Renters pushed to breaking point as Britain's selfish homeowners gloat their hands

ruggedtoast

Average monthly rent in London hits £1500.

Fifteen. Hundred. Pounds.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jun/15/london-rents-homelet-survey-housing-crisis

This is now approaching 100% of take home salary for people on an average salary.

How on earth are people meant to live?

The cost of renting property is spiralling out of control with the average price of a flat or a house in London now hitting £1,500 a month, a survey has shown.

According to data collected by HomeLet, rents have shot up 12.5% across the country with tenants on average asked to fork out £751 a month outside the capital.

This is combined with Britain having the most insecure, predatory and just downright unfair rental market in Europe.

I feel especially sorry for parents who can't even give a vague assurance to their kids that they will finish terms in the same school that they started in.


A man contemplates his appointment with Foxtons Letting Department later that day

Britain's hard working renting families deserve better than being pushed into ever more shoddy accommodation in ever worse locales.

Meanwhile:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/property/house-prices/11674108/Rush-to-buy-after-Conservative-victory-pushes-house-prices-to-record.html

Rush to buy after Conservative victory pushes asking prices to record
Asking prices rise 3pc in June to a new record high, reversing May's pre-election decline

As long as a small amount of people have more money the needs of a large amount of people regarding housing are forgotten

NIMBYs must be overruled. Britain needs buy to let landlords like it needs another bout of Black Death.

Homes for people not hedge funds.


The Homeowner's code

mwpt

ruggedtoast wrote: »

As long as a small amount of people have more money the needs of a large amount of people regarding housing are forgotten

Well, it's not that many landlords had/have more money, they were just willing to risk it all on a leveraged bet, using previously leveraged assets to increase their portfolio. That was a risky bet, as any bet with leverage is. Except, it turned out it wasn't, because most were bailed out on this bet in 2008/2009 with slashed rates. That set the moral precedent.

ruggedtoast wrote: »

NIMBYs must be overruled. Britain needs buy to let landlords like it needs another bout of Black Death.]

You have to be pragmatic about this though. Every nation will always have people who prefer to rent, and maybe even the majority. And if that is their preference, you shouldn't be able to tell them otherwise. In this case, for every renter, you need a property owned by someone else (NOT the state). So, the reality is that we will always have landlords, and that is good. What we need to do though is evolve our tenancy laws to something approaching fair, move toward the German model.

footyguy

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Average monthly rent in London hits £1500.

Fifteen. Hundred. Pounds.

...

This is now approaching 100% of take home salary for people on an average salary....

Not in London it aint

According to data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), the median gross annual wage for people working in inner London is £34,473

http://www.cityam.com/206242/where-can-you-earn-most-uk-pay-london-much-higher-any-other-part-uk

caronoel

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Average monthly rent in London hits £1500.

This is per property, not per occupant.

I rent out one of my flats in Clapham (3 beds / 2 baths) to four sharers (two couples) for a total of £1,850.

That works out at well under £500 / head, which aint bad in my book.

I'd fully agree with the comment about the desireability of longer term tenancies: both tenants and LLs would welcome the stability.

ukcarper

Aren't you a homeowner how's the gloating feel

jacko74

caronoel wrote: »

This is per property, not per occupant.

I rent out one of my flats in Clapham (3 beds / 2 baths) to four sharers (two couples) for a total of £1,850.

That works out at well under £500 / head, which aint bad in my book.

I'd fully agree with the comment about the desireability of longer term tenancies: both tenants and LLs would welcome the stability.

2 couples sharing a 3 bed flat, how very cosy.. and all for the bargain price of £1,850 a month, I imagine they must be thanking the Lord above every day for your very existence.

caronoel

jacko74 wrote: »

2 couples sharing a 3 bed flat, how very cosy.. and all for the bargain price of £1,850 a month, I imagine they must be thanking the Lord above every day for your very existence.

£1,850 is right at the bottom end of the price of local flats:
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E85282&sortType=1&minPrice=250&minBedrooms=3&maxBedrooms=3&googleAnalyticsChannel=renting

If I wanted to charge a market rent, it would probably be closer to £2k/month, but there is little point in risking the relationship with a good set of long term tenants.

I will review the rent level once they move out, to bring it closer to market levels

Cornucopia

How much should people be paying for accommodation?

The example above works out at £106 per person per week. Any professional person working in London is likely to find that easily affordable.

chucknorris

jacko74 wrote: »

2 couples sharing a 3 bed flat, how very cosy.. and all for the bargain price of £1,850 a month, I imagine they must be thanking the Lord above every day for your very existence.

I also rent out a 3 bed flat out near that one for a similar rent (in Battersea for £1,800/month, also (slightly) under the market rent), if you wanted to buy a similar flat, it would cost you about £500,000, what you would let it for?

Cornucopia

What a lot of people don't realise is that the ratio of rent to purchase price in London is actually a fair bit lower than in many other parts of the country. Your property above has a gross yield of 4.3%, compared to over 6% in the Kentish town where I live.

Yes, there is potential capital growth, but this isn't funded by tenants.

chucknorris

Cornucopia wrote: »

Your property above has a gross yield of 4.3%,

LOL, did you think I was unaware of that (before anyone else says, yes I know it is actually 4.32%)?