Landlords to blame for Britain's rising house prices

danothy

stator wrote: »

A common delusion.

Confusion about who actually owns a particular property can often be remedied by checking whose name appears on the title deed.

Jason74

TickersPlaysPop wrote: »

The western spring is coming... maybe not this general election.... unless we have a re election due to hung parliament. .... but definitely the next election the young will rise and a new party will emerge.

That was a party political broadcast on behalf of the Tooting Popular front

Pixie5740

danothy wrote: »

Confusion about who actually owns a particular property can often be remedied by checking whose name appears on the title deed.

You would think so but property ownership isn't as straightforward as you're making out. Say you have a mortgage on a leasehold property, who actually owns the property? What about a tenant during a tenancy, does the tenant not have ownership of the property?

You can read more about it here:

Urban Myths: -when a landlord lets a property, its still his.

Do tenants own the property they rent?

stator

danothy wrote: »

Confusion about who actually owns a particular property can often be remedied by checking whose name appears on the title deed.

Which would show clearly that someone else has an overridding interest in the property.

stator

CLAPTON wrote: »

Unite do indeed build a lot of housing and outbid builders that would otherwise build for ordinary people, so driving up the price of property for ordinary people: a particular problem in London which is why many councils there try to prevent new student accommodate.

Student housing is higher density than residential. It doesn't change the number of students that exist, merely where they live. So if I build student flats for 100 people, that's 100 rooms or flats elsewhere that are freed up for non-students.

danothy

stator wrote: »

Which would show clearly that someone else has an overridding interest in the property.

I think you may be confusing "overriding interest" with "first charge".

CLAPTON

stator wrote: »

Student housing is higher density than residential. It doesn't change the number of students that exist, merely where they live. So if I build student flats for 100 people, that's 100 rooms or flats elsewhere that are freed up for non-students.

In exactly the same way as any landlord doesn't change the population wanting somewhere to live?

Unite is a for profit company and it's aim is to make money from students: in many cases student chose to rent from small private landlords as its cheaper than Unite.

I have no problem with this but I'm not sure why you prefer large rental companies from small ones.

Do you own shares in Unite?

wotsthat

TickersPlaysPop wrote: »

The western spring is coming... maybe not this general election.... unless we have a re election due to hung parliament. .... but definitely the next election the young will rise and a new party will emerge.

I'd say in the UK there aren't enough unemployed young men to make this anything but a highly unlikely possibility.

The past will more likely be repeated. Young people get older and realise their own actions impact their life situation more than the differences between any UK governments could ever do.

They're then replaced with more young people who proclaim their generation has been shafted more than any other.

In the meantime living standards and wealth increase.

stator

CLAPTON wrote: »

I have no problem with this but I'm not sure why you prefer large rental companies from small ones.

Do you own shares in Unite?

No, and I have no problem with companies that BUILD housing to rent it out. ie new housing. It's Buy to Let that should be bannished :j

stator

danothy wrote: »

I think you may be confusing "overriding interest" with "first charge".

Not confused at all. Who's permission do you need to sell the house? Who gets first dibbs on the proceeds?