Repeal S21.

AdrianC

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

No. It's voids.

A void costs a month's rent per month.
A bad tenant can cost THOUSANDS in short order.

Then why would repealing S21 be an issue?

<sigh> Once again... There is no benefit to the landlord in repealing it. In the majority of tenancies, there is no downside. But, in those tenancies where there IS a downside, it is a BIG downside.

lighting_up_the_chalice

AdrianC wrote: »

A void costs a month's rent per month.
A bad tenant can cost THOUSANDS in short order.

You're not comparing like with like. A bad void (couple of months, boiler and pipes nicked, water damage etc) could easily cost more than any but the very worst tenant. I've seen voids completely stripped in a weekend... £40K+ worth of damage. So, if you want to compare a bad void to a bad tenant, we can play top trumps and I'll always win.

AdrianC wrote: »

<sigh> Once again... There is no benefit to the landlord in repealing it. In the majority of tenancies, there is no downside. But, in those tenancies where there IS a downside, it is a BIG downside.

The benefit to the LL is that the tenant feels more secure and is, as a result, far more likely to stay put. Why do you think so many people want to buy? It's for the security.

AdrianC

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

You're not comparing like with like. A bad void (couple of months, boiler and pipes nicked, water damage etc)...

Who's not comparing like with like...?

BTW, I think you'll find that theft would be covered by insurance.

As for the security logic...
What tenant thinks "Ooh, I might be evicted, and I don't want that, so I'll move regularly"?

Your grasp of basic human psychology is on a par with your grasp of basic business.

lighting_up_the_chalice

AdrianC wrote: »

Who's not comparing like with like...?

BTW, I think you'll find that theft would be covered by insurance.

As for the security logic...
What tenant thinks "Ooh, I might be evicted, and I don't want that, so I'll move regularly"?

Your grasp of basic human psychology is on a par with your grasp of basic business.

You think that people who feel insecure in their accommodation aren't on the lookout for an alternative? I guess it's a mystery to you why home ownership is so popular in this country. I mean, it can't be a desire for security of tenure, can it?

AdrianC

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

You think that people who feel insecure in their accommodation aren't on the lookout for an alternative?

If we're talking about going from one AST to another, then... Frying pan. Fire. No benefit to the tenant once into an SPT - so if they find a good property with a landlord, why wouldn't they stick with them, rather than risk the next one being an incompetent git who CBA to do basic property maintenance on their mouldy hovel with the neighbours from hell? s21 or no s21...?

I guess it's a mystery to you why home ownership is so popular in this country. I mean, it can't be a desire for security of tenure, can it?

And there was me, thinking it might have something to do with the perception of ever-rising property prices and people thinking owning a house was a nice way to increase your overall wealth... After all, that's why people are in the BTL game, isn't it...?

mrginge

I'm sorry to tell you this and there really isn't much point since you have absolutely zero understanding of basic finance, but the primary cost (or expense if that helps) is in most cases a mortgage payment.

lighting_up_the_chalice

AdrianC wrote: »

If we're talking about going from one AST to another, then... Frying pan. Fire. No benefit to the tenant once into an SPT - so if they find a good property with a landlord, why wouldn't they stick with them, rather than risk the next one being an incompetent git who CBA to do basic property maintenance on their mouldy hovel with the neighbours from hell? s21 or no s21...?

Some are already in that hovel, fearful to raise repair issues for fear of that S21. Maybe they feel the grass will be greener elsewhere. Maybe you're right and all landlords are, effectively, Rigsby. All the more reason to rid the rental world of S21.

AdrianC wrote: »

And there was me, thinking it might have something to do with the perception of ever-rising property prices and people thinking owning a house was a nice way to increase your overall wealth... After all, that's why people are in the BTL game, isn't it...?

No. Most homeowners view the home they own as, well, a home. Somewhere they can reasonably feel is secure for them and their family beyond the next 2 months. It's the main reason for the popularity of SH.

lighting_up_the_chalice

mrginge wrote: »

I'm sorry to tell you this and there really isn't much point since you have absolutely zero understanding of basic finance, but the primary cost (or expense if that helps) is in most cases a mortgage payment.

The mortgage payment is a business expense, that's why you can claim it as a tax deductible. It only becomes a cost when the rental income falls below the mortgage payment, most commonly during a void period. Then, of course, you have no income to set it against as a tax deduction and it becomes a cost. THAT is basic finance.

mrginge

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

The mortgage payment is a business expense, that's why you can claim it as a tax deductible. It only becomes a cost when the rental income falls below the mortgage payment, most commonly during a void period. Then, of course, you have no income to set it against as a tax deduction and it becomes a cost. THAT is basic finance.

Oh dear me.

I think its pretty clear to everyone now.
You don't understand the differences between INCOME, COSTS, PROFIT and LOSS.
Given that these are first week gcse level concepts its going to be dfficult for me to explain even slightly more advanced topics like shifting supply curves and the effects on prices.