Why do people resent buy-to-letters so much?

westernpromise

Deleted_User wrote: »

Amateurs that rent out property from inheritance or a BTL from their pension pot are the ones to watch out for. They treat the rent as cold hard cash for their back pocket. Then when maintenance and repairs need doing e.g. broken boiler, they drag their feet as this eats into their cold hard cash.

Amateur landlords generally are to be avoided. I've rented four times in my life. The first time was in the Netherlands and the landlady was loaded and excellent. The second time was from a couple of professional landlords who were also excellent and who sold the flat to me in the end. The last two times were from utter cheapskates who left all the maintenance to British Gas or to monkeys whom they would then find ways not to pay.

I've been a landlord three times, once while I was in the Netherlands and twice since, and the model I've taken has been the Netherlands landlady. I'm currently letting a ~£900k flat for £30k a year and for that level of rent, if anything goes wrong with an appliance, they just get a brand new one.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm not so sure why so many of you are hung up on defining one singular cause as if nothing else matters.

UK mortgage lending was certainly part of the issue, and a rather large one at that. You can deny that should you wish, but it's clearly documented and has been clearly defined by the BOE.

That's strange.

A member of the BOE's MPC has stated the exact opposite.

He even wrote a full research paper backing up that position.

But the debt that's caused the problems hasn't been the debt of households. It really has been down to silly bets by Britain's banks (and other parts of the financial system), which were NOT bets on UK residential property. Most of them weren't even in the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17398014

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

That's strange.

A member of the BOE's MPC has stated the exact opposite.

He even wrote a full research paper backing up that position.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17398014

You do realise the BOE is not Ben Broadbent?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You do realise the BOE is not Ben Broadbent?

Can you provide evidence to prove he's wrong?

Are you really saying that a member of the MPC is not correct when he notes that UK-owned banks have lost 15 times more on foreign mortgages, since the crisis started, than on mortgages in the UK?

Because I think everyone realises that if the banks had only lost 1/16th of the amounts they did, there would have been virtually no UK banking crisis to speak of at all....

[Deleted User]

westernpromise wrote: »

Amateur landlords generally are to be avoided. I've rented four times in my life. The first time was in the Netherlands and the landlady was loaded and excellent. The second time was from a couple of professional landlords who were also excellent and who sold the flat to me in the end. The last two times were from utter cheapskates who left all the maintenance to British Gas or to monkeys whom they would then find ways not to pay.

I've been a landlord three times, once while I was in the Netherlands and twice since, and the model I've taken has been the Netherlands landlady. I'm currently letting a ~£900k flat for £30k a year and for that level of rent, if anything goes wrong with an appliance, they just get a brand new one.

I've never liked the idea of renting a furnished property, would always prefer to have my own stuff. But yes, the cheapskates are the ones that take months to replace a broken/condemned boiler. Or fix a leaking roof etc. The type that don't keep funds aside for maintenance, they just see the rent money coming in and spend it like part of their disposable income.

You can tell when it's an amateur renting out his grannies inheritance - the property in question still has the naff wallpaper and swirly carpets down. Zero coin spent = maximum profits.

CLAPTON

Deleted_User wrote: »

I've never liked the idea of renting a furnished property, would always prefer to have my own stuff. But yes, the cheapskates are the ones that take months to replace a broken/condemned boiler. Or fix a leaking roof etc. The type that don't keep funds aside for maintenance, they just see the rent money coming in and spend it like part of their disposable income.

You can tell when it's an amateur renting out his grannies inheritance - the property in question still has the naff wallpaper and swirly carpets down. Zero coin spent = maximum profits.

you clearly have experience of some housing associations and councils

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Can you provide evidence to prove he's wrong?

Are you really saying that a member of the MPC

I can't provide evidence that his opinion is wrong no.

Neither did I say anything in my original post about a member of the BOE. You did.

I referenced the BOE in it's entirety.

I see Mr Muddle is up to his tricks again though.

[Deleted User]

CLAPTON wrote: »

you clearly have experience of some housing associations and councils

Only rented once, a private property, But I know of family and friends who have a lot more experience of renting to know what it's all about.

cells

Deleted_User wrote: »

I've never liked the idea of renting a furnished property, would always prefer to have my own stuff. But yes, the cheapskates are the ones that take months to replace a broken/condemned boiler. Or fix a leaking roof etc. The type that don't keep funds aside for maintenance, they just see the rent money coming in and spend it like part of their disposable income.

You can tell when it's an amateur renting out his grannies inheritance - the property in question still has the naff wallpaper and swirly carpets down. Zero coin spent = maximum profits.

its not how I would let out but dont you think that there should be some properties that have the naf wallpaper and carpets?

if there are 10 properties on the market hat go for £1,000 per month each. And the naf property comes on the market, its not going to go for £1,000 it may only get £800 and the person taking it for them the £200pm difference is worth not having a newly decorated place.

There should be a whole spectrum from crap homes that cost £400per month to homes which cost £10,000 per month.

HornetSaver

cells wrote: »

its not how I would let out but dont you think that there should be some properties that have the naf wallpaper and carpets?

if there are 10 properties on the market hat go for £1,000 per month each. And the naf property comes on the market, its not going to go for £1,000 it may only get £800 and the person taking it for them the £200pm difference is worth not having a newly decorated place.

There should be a whole spectrum from crap homes that cost £400per month to homes which cost £10,000 per month.

For once we're in complete agreement. However, safety related maintenance is another matter, and there is usually a correlation.