We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Increasing the rent - tenants angry.
Comments
-
I'm pretty sure by now that would be over-estimating your ability to put together an argument in the first place.
Better watch out the fascists are coming... and don't forget to take your tablets again.
Well that's an absolute classic. FYI I came here with well reasoned arguments regarding immigration, based around pressure on infrastructure; Schools, Hospitals, Housing and the Job markets. However I discovered that if you offer a different point of view to that of the forum facists you are quickly accused of being a racist, xenephobic bigot. Not once but over and over again.
I think it is you and the other facists that need to take some tablets (that's the best you could come up with?0 -
marathonic wrote: »You're comparing an accidental landlord through inheritence who is renting out to supplement their income to someone who is purchasing properties as part of a BTL business.
Not a like for like comparison I'm afraid.
The first point is, however, a valid one. If a landlord is to assume a void period of one month per year, it stands to sense that they should be willing to accept an 8% reduction in rent compared to market rates for their long term tenancts.
The 8% reduction keeps the tenants happy and more likely to stay whilst, in theory, should cost the landlord too much, if anything.
It's when the discrepency between market rent and the rent being charged by a landlord becomes greater than 10% that the landlord starts to look more like a fool than a business person.
I never said it was a like for like comparison, and I described my dad as rare and a dinosaur. However, from the tenants' point of view, a LL is a LL is a LL. My point is that some LLs (for whatever reason) do not put the rent up at every opportunity. Some do. Tenants do not have any way of knowing which sort they are getting when they sign the tenancy agreement. It's natural for them to feel upset if they find they have got one of the second kind when they were hoping for one of the first kind.
Over my life, I've had 2 short tenancies where rent increases weren't relevant because I was there less than a year, and 2 longer ones. The 6 year tenancy LLs didn't put the rent up either because they wanted to keep us. So I've never had to suffer the kind of LL who keeps putting the rent up whenever they can.Do you know anyone who's bereaved? Point them to https://www.AtaLoss.org which does for bereavement support what MSE does for financial services, providing links to support organisations relevant to the circumstances of the loss & the local area. (Link permitted by forum team)
Tyre performance in the wet deteriorates rapidly below about 3mm tread - change yours when they get dangerous, not just when they are nearly illegal (1.6mm).
Oh, and wear your seatbelt. My kids are only alive because they were wearing theirs when somebody else was driving in wet weather with worn tyres.
0 -
saverbuyer wrote: »Do you think HB sets a rent floor in Derry or supply and demand.
The housing benefit increases the demand through people entering the rental sector that may otherwise stay at home.
The demand as a result of housing benefit feeds into the demand from other sources and sets the rental prices.
At the end of the day, as a landlord, should you really care where the demand comes from as long as it's there?0 -
Bingo. Here less than 15 years, amazing what can be achieved. He's retired back to Lithuania.
PS - I've changed his nationality to protect his identiy - you never know......
Hardly surprising as the housing boom barely lasted 12 years......
If he resides anywhere in the EU. Then debt recovery won't be an issue.0 -
So to summarise, any on the ball long term well established landlord who happens to now reside in Monaco, Lithuania or elsewhere, with low gearing making high profits putting hiser rents up is about to go ttiits up?
Thanks for the tip, we'll make sure anyone with this profile is removed from our books.
Long term is over 10 years.
As for highly leveraged businesess. Seen it over and over again.
Knock out one prop and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.
Asset rich, cash poor.0 -
Do you still think the opportunity is there in the property market? Many landlords built up their portfolios in the era of fast rising prices and easy access to finance. On the other side of the coin of course, landlords can now achieve income from their rentals, though the capital growth isn't so spectacular.
I would say yes, and at a lower risk.
In the absence of capital growth and in a flat market, income reigns king.
Buying your first BTL will be as difficult as it's always been as you still have to save that initial deposit.
When you have your first, you start working on the second. Instead of equity release through capital appreciation, you save just like you did for the first but with an additional, for example, £300 per month income.
Then, when you have the second, you save in the same way but with a salary and £600 per month rental income.
Each one should get easier and it's a more sustainable model than building a portfolio through equity release.
When capital appreciation does return, you'd hopefully have a lot of properties bought towards the bottom of the market.0 -
marathonic wrote: »Two options:
- You are able to buy a house if your circumstances allow it and, otherwise, you have the choice to rent
- There is no such thing as a landlord and, until you can afford a house, you're on the street
You seem to be an advocate of option 2.
Those two options aren't the only options. They are fast becoming the only options due to monopolisation and rent seeking.
People should be able to use idle land to build homes. With there being high demand for homes, housing would be built and prices would fall. This is what would happen in a capitalist country.
People should be allowed to pitch tents if they so wish.
Look at China, over there they build homes.0 -
Those two options aren't the only options. They are fast becoming the only options due to monopolisation and rent seeking.
People should be able to use idle land to build homes. With there being high demand for homes, housing would be built and prices would fall. This is what would happen in a capitalist country.
People should be allowed to pitch tents if they so wish.
Look at China, over there they build homes.
Prices have halved in Northern Ireland yet rents are still on the increase and people still cannot afford to buy due to leaving it too late to save the deposit and other changes in circumstances rendering them unable to do so.
As I've said before, the solution to the problem isn't government changes to legislation, it's financial education for the youth.
If someone knows the requirements for a deposit for a house before they get their first job and puts a plan in place to achieve that, their financial responsibility will prove to the banks that they are capable of managing a mortgage.
There are daily threads on the boards about gifted deposits and excessive debt. Any bank that lends money to people in these categories is asking for bother.0 -
Do you still think the opportunity is there in the property market? Many landlords built up their portfolios in the era of fast rising prices and easy access to finance. On the other side of the coin of course, landlords can now achieve income from their rentals, though the capital growth isn't so spectacular.
I do and I'm putting my money where my mouth is.
Thing is I recall naysayers telling be in the mid nineties the time to have got into B2L was the 1980's.
Tis human nature to always say yesterday was better than tomorrow, be they discussing B2L, films, music or freindly local bobbies clipping lads round tut ear.0 -
People should be able to use idle land to build homes. With there being high demand for homes, housing would be built and prices would fall. This is what would happen in a capitalist country.
People should be allowed to pitch tents if they so wish.
Look at China, over there they build homes.
There is tons of land in the right places in Canada, Australia and elsewhere yet prices and rents are high.
Building will solve nothing and just bring even more congestion.
We just have to accpet life on a small crowded island (yes Hamish crowded - the roads and facilities down here are choc a bloc)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards