Labour plans longer tenancies and rent control

Bantex_2

chucky wrote: »

People can buy their own home whenever they want.

Not when they are "outbid" by investors who do not have to prove or even have sufficient income to service the mortgage at the time of buying.

chucky

Bantex wrote: »

Not when they are "outbid" by investors who do not have to prove or even have sufficient income to service the mortgage at the time of buying.

Unfortunately the number of people it happens to is very small.

Generalising, exaggerating and believing conspiracy theories is never the best view of reality.

JencParker

chucky wrote: »

Unfortunately the number of people it happens to is very small.

Generalising, exaggerating and believing conspiracy theories is never the best view of reality.

Unfortunately???? So desire the number of people it happens to should be greater?

GeorgeHowell

BobQ wrote: »

What do you mean by that?

I agree that adequate infrastructure is required but NIMBYs often are unhappy about starter housing. If they are willing to consent to new houses they want properties of the type that their sort of people might live in.

That's your assumption. Having decently built and speced houses, where you don't have to take windows out to get sofas in, and having decent and adequate infrastructure improvements to support new housing is in everybody's best interests. But typical of the left to allege that anyone who makes these points must have a class-based agenda.

chucky

JencParker wrote: »

Unfortunately???? So desire the number of people it happens to should be greater?

No...

Nice mini-rant though.

andybenw

Conrad wrote: »

STOP PRESS**




The Labour run London council where I have 2 buy to let flats has just announced the regulation of the local lettings market.


This means the following for me;


£575 fee to the council
Hardwired smoke alarms - installed by an electrician
Fire doors
Door closure mechanisms


Etc etc


So guess what I've just decided to do? Bare in mind I only completed on one of these last Friday.


I'm going to sell it.


Why, because the tory run borough next door where I also have a flat has none of this. I shall stick to buying here.


I do not want a nanny state hectoring me as I am a decent landlord and cannot stand the nanny state interfering in contracts between willing adults.




WHAT WILL THIS MEAN?


Having spoken to a few other LL's this morning others are also selling - the sales market is booming btw.


This thus means less rental supply so rents will rise.




Well done Labour, another back firing initiative.

Sounds like additional licencing for HMOs to me. £100 per year not really excessive. Hardwired smoke alarms and firedoors sound like appropriate safety measures. Only self closers sounds over the top to me.

Good luck(sarcastic) in your future renting out of unsafe properties.

CLAPTON

andybenw wrote: »

Sounds like additional licencing for HMOs to me. £100 per year not really excessive. Hardwired smoke alarms and firedoors sound like appropriate safety measures. Only self closers sounds over the top to me.

Good luck(sarcastic) in your future renting out of unsafe properties.

always seems odd to me, that the safety standards applicable to properties occupied by (say) 3 able bodied adults, aren't applied to properties occupied by (say) 3 young children just because of ownership type.