Rent to Rent, dubbed the new property get rich scheme

Dexters_Indignation

This is a very sore state of affairs, but as mentioned above its the only way.

The Slum Lords are to be replaced by the Slum Charlatans...

I hate to say it, but at least the Slum Lords had at least some reason not to screw the actual buildings to much.
Slum Charlatans on the other hand will be gone before the ink dries on the rent check...

"Don't be genital. It's a rental"
"Lets go mental its a RE-Rental"

Oh dear!!!

Delara

Its all very well for now, but what happens when the government can no longer pay housing benefit? Then the renters who rent from the guy who rents the entire house can no longer pay their rent. then the property owner can no longer pay the mortgage, and the banks are in even more trouble!

But for now the music keeps playing. But its a question WHEN not if the music stops there are not enough chairs for eveyone playing the musical chairs game.

IveSeenTheLight

Delara wrote: »

Its all very well for now, but what happens when the government can no longer pay housing benefit? Then the renters who rent from the guy who rents the entire house can no longer pay their rent. then the property owner can no longer pay the mortgage, and the banks are in even more trouble!

But for now the music keeps playing. But its a question WHEN not if the music stops there are not enough chairs for eveyone playing the musical chairs game.

What are you infering from your analogy.
Is it that if there are not enough chairs, there will be a lot of people homeless?
What would be the impact?

Flashmanchop

ging84 wrote: »

this guy sounds like a chancer and a bit of a scum bag
i wouldn't want to rent a room from someone like that
if/when it ends badly it'll be his tenants that suffer not him, he'll get to just give up and walk away

What makes him scum?

N1AK

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Different risks, perhaps.

In this model the risk is still there that you could take out long term commercial leases on the properties, and a sudden recession, increasing unemployment, or even changes to housing benefits, could result in big increases in arrears from your tenants.

Leaving you to service the balance for 'head landlord' rent payments, just as you would for mortgage payments.

No less risk.

Just different risk.

We obviously see the situation differently because the risks definitely seem lower to me. Because he doesn't have the mortgages he is isolated from property value risks (and gains); additionally it means that his rental income only has to cover his rental costs not mortgage payments and interest. The lack of mortgage costs will mean that his rents could fall further than a BTL landlords before he would have a negative cashflow. Finally because he isn't buying the properties any money he makes is available to him in a liquid for, whereas the BTL will have a large proportion of rents tied up in the property.

I don't believe the business model is risk free; however I think it is considerably less risky than a mass BTL one.

OffGridLiving

Isn't this just sub-letting? If so, then clearly this is nothing new. The company I work for sub-lets office space that it no longer needs (but still has a long lease on) and makes a tidy profit from doing so.

I'll have to tell them that it's frowned upon by elements on this board. I'm sure they will stop this reprehensible practice forthwith.

OffGridLiving

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What are you infering from your analogy.
Is it that if there are not enough chairs, there will be a lot of people homeless?
What would be the impact?

The homeless will have to sit on stools, kerbs, beer crates or boxes. Perhaps some will resort to sitting on the floor?

Graham_Devon

OffGridLiving wrote: »

Isn't this just sub-letting? If so, then clearly this is nothing new. The company I work for sub-lets office space that it no longer needs (but still has a long lease on) and makes a tidy profit from doing so.

I'll have to tell them that it's frowned upon by elements on this board. I'm sure they will stop this reprehensible practice forthwith.

Your outlook over the past week has changed so much from whehn you joined up.

It's almost as if you are a new poster again, having given up on the act!

OffGridLiving

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Your outlook over the past week has changed so much from whehn you joined up.

It's almost as if you are a new poster again, having given up on the act!

What outlook? Can you explain how I was and what has changed?

OffGridLiving

OffGridLiving wrote: »

What outlook? Can you explain how I was and what has changed?

As expected, no response. It seems that a popular tactic on this debating board is to throw mud around and hope some of it sticks.

It's a shame that we can't just debate the issues and leave this sort of thing in the playground.