Am I to become a renter

Percy1983

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Ok, so charging rent now is fine as long as it's not "profiteering"? So what a LL should to is work out exactly the cost of the property and recharge that to the tenant with no mark up? How would this work - presumably to be consistent with your previously stated views the LL could not pass on the cost of the mortgage interest as that is not a cost of the tenant "being there", as it would still have to be paid if they were not. So, should rent in fact be a charge to cover the amount of wear on the carpets caused by the tenant walking up and down, and nothing more?

This still seems inconsistent with your previously articulated views that, even if a LL charges a tenant a below market rate rent, it is an immoral practice as the LL is getting subsidised carpets paid for by the tenant.

Also, I am confused by your clarification around your use of the word "rent" as it appears what you meant was "a contribution to the incremental cost of utility and food bills and no contribution towards the provision of the roof over one's head".

In simple terms a landlord should be able to charge a maximum of the interest paid, that way the landlord gets an interest free mortgage and the renter gets an excellent deal.

Essentially if YOU want the house at the end of it YOU should pay for it, is that such a hard idea to understand?

JonnyBravo

Percy1983 wrote: »

In simple terms a landlord should be able to charge a maximum of the interest paid, that way the landlord gets an interest free mortgage and the renter gets an excellent deal.

Essentially if YOU want the house at the end of it YOU should pay for it, is that such a hard idea to understand?

Hmmm. Some might suggest you've not thought about this. More worryingly for you I'd suggest you have thought about it and have come up with this idea.
So let's explore this a little further.
So as the interest on the loan goes down (assuming full repayment mortgage), so should the rent? It should be changed every month?
How about if the landlord only pays the interest and then withdraws any increasing equity? The rent clearly should rise?

chewmylegoff

Percy1983 wrote: »

In simple terms a landlord should be able to charge a maximum of the interest paid, that way the landlord gets an interest free mortgage and the renter gets an excellent deal.

Essentially if YOU want the house at the end of it YOU should pay for it, is that such a hard idea to understand?

what if i buy a house for cash and rent it out, with no mortgage.

i have bought a house, am i allowed to charge rent? how should the rent be calculated.

if i am allowed to charge rent in the above circumstances, then why can a landlord with leverage not charge the same rent for the same house?

Percy1983

I will say on the basis on tenants only paying interest, they would be responsible for the upkeep so there would be potential costs there.

If its costing you nothing why shoud it cost them anything?

JonnyBravo

Percy1983 wrote: »

I will say on the basis on tenants only paying interest, they would be responsible for the upkeep so there would be potential costs there.

If its costing you nothing why shoud it cost them anything?

I'm not really sure how you work out it's cost nothing. Chewy said it was bought with cash rather than a loan.
Cash.
It doesn't grow on trees you know.


It's all starting to fall apart isn't it Percy.
Can't really answer all the questions posed as you're aware some answers will lead you down alleys you'll get stuck in. This making stuff up as you go along must get tiring. Broaden your horizons a little.

chewmylegoff

I suspected as much for a while, but the last post makes it quite clear that Percy is trolling.

IveSeenTheLight

chucknorris wrote: »

There would not be any VAT on 100k, in my example I would anticipate paying between 400 - 499k for the land.

Have you allowed for landscaping, fees (planning, building regs, statutory bodies, misc prof fees), services to the site boundary (or is the site fully serviced?), finance costs (opportunity cost if self financed)?

You should also allow for a contingency fund of around 5% of the building cost.

I have allowed for Landscaping, fees, utilities etc.
The builders have quoted £192k, and I'm calculating it to be £235k (land excluded)

Percy1983

JonnyBravo wrote: »

I'm not really sure how you work out it's cost nothing. Chewy said it was bought with cash rather than a loan.
Cash.
It doesn't grow on trees you know.


It's all starting to fall apart isn't it Percy.
Can't really answer all the questions posed as you're aware some answers will lead you down alleys you'll get stuck in. This making stuff up as you go along must get tiring. Broaden your horizons a little.

I have loads of things which aren't costing me anything, they did cost me something at one time.

If I no longer have a use for them I sell them.

Why should a renter pick up the bill because you decided to buy property than you need?

Percy1983

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I suspected as much for a while, but the last post makes it quite clear that Percy is trolling.

Anybody who believes in a fairer world is a troll?

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

I have loads of things which aren't costing me anything, they did cost me something at one time.

If I no longer have a use for them I sell them.

Why should a renter pick up the bill because you decided to buy property than you need?

Gents,
Has your discussion deviated from topic?
Sure I asked Am I to become a renter, but maybe the costs / reward for tenant / landlord should be discussed in a different thread.