Landlords to blame for Britain's rising house prices

antrobus

CLAPTON wrote: »

There are about 500,000 immigrant that arrive in the UK each year.

In addition there are about 800,000 people that move out of the family home each year

so up to 1,300,000 people per year that will be looking to live somewhere
-are unlikely to have sufficient money for a house deposit
-are unable to get a mortgage even if they wanted to.
-and of course numerous students and people moving round the country for various reasons

So unless the state provides all these people with instant homes there is a need for private rented accommodation.

There are indeed about 500,000 immigrants that arrive in the UK each year; on the other hand there are also about 300,000 emmigrants that leave the UK each year. Net migration is what counts.

Similarly whilst there might be 800,000 people that move out of the family home each year, there are also about 600,000 who die every year. Again it would be the net figure that counts.

Nevertheless, despite my pedantic insistence on getting things right, you are very much on the right track. If the demographics are such that we have 400,000 extra people every year looking for somewhere to live, and we are only building an extra 150,000 or so homes for them to live in, then of course there's a f...lippin 'chronic' house shortage, and of course prices are going to increase.

Bleating on about BTL ain't gonna change that one little bit.

stator

Pixie5740 wrote: »

There is a market for private rented accommodation.

The market is created by all the greedy buy-to-letters who go around hoovering up all the properties and then rent them back to the poor at inflated prices.
Much like how Sky deal with TV entertainment. Pay over the odds for something and then sell it back to the people at double the price.

somethingcorporate

stator wrote: »

The market is created by all the greedy buy-to-letters who go around hoovering up all the properties and then rent them back to the poor at inflated prices.
Much like how Sky deal with TV entertainment. Pay over the odds for something and then sell it back to the people at double the price.

Really?

So you think that a student that moves somewhere to go to university should be buying a house?

You think there is no natural demand for rented properties outside of one stimulated by supply?

tom9980

Landlords buy property because there is demand, by building more properties we satisfy the demand for rental and for ftbers. Now if we limit new builds to ftbers only so that landlords buy substandard property that they then renovate to a minimum standard we improve housing. By limiting BTL investment we limit supply further the simple fact is the government desperately need investment in our housing stock to increase supply.

Mandatory licensing should exist for all landlords before they can let out property and an exam passed ensuring the quality of landlords improves and that all gas certs, repairs and deposit protection is met. Where there is consistent failure the license is revoked and a minimum 5 year suspension of their ability to let gets served. BTL mortgages can only be given to LLs who are licensed.

Tenants also must register and payments for rent registered to help them prove to mortgage companies their ability to pay. Landlords can also attach check in and out inventories to help show good tenants from bad.

CLAPTON

antrobus wrote: »

There are indeed about 500,000 immigrants that arrive in the UK each year; on the other hand there are also about 300,000 emmigrants that leave the UK each year. Net migration is what counts.

Similarly whilst there might be 800,000 people that move out of the family home each year, there are also about 600,000 who die every year. Again it would be the net figure that counts.

Nevertheless, despite my pedantic insistence on getting things right, you are very much on the right track. If the demographics are such that we have 400,000 extra people every year looking for somewhere to live, and we are only building an extra 150,000 or so homes for them to live in, then of course there's a f...lippin 'chronic' house shortage, and of course prices are going to increase.

Bleating on about BTL ain't gonna change that one little bit.

Thank you for reminding me that people emigrate and that people die.

However the discussion was about the need for rental properties: it would seem unlikely all the emigrants would be in rental properties that would conveniently net off against the immigrants.

Again it's unlikely that all the deaths were in rental properties that could net off against the immigrants and the people moving.

Of course, the situation is a bit more complicated because even if they don't net off there will be intermediate movements that mitigate the need for NEW rental properties, but NOTHING in your pedantic offering suggests we have a declining need for rental properties; indeed the contrary.

So the net migration is NOT then only thing that matters : the financial status and other factors affect the relative demand of rental versa owner occupiers properties.

Plus there are many other unexplored areas to discussion if one wants a complete and pedantically correct overview;

however the points being made
-we need rental business to meet people needs
-the state is realistically never going to cater for the much of the requirement

michaels

Is there any data on whether rented property has more or fewer residents per room than OO?

Conrad

stator wrote: »

Buy to let is evil and should be banned. All it does is increase house prices and rents

An argument could be made that share ownership (perhaps via a pension / ISA) is evil, indeed lots of anti capitalist types say shareholders cause workers to be paid as little as possible in order to drive up profits and thus dividends.


Adding a net 260,000 new citizens to the nation each year also drives up demand and no amount of building can keep pace with this (not just house building but everything that goes with it - roads, schools etc)

Pixie5740

tom9980 wrote: »

Mandatory licensing should exist for all landlords before they can let out property and an exam passed ensuring the quality of landlords improves and that all gas certs, repairs and deposit protection is met. Where there is consistent failure the license is revoked and a minimum 5 year suspension of their ability to let gets served. BTL mortgages can only be given to LLs who are licensed.

In Scotland landlords must be registered with the local council before letting out a property. It is a criminal offence to let out a property without being registered.

Shelter Scotland estimate that only 75% of landlords are registered. My last landlord wasn't registered despite letting out 3 properties in the council area. I reported her to the council and do you know what they did? They sent her a letter. Big deal. One year on she is still letting out 3 properties, still isn't registered and still hasn't been prosecuted. Licencing landlords is all well and good but it has to mean something.

Pixie5740

stator wrote: »

The market is created by all the greedy buy-to-letters who go around hoovering up all the properties and then rent them back to the poor at inflated prices.
Much like how Sky deal with TV entertainment. Pay over the odds for something and then sell it back to the people at double the price.

I have rented property when I was at university, like many do, as it doesn't make sense, nor is it practical, for every student living away from home to buy somewhere to live and the halls of residence will only let you stay in first year.

In my career I have moved to different cities and it was cheaper for me to rent that continually be buying and selling properties. So there is a demand for private rented accommodation.

antrobus

CLAPTON wrote: »

Thank you for reminding me that people emigrate and that people die.

However the discussion was about the need for rental properties:...

No, the title of the thread is "Landlords to blame for Britain's rising house prices". So the discussion is about house prices (again) and not 'the need for rental properties'.

CLAPTON wrote: »

....
it would seem unlikely all the emigrants would be in rental properties that would conveniently net off against the immigrants.

Again it's unlikely that all the deaths were in rental properties that could net off against the immigrants and the people moving.

Of course, the situation is a bit more complicated because even if they don't net off there will be intermediate movements that mitigate the need for NEW rental properties, but NOTHING in your pedantic offering suggests we have a declining need for rental properties; indeed the contrary.....

That might well be because I wasn't suggesting that there was a declining need for rental properties, quite the contrary in fact, I was arguing that there was an increasing need for properties. Whether or not said properties are occupied by owners or tenants would be a different question.

CLAPTON wrote: »

....So the net migration is NOT then only thing that matters : the financial status and other factors affect the relative demand of rental versa owner occupiers properties.

But then I never said that net migration is the "only thing that matters". I simply said that it is "what counts" in the context of immigration/emigration.

CLAPTON wrote: »

...Plus there are many other unexplored areas to discussion if one wants a complete and pedantically correct overview;

however the points being made
-we need rental business to meet people needs
-the state is realistically never going to cater for the much of the requirement

And I would agree with you. We need rental business to meet people needs, and the state (given the state of the deficit) is in no real positition to do anything much about that.

But to return to the subject of the thread, landlords are not to blame for rising house prices; demographics are to blame for rising house prices.