Legal & General plans to become large-scale landlord

wotsthat

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23696313

Glad this appeared on the BBC site as I heard the tail end of the radio interview this morning.

"Instead of applauding ourselves when house prices go up, we should try to develop a system where house prices don't go up for the next few years and we increase the supply - instead of 120,000 house a year, up to 250,000 a year, a sizeable portion of which should be rented." he said.

Such an increase would invariably mean building on green belt land, something Mr Wilson said should be part of the solution.

He said the UK had the most difficult planning conditions in the world.

Be interesting to see how they get on with a stated aim of building on the green belt.

Loughton_Monkey

I suspect it was the lure of a lucrative and rising property market, with high rents, that pushed them into this idea.

As an afterthought, their PR people seem to have been in full flow to spin it as a way of solving "intergenerational injustice" towards young people, who can't get jobs, have to pay for very expensive education and can't afford housing.

Will the young jobless graduate with a £27K debt who cannot afford housing get free or cheap housing from L & G?

...answers on a postcard....

antrobus

wotsthat wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23696313

....

The Prudential announced some months ago that they were going into the residential property business. There was speculation at the time that L&G would follow suit. Now it looks like they intend to.

www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1c60f18c-a03a-11e2-a6e1-00144feabdc0.html

Of course that link might not work.

Anyway, the report is dated April 8, 2013, appears under the headline 'Prudential fills gap in housing market' and says (inter alia) - "The move by the Pru to buy 500 new homes to use as seed properties for a private rented portfolio – hailed by some industry insiders as a “watershed moment” – is likely to herald similar deals by institutional investors, including Aviva and Legal & General".

wotsthat

To an extent it's the sign of a more functional market. Increasing prices should lead to more interest in increasing supply albeit with planning slowing things down to a crawl.

L&G seem to be trying really really hard to appear as if they're not cashing in on a rent bonanza but just trying to do something to help the kids.

Graham_Devon

Well I'd rather be a tenant of L&G than of some random landlord using any old agency.

OffGridLiving

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well I'd rather be a tenant of L&G than of some random landlord using any old agency.

Totally agree.

Plus they are talking about actually building their own property in order to let it out, rather than taking on existing housing stock and just exacerbating the housing shortage for those looking to purchase rather than rent.

MacMickster

This is great news for the UK, provided that idiot planners don't kybosh the whole thing.

Britain needs substantially more housing stock, so it's time for government to issue instructions (not just guidelines) to planners around the country that the default position should be to approve applications for large scale developments.

michaels

Now if they launched a 'property fund' on the back of this then private investors could gain exposure to the market without the risk resulting form a small portfolio and potentiially benefit from being able to invest in property inside a pension or isa tax wrapper.

Obviously it still means those who have capital benefiting at the expense of those without the deposit and thus forced to pay more to rent but such is the way of the world....

CLAPTON

all rather depends upon whether L&G simply 'own' the properties and then lease out to a property company or they manage them themselves


anyway new building is to be welcomed

Graham_Devon

Should cause rents to fall too. If others are like me, and would prefer to rent from L&G operating a proper business from building to renting, I'd choose renting from them over renting from a landlord in an estate agents any day of the week - even if it did come at a slightly increased cost.

You should be able to comfortably assume that everything will run smoothly. Your deposit will be protected, you won't have to fight in a small claims court to get it back etc.

Theres a thread in the house buying section where a landlord is asking whether they should chase the outgoing tenants for £20 or £30 for damage to a second hand chair. It's got to the point of being ridiculous and some landlords appear to think they are simply hiring someone to look after their home on their behalf while wanting the income from it.

I should think L&G would have an overall policy which is very clear from the start, professionals running the service in house and a reputation to protect.

My sister now rents from a large company and it's a world away from the horror stories I hear of BTL landlords arguing over whether they can claim £50 from the deposit for wear and tear to carpets and curtains etc.

The government did mull over letting companies liek this built to rent. The premise was that the building could not be sold for 20 years. If this is what L&G are tapping into, it's more than welcome and just what's needed.

OffGridLiving

This might be the first topic where everyone is in accord and believes it's a good thing. Amazing. We'll all be sat around a camp fire singing "come by are my Lord" and toasting marshmallows if this trend continues!

:eek: