Wow!

Percy1983

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Did you realise that BTL has only Partially filled the void created by the RTB sell off.

As a percentage, social and private housing is lower now than it was pre-BTL.

there is a need for more rental properties, which the government is driving for the Private sector to fill.

You may find this summary helpful
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/improving-the-rented-housing-sector--2/supporting-pages/private-rented-sector

I do have to question did the RTB sell off really create the void its made out to be?

My point about controls on rents and security for the tenant on length of agreements etc comes into play here.

In short if I could rent at a reasonable price and know I wouldn’t be kicked and price jacked I would say that’s a perfectly acceptable way to live and would consider it myself if cheaper than buying, ie if I could get social housing.

So I would say that many of those who were in social housing given the choice of private rental or buying now would choose buying.

So more social housing would certainly be a good thing I agree and yes it would have been better if they weren’t sold off in the first place, but I do question how mnay of them if they were kicked out of social housing would go from happy to rent to unhappy to rent in a private rental.

I will say more council/housing association housing would be ideal, they provide the rental which is needed but aren’t fuelled by greed and work on big scales which means they can set rents at much fairer rates.

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

given that rents are at an all time high, one has to ask why the government feels the need to fund private sector rented accommodation.

I would believe that expanding the private rental market would help to curb rent inflation.

The fund is to assist the building of new rental properties

Here's a snip of my previous quote

The government wants to see a bigger and better private rented sector and believes that the most effective way to make rents more affordable is to increase the supply of new homes.

We are investing £1 billion in a Build To Rent Fund,

duchy

Bantex wrote: »

Not for the same journey.
For separate trips if no second car available one would have to take a cab, so again no saving of limited resources.

Or taken a bus or a train or even walked all of which use fewer resources.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I would believe that expanding the private rental market would help to curb rent inflation.

The fund is to assist the building of new rental properties

Here's a snip of my previous quote

if rental properties are so profitable why doesn't the private sector build them anyway?
do they not like guaranteed easy profit?

to solve the problem of high prices we need to build more irrespective of whether for rent or owner occupation.

as we have sufficient land in the UK and we have the ability to build, we need to ask what stops us building more homes

Cornucopia

There does seem to be a barrier to commercial scale private rental. I've always assumed that this is because companies do not have the same relatively generous tax treatment for both income and capital growth (as individual landlords).

Or perhaps it's simply that companies are no longer able to take the long-view and cannot tie up capital against a possible future increase in value.

antrobus

Cornucopia wrote: »

There does seem to be a barrier to commercial scale private rental. I've always assumed that this is because companies do not have the same relatively generous tax treatment for both income and capital growth (as individual landlords).

Or perhaps it's simply that companies are no longer able to take the long-view and cannot tie up capital against a possible future increase in value.

Prudential enters the home rental market
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/9970736/Prudential-enters-the-home-rental-market.html

Legal & General in talks to expand residential investment portfolio
http://realestatepublishing.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/legal-general-in-talks-to-expand-residential-investment-portfolio/

Cornucopia

Interesting.

Though considering the size of Prudential, an investment in 534 homes is hardly ambitious.

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

if rental properties are so profitable why doesn't the private sector build them anyway?
do they not like guaranteed easy profit?

For starters, it add's a who new factor into the investment.

• Obtaining land
• obtaining planning permission
• Obtaining Building Warrant
• Manage the construction company / contractors
• Finance for land
• finance for build
• Time to build without rental income (affecting finance)

To name but a few.

Far easier to buy an existing property and market earlier

Of course, this is why the government is including a fund for building private rent properties

CLAPTON wrote: »

to solve the problem of high prices we need to build more irrespective of whether for rent or owner occupation.

Totally agree. The incentive needs to be there for people to build.
Private construction companies build for profit and will build for demand, which can be affected by available credit.

CLAPTON wrote: »

as we have sufficient land in the UK and we have the ability to build, we need to ask what stops us building more homes

As above, the government don't contract builders directly for social homes and private construction companies build to profitable requirements

CLAPTON

Cornucopia wrote: »

There does seem to be a barrier to commercial scale private rental. I've always assumed that this is because companies do not have the same relatively generous tax treatment for both income and capital growth (as individual landlords).

Or perhaps it's simply that companies are no longer able to take the long-view and cannot tie up capital against a possible future increase in value.

companies can offset their costs against profits just like individual landlords.

I'm not sure about the longer view but I would image that large companies would know that political parties will continually interfer with their business: I'm sure if there were large, national, for profit rental businesses, Ed would already have promised to freeze rents for 3 years etc etc.

IveSeenTheLight

Percy1983 wrote: »

I do have to question did the RTB sell off really create the void its made out to be?

I've shown before (but don't have time to find the post at the moment) that the increase of BTL did not fully cover the reduction in social housing.

This is why we saw Owner Occupancy peak.

There are fewer BTL & Social houses as a percentage of overall properties than what there was prior to BTL expansion.

Percy1983 wrote: »

My point about controls on rents and security for the tenant on length of agreements etc comes into play here.

I've had tenants for 7 years, another tenant for 2 years and a tenant for just coming up to 1 year.

If any of them wanted to agree a long term rental, I'd happily oblige.

I also do not increase the monthly rent during the tenancy (even for the 7 year tenant).

Can't see how I can provide a more secure / stable tenancy

Percy1983 wrote: »

So I would say that many of those who were in social housing given the choice of private rental or buying now would choose buying.

Many social renting cannot afford to buy? Not sure the point you are making

Percy1983 wrote: »

So more social housing would certainly be a good thing I agree and yes it would have been better if they weren’t sold off in the first place, but I do question how mnay of them if they were kicked out of social housing would go from happy to rent to unhappy to rent in a private rental.

Hmmm, sorry, not totally understanding your question.

The issue is not short term about the RTB sell off as it transposes one renter to one owner, but the impact on the next generation of social housing renters given there are fewer opportunities to obtain social housing.

This is why the government is driving an expansion of private renting.

Percy1983 wrote: »

I will say more council/housing association housing would be ideal, they provide the rental which is needed but aren’t fuelled by greed and work on big scales which means they can set rents at much fairer rates.

How much will this cost and how will the government fund.
We've talked in other threads about this costing £200Bn per term + the cost of managing and maintaining the rental properties

At this time, this is not on the government manifesto's ad I reiterate, their solution is to expand private rental.