregulated basically the same as your commercial borrowing, which wouldnt have come cheap. Also your commercial borrowing can be called in at short notice at any time. Beware.

The_J

Yes it's discrimination. Discrimination against morons.

paulmapp8306

Ultimately, someone buying a house to live in, so its residential use. Your buying to make money - thats commercial use. How is it descrimination to treat commercial customers differently from residential? Treating two residential customers differently OT two commercial customers differently might be - BUT you are not the same as an owner/occupier.

Tax rates differ for buisiness and private income - so do insurance rates, utility charges and I guess many more things. Are they discriminatory as well?

DVardysShadow

Gadge0275 wrote: »

At least we supply housing for those that can't afford a mortgage so we should in all fairness have the same mortgage rights!

If there were much less BTL, house prices would be more affordable and mortgages for buyers would be more readily available and people would not need to rent off people like you with 11 flats.

In all fairness, you are creating the ecosystem in which people have to rent, because you have bought the stuff they would buy.

chrisscott666

I think there are some harsh comments there just because people are a bit bitter towards land lords, I’m a land lord and although I’m in it for the money obviously if it didn’t make a profit I would not do it but then dose that make a shop keeper evil? my rents are set below what others charge and the standard of my housing is high, I do not believe for one minute that landlords are pricing new buyers out the market for the simple reason they can pay more for a house than I can, my price is set by mathematics, I need to make a certain amount from the rent I charge, I’ve been out bid regularly by new buyers as once they go above my maximum it’s not worth me buying as I won’t make enough to make it worthwhile.

I work 70 hours a week in my own job to pay for these houses (every week) so I’m working hard and I do believe although I’m in it for the money. I’m also helping family’s out, in the 5 years I’ve been doing it having 8 houses I’ve never had a tenant leave because I look after them. and don’t rape them for every penny they have, we both get a fair living.

I do agree the arrangement charges are extortionate however but like people say you can choose to pay them or simply not.

The_J

I'm a landlord too, also in it for the money, but I thoroughly agree that BTL propositions are higher risk, more commercial and as such should certainly be priced higher to account for that risk.

Also, if you are working to support your BTLs then you are doing it wrong. Do you understand the concept of rent?

dunstonh

I think there are some harsh comments there just because people are a bit bitter towards land lords

No. It was the way the OP made out they were offering a public service.

antrobus

Gadge0275 wrote: »

... At least we supply housing for those that can't afford a mortgage so we should in all fairness have the same mortgage rights!

(Scratches head)

People have mortgage rights? That's a new one. At least it's a right that seems to have slipped the minds of the worthies who complied the European Convention on Human Rights.

DannyboyMidlands

Of course banks discriminate and rightfully so. That's the whole point of a mortgage application, to give them the information so that they can discriminate between different borrowers, choose who they want to lend to and at what rate.

What are you suggesting? That banks should give any amount of money to anyone who walks through the door, one rate for all, no questions asked? And if they don't, it's discrimination and against the borrowers basic human rights? Rubbish.

BTL can be risky. Why should boring old homeowners subsidise your house of cards?