Remember Fergus Wilson?

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

BTL only partially filled the gap left by the RTB sell off.

Without BTL, rents would have dramatically increased and there would have been a significant less options for those remaining renters.

Without BTL, I'm guessing there would have been a significant greater impact.

Remember BTL is only about 13% of the property market, meaning that losing stock from that has a bigger impact than the additional supply to owner occupancy.

The thing that is interesting here is how other countries do it.

You don't often hear anyone but BTL landlords (and those who feed off landlords) themselves claiming BTL is a good thing on the whole.

However, looking at other countries, you DO hear of their citizens stating their rental market does work and they ARE happy with it.

BTL is not the only option - and looking at other countries, doesn't seem to be the favoured option of anyone really bar landlords themselves. I can see why BTL is popular with landlords, I truly can, but can landlord not see why it's not popular with their customers? (on the whole)

I believe with proper regulation the BTL sector could prosper. Not in terms of finance, but in terms of how it's perceived. At the moment it's just perceived as greedy landlords out to get everything that can. This isn't just on here. Most forums and indeed public life is the same. (Bar your tenants of course!)

When any business starts going down the route of stating "we are doing you a favour" to protect themselves against claims otherwise, you know something has gone wrong.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The thing that is interesting here is how other countries do it.

You don't often hear anyone but BTL landlords (and those who feed off landlords) themselves claiming BTL is a good thing on the whole.

However, looking at other countries, you DO hear of their citizens stating their rental market does work and they ARE happy with it.

BTL is not the only option - and looking at other countries, doesn't seem to be the favoured option of anyone really bar landlords themselves. I can see why BTL is popular with landlords, I truly can, but can landlord not see why it's not popular with their customers? (on the whole)

I believe with proper regulation the BTL sector could prosper. Not in terms of finance, but in terms of how it's perceived. At the moment it's just perceived as greedy landlords out to get everything that can. This isn't just on here. Most forums and indeed public life is the same. (Bar your tenants of course!)

When any business starts going down the route of stating "we are doing you a favour" to protect themselves against claims otherwise, you know something has gone wrong.

BTL might not be the best way to provide for the rental market but no one else seems to want to do it, as far as I know there is nothing stopping them.

chucknorris

ukcarper wrote: »

BTL might not be the best way to provide for the rental market but no one else seems to want to do it, as far as I know there is nothing stopping them.

I really don't see what the alternatives might be, I can't see a massive increase in social housing as likely and I don't see how a larger company specialising in residential lettings would be much different to what I offer.

ILW

I believe that when I first bought a flat, that the cost of renting was quite a bit lower than the cost of a mortgage. I think the "landlord" model was more long term and probably less profitable overall.

ILW

chucknorris wrote: »

I really don't see what the alternatives might be, I can't see a massive increase in social housing as likely and I don't see how a larger company specialising in residential lettings would be much different to what I offer.

I think the market may well change (for the better) if the AST was increased to say 3 years, but with a short notice period for the tenant. Would weed out some of the bad amateurs with little or no financial backup.

ukcarper

When I first bought in the seventies there was very little rental property available if you looked in the local papers in my area then you would see no rental property.

chucknorris

ILW wrote: »

I believe that when I first bought a flat, that the cost of renting was quite a bit lower than the cost of a mortgage. I think the "landlord" model was more long term and probably less profitable overall.

When was that? If what you say is correct it sounds like it was back in the days of protected rents. Sure it doesn't necessarily have to make a profit in year 1 to be successful, but I would suggest that it certainly has to be more than the mortgage. Otherwise what is the point in investing?

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

I really don't see what the alternatives might be, I can't see a massive increase in social housing as likely and I don't see how a larger company specialising in residential lettings would be much different to what I offer.

People keep saying how good it is in other countries but I would have thought there is nothing stopping companies doing the same thing here but no one seems to want to.

chucknorris

ILW wrote: »

I think the market may well change (for the better) if the AST was increased to say 3 years, but with a short notice period for the tenant. Would weed out some of the bad amateurs with little or no financial backup.

If only we could rent out for 3 years that would be lovely! As it happens though most of our tenants are long standing:

1 x 6 years
1 x 4 years
1 x 3 years
3 x 2 years

Longer tenancies equate to far less work, a lot of work is generated during a tenancy change. Not only that but it is good to have a long standing relationship built up on mutual trust. Although our tenants tend to renew they don't want 3 year contracts.

ILW

chucknorris wrote: »

If only we could rent out for 3 years that would be lovely! As it happens though most of our tenants are long standing:

1 x 6 years
1 x 4 years
1 x 3 years
3 x 2 years

Longer tenancies equate to far less work, a lot of work is generated during a tenancy change. Although our tenants tend to renew they don't want 3 year contracts.

Think you are fairly unusual.
Most the people I know only rent because they cannot (for whatever reason) get a mortgage. Most seem to be paying more than if they were buying and i know of 3 families who have had to move at least twice in the last 3 years either due to massive rent hikes or landlord problems. It is no life for a family.