Buy to let: the future

marathonic

wannabe_credit_free wrote: »

I currently have 2 btl. One was vacated before xmas 13 and the other has a tenant with 2mths rent arrears. Meanwhile I still have to find the agents, factors and mortgage fees, not to mention the council tax for the empty flat, as it is furnished. You won'nt get rich on buy to lets, unless you have at least 10 of them and tenants who pay on time...:(

I shall sell up, when the market has improved.

I reckon it depends on what the banks currently have on their books in a particular area. If they have other houses on their books in your area and spot you on the new landlord register, they may let sleeping dogs lie because there's no point having another house to put on the market in the same area only to compete with themselves as a seller. They may as well let you make whatever attempt you're already making at paying whilst on the residential rates while they try to offload their current properties - and, also, let you continue to deal with the hassles of being a landlord.


If they've nothing on their books in that area, the way I'd look at it if I was the bank is:

• I don't know the ins and outs of their current finances but, if they're up-to-date with payments, chances are they can afford the repayments (not in all cases but in most). However, if they're behind in repayments, they obviously can't afford them - but I don't want such people on my books anyway
• With the above in mind, bump the rate by 1% for all in the knowledge that you're probably going to be repossessing most of the second category of people. The first category will primarily become more profitable customers with a smaller portion of them then starting to fall behind with repayments

When deciding how to proceed, the banks, if they had any sense, would also compare the market rent in the area to your mortgage repayments.

If market rents exceed someones mortgage repayments, they're up-to-date with repayments and the bank spot them on the landlord register, they are a PRIME candidate for a rate bump.

marathonic

Regarding the main topic of the thread "Buy to let: the future", I reckon the name of the game will be "consolidation".


What I mean by that is that there are thousands of landlords at the moment:

• A large proportion of these are the, so-called, accidental landlords.
• Others are what they considered themselves to be professional landlords and bought during the boom times with the impression that the purpose of being a landlord had nothing to do with yield and everything to do with capital appreciation
• The majority in both categories above only have one investment property

The vast majority of the above landlords are holding their properties with the intention of selling when prices improve or when the bank eventually comes to call in their debt.

The buyers are going to be owner occupiers and 'real' professional landlords. By 'real' professional landlords, I mean a landlord that has done his numbers and doesn't need to subsidise his properties from his earnings whilst waiting for capital appreciation.

For such landlords, capital appreciation will be a bonus but, in some cases, they'd prefer stagnating prices to allow them to build their portfolio at better rental yields. They will be owners of multiple properties and it will be easier, and more worthwhile, for them to keep abreast of the responsibilities of being a landlord (I'd hazard a guess that a lot of the accidental landlords aren't even aware of the new register).

From an anectodal point of view, I saw an advertisement about having to register by February 25th on the side of a public bus. My first thought was how rediculous it was and how unprofessional it was that the powers-that-be have decided that such advertisements are required to ensure that a landlord is aware of their responsibility.

warmhands.coldheart

Cotta wrote: »

The arguement doesn't completely stand, Mr. A is no longer paying and mortgage and the likely renatal income he is getting would cover his mortgage.

.........making the assumption that the rental income will cover the mortgage and other costs.......... an average buy to let mortgage of 4.5% on £120,000 would cost Mr A £450/month in interest only. that's before any other costs.......... £450/month wouldn't be far of what you'd get per month on a house outside of Greater Belfast..... then you have the rates, maintenance, allowance for vacant periods etc, etc, etc,..........
We're not in England where Rents are £700+ per month in most area's (Ok there are exceptions) but the interest rates are the same !!! you'll not make a killing on rental property in Northern Ireland any time soon unless you have the cash up front....

warmhands.coldheart

It's all coming out now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26523767

Maybe private sector rental will be on the up... or down whatever way you look at it !!

Old_Git

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

It's all coming out now

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26523767

Maybe private sector rental will be on the up... or down whatever way you look at it !!

spotlight

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03xq20d/Spotlight_Housing_Fraud_The_Hidden_Scandal/

warmhands.coldheart

So everyone see Spotlight last night.........?
The Elephant in the room is a bit of an understatement!

Social Housing must be one of the most abused social enterprises available to people. I'd say easily half those on the social housing list shouldn't be on it...... I pity the genuine people in need.

And I'm sorry, but that Scottish lady living in that sh.1t-hole in South Belfast.. I mean come on. OK the house was bad but it looked like they mustn't actually own a vacuum cleaner, dustpan or a basic bottle of cleaner....... The kids had even written all over the walls!! Probably not a great example to use for lazy, lax, landlords....

Old_Git

strange spotlight didnt mention the good tenants or good landlords Or the tenants who pay Fook all and the LL cant get them out .
I suppose that wouldn't be good TV.

donnac2558

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

So everyone see Spotlight last night.........?
The Elephant in the room is a bit of an understatement!

Social Housing must be one of the most abused social enterprises available to people. I'd say easily half those on the social housing list shouldn't be on it...... I pity the genuine people in need.

And I'm sorry, but that Scottish lady living in that sh.1t-hole in South Belfast.. I mean come on. OK the house was bad but it looked like they mustn't actually own a vacuum cleaner, dustpan or a basic bottle of cleaner....... The kids had even written all over the walls!! Probably not a great example to use for lazy, lax, landlords....

She lives in a big house on the Ravenhill Road it seems. I did see a vacuum cleaner or the box of one on the show. My thoughts, why is she still living in it????? For £600 a month she could get much better in the Rosetta area.

warmhands.coldheart

donnac2558 wrote: »

She lives in a big house on the Ravenhill Road it seems. I did see a vacuum cleaner or the box of one on the show. My thoughts, why is she still living in it????? For £600 a month she could get much better in the Rosetta area.

..........because no normal person would have the dirty sods in their house !! did you see the walls the kids had drawn over??
I suppose the fact she had no door on her tumble dryer was landlords fault too??..

ballyblack

My thoughts, why is she still living in it????? For £600 a month she could get much better in the Rosetta area

maybe no landlord really wants her