Buy to let set to further worsen renters' lives : The Groaner

Conrad

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Everything always gets ruined this way when theres a quick buck to be made.

Thats a tad simplistic Devon.

If you were considering B2L, all sorts of competing drivers would course through your thoughts. For example if you invest say £35000 of hard earned inot B2L, you might feel a little unsettled at haing it tied up in an investment where you may experience voids and other hassles at any time.

The modest monthly profit is just about sufficient to assuage and balance out those negative feelings and eventualities.

If I retire at 60 with a portfolio, the effort involved in earning the cash deposits, the years of uncertainty, the thought of having maybe 15 mortgages prior to retirement and so on, is quite a serious endeavour to wrestle with.

So it's not quite the money making machine we might sometimes portray.:o

It actualy takes a bit of guts believe it or not. Would you fancy say 15 mortgages hanging over you aged 59?

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I think the frustrations people have towards BTL's are drawn out pretty well in this thread.

Stuff such as "other people are paying my mortgage for me" is the kind of stuff that annoys people.

I would recommend you learn not to bite at those who are clearly trying to wind you up, whether they are BTL LL's or not remains to be seen.

I am a BTL LL and don't use that sort of language.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

no other business can get away with the lax regulation BTL enjoys. There was a comparison on the TV not long ago showing the regulation food serving shops have to comply to, yet BTL landlords can let people LIVE within the problems with absolutely no issues.

I've referred before that there is registration and legislation for landlords in Scotland.
https://www.landlordregistrationscotland.gov.uk/Pages/Process.aspx?Command=ShowHomePage

I suggest you lobby for E&W to follow Scotland lead.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Then theres the other argument that BTL simply sucks money out of the economy, creating little in the way of jobs, and, with rent increases seemingly never ending, never allowing the renter a way out.

Does it suck money out of the economy? I guess it does to a certain extent as it passess from tenant to landlord.

Part of it however will make it's way to the government through taxation.

The profits can be used to improve the condition as I have done recently putting in new windows and therefore supporting part of the economy and the remainder of the profits can be spent towards the economy also.

I'm not sure it's a complete drain

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Though I do agree, it's fantastic for those with the money to plough into it.

Don't think people would mind so much if the playing field was a little more level, however, it's not, infact, it continually sides towards the landlords.

I don't think this is a fault of the BTL LL's though is it.
It's about those that lend and those that are able or not to save for a deposit

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So yer, great game for those with the wealth to plough in, and make more money, not so great for the rest of the economy and those having to use the services.

We've shown before that the levels of owner occupancy have been far lower with a lower quality of homes for the renters.

Not so sure the picture is as black as you paint it, indeed, the level of quality accomodation has improved since the introduction of BTL.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As with everything, it's not the renters that are causing problems with BTL, it's the GREEDY BTL's themselves, of which not all landlords are. Everything always gets ruined this way when theres a quick buck to be made.

"GREEDY BTL's"...........

The market is set by supply and demand.
As BTL expands, renters have more options.
Indeed you should be arguing for more BTL's to drive down the rents, but of course we then get into a discussion of property building which of course has done the rounds many times before

BobQ

ruggedtoast wrote: »

No thats fine. Why dont you go and invest in manufacturers of land mines, North Korean government bonds, entities that exploit child labour. As long as it makes you 3% profit it must be fine because it makes a profit which is apparently the only thing that matters to you and the point exactly where your moral compass ceases functioning.

Good day.

Pontificate if you want. I know of no BTL landlords who do this kind of thing and everyone has to operate within the law and whatever their own moral standards.

Why not turn you attention to employers while you are at it? Many employers make a lot more money than they pay their workers tp produce the goods and services they sell, so maybe they are parasites too.?

You just have a thing about landlords.

nollag2006

Joeskeppi wrote: »

You know, whether I believe nollag or not I don't know, but his back story has never changed that I've seen, Ealing in 2009 and Clapham in 2010 or 11, can't remember.

Hounslow is brit's territory where nollag likes to point out the rises, not that he owns there.

I could be totally wrong and am happy to be shown otherwise.

Thanks Joe - finally some sense in this thread.

It's basically down to jealousy from the likes of HSW. Such hatred and jealousy is quite sad really

ruggedtoast

BobQ wrote: »

Pontificate if you want. I know of no BTL landlords who do this kind of thing and everyone has to operate within the law and whatever their own moral standards.

Why not turn you attention to employers while you are at it? Many employers make a lot more money than they pay their workers tp produce the goods and services they sell, so maybe they are parasites too.?

You just have a thing about landlords.

The law of what? The law of spivs and scheisters? The law that pays millions of pounds to corrupt bankers and politicians while pensioners freeze to death without heating. The law that invades countries that have never done a thing to us so oil companies can post a rising balance sheet?

The law that turns families out on the street with weeks notice? The law that forbids able bodied men and women to build their own homes on land they might buy due to "planning permission". That law; yes I imagine that kind of law is very popular with buy to let landlords.

However as Creon discovered in Sophocles play, it is abhorrent to the laws of decency and desperate hubris will strike down it's proponents. (Buy to let landlords, and other kinds of landlords too).

nollag2006

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The law of what? The law of spivs and scheisters? The law that pays millions of pounds to corrupt bankers and politicians while pensioners freeze to death without heating. The law that invades countries that have never done a thing to us so oil companies can post a rising balance sheet?

The law that turns families out on the street with weeks notice? The law that forbids able bodied men and women to build their own homes on land they might buy due to "planning permission". That law; yes I imagine that kind of law is very popular with buy to let landlords.

However as Creon discovered in Sophocles play, it is abhorrent to the laws of decency and desperate hubris will strike down it's proponents. (Buy to let landlords, and other kinds of landlords too).

Time to up the medication, methinks

BobQ

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The law of what? The law of spivs and scheisters? The law that pays millions of pounds to corrupt bankers and politicians while pensioners freeze to death without heating. The law that invades countries that have never done a thing to us so oil companies can post a rising balance sheet?

The law that turns families out on the street with weeks notice? The law that forbids able bodied men and women to build their own homes on land they might buy due to "planning permission". That law; yes I imagine that kind of law is very popular with buy to let landlords.

However as Creon discovered in Sophocles play, it is abhorrent to the laws of decency and desperate hubris will strike down it's proponents. (Buy to let landlords, and other kinds of landlords too).[/QUOTE

The law of the land, determined by the elected government.

I really think that you have lost the plot. I am not supporting landlords who fail to provide a reasonable standard of accommodation that complies with the law.

You seem to blame landlords for the decisions of Government about foreign policy but I doubt this was on Sophecles mind.

chucknorris

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As with everything, it's not the renters that are causing problems with BTL, it's the GREEDY BTL's themselves, of which not all landlords are. Everything always gets ruined this way when theres a quick buck to be made.

ISTL has done a good job going through your post bit by bit, the only think I would like to add is that there are no quick bucks to be made. It is a long term investment because of the initial costs of investing over and above that of the actual property purchase and maintenance costs:

Stamp duty
Mortgage arrangement fee
Valuation fee
Solicitor's fee
Furniture
Any improvement work?

It takes time to recoup those costs and also don't forget of the disposal costs:

Estate agent's fees
Solicitor's fees
Mortgage/utility payments during void immediately prior to sale
Mortgage redemption fee (if sold soon after buying)

Not to mention the time and effort or at least paying for some of it to be carried out by others, and the capital gains tax paid on the profit. I'm not saying that it can't be a good investment, I'm saying it is a long term investment, not something you make a quick buck out of.

EDIT: I may have even missed an odd cost in the above list as I just rattled those off quite quickly.