Rent trap confounds dreams of a generation - landlord greed grows

ruggedtoast

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/09/generation-rent-locked-out-home-ownership

Andrew Visser's four-bedroom home in the historic village of Mangotsfield near Bristol, with its views over rolling fields, is just the sort of place he had hoped to raise his two young children. Yet, despite earning a good salary as a software specialist, this 39-year-old does not own the house and sees no prospect of doing so.

Andrew and his wife Amy belong to Generation Rent, an army of millions, all locked out of home ownership in Britain. They are among 60,000 households who rent privately in the Bristol area, more than at any time since the second world war. Rents are being hiked up as demand outstrips supply and the average age of a first-time buyer in the city has risen to 37.

Meanwhile in our marvellous private rental industry:

http://www.independent.co.uk/property/four-out-of-10-landlords-plan-to-increase-rents-in-2013-8399238.html?origin=internalSearch

Just under 40 per cent of the 1,223 landlords polled by LSL Property Services expect to increase rents in the coming 12 months, with 10 per cent anticipating rises greater than 5 per cent.

How much longer must this go on?

Edit:

"It's a generational thing. Two-thirds of us are still homeowners. One-third of all householders own their homes outright (mostly those over 60); one-third have a mortgage and one-third rent (privately or in social housing).

"What's clear is that the next generation is going to really struggle to get a stable or affordable home, no matter how hard they work or save. While it used to be a reasonable expectation for parents that their children would be better off than them, when it comes to housing things are moving backwards."

Says it all.

moneyinmypocket

The dreams of most yoof go as far as a Friday out in the town.

ILW

So this bloke earns a good salary, has two children and chooses to rent a four bed house (with views over rolling hills) in an expensive area. Don't think buying is much of a priority for him or he would have been renting something cheaper to save for a deposit.

mroing

I don't think it's quite unobtainable yet. Most of my friends that complain that they will never be able to afford a home are not willing to compromise anything to work towards that goal. Very few of my friends even set aside any money for savings, regardless of how much they earn.

I live within my means, budget properly, and manage to set aside 25% of my (well below average) income every month. Assuming no payrise, and accounting for the increase in house prices, I'm only a couple of years away from getting on the property ladder, should I choose to do so at that point.

It's not hard. It's just not exactly cushy.

moneyinmypocket

Well said.

This is my point most yoof want there beer money and iPads - sacrifice people that's what's needed

Fella

Why are landlords greedy for increasing rent? What services to the population does the OP provide at below market rate? Approximately none?

Landlords are benefitting from Government policy. That's the fault of successive Govts, not landlords.

Rinoa

Hmmm. It was the bears who wanted bank lending reined in.

"Stop the banks lending and house prices will plummet" they argued.

How silly do they look now. They still can't buy and their rents are soaring.

ruggedtoast

Fella wrote: »

Why are landlords greedy for increasing rent? What services to the population does the OP provide at below market rate? Approximately none?

Landlords are benefitting from Government policy. That's the fault of successive Govts, not landlords.

Yeah, landlords are just falling over eachother in the race to provide the best service.

Nurses provide a service, doctors provide a service, teachers provide a service, even the man who hands ice creams out to kids in the park provides a service.

In what way does letting someone occupy a property you don't need and then fleecing them for rent because they dont want to be homeless equate to being a service?

ILW

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Yeah, landlords are just falling over eachother in the race to provide the best service.

Nurses provide a service, doctors provide a service, teachers provide a service, even the man who hands ice creams out to kids in the park provides a service.

In what way does letting someone occupy a property you don't need and then fleecing them for rent because they dont want to be homeless equate to being a service?

Jealousy is an unattractive trait.

Conrad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

How much longer must this go on?

Until the FSA allows grown adults thier heads.

I'm looking to get another B2L or 2 now, as a direct result of the FSA forcing millions more to rent and thus forcing up rents considerably in my area.

You keep ignoring the FSA's roll in depriving grown adults a mortgage.

Conrad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

In what way does letting someone occupy a property you don't need and then fleecing them for rent because they dont want to be homeless equate to being a service?

Ok take me. I have just sold a property abroad.
I can CHOOSE to pay down my main mortgage, my sons want me to blow it on a car, but no, I will risk it in a B2L or two, with all the hassles that entails.

In return for this action I get a rent.
No one is forcing anyone to do a thing here.

How much of your cash are you risking today? Or are you greedily and cautiously building up your cash stocks?