Owner Occupiers > BTL Landlord

CLAPTON

HornetSaver wrote: »

True



False.

Affordability and supply and demand are two distinct concepts. Rentals in Hertfordshire are plentiful though gradually becoming less so (as there is a high housing stock relative to jobs located within the county, meaning that there are always rentals on offer but population shift from London is on the rise) but expensive (because the costs to wages ratio in Hertfordshire is high even by London Commuter Belt standards).

if rents are unaffordable then either property will remain empty or price will fall

the distinction you are trying to make between people who live in Herts but work in London and people who live in Herts but work local is simply part of the demand mix.

HornetSaver

CLAPTON wrote: »

the distinction you are trying to make between people who live in Herts but work in London and people who live in Herts but work local is simply part of the demand mix.

It's only irrelevant where that mix is constant. It's of some relevance where the mix is changing at a steady rate, and highly relevant where that mix is changing at an accelerating pace.

HENRY78

Hornet Saver I guess you are in Watford or near by? I live in Bushey and from what I can see which actually makes little economic sense is that there are a quite a lot of rental properties available. Again I make my point if someone wanted to and can afford the rent and deposit they could move into somewhere within a couple of weeks. However it is extortionate and unaffordable for a lot of young people.


Back to my point with OO > BTL. The EA sets the price based on market conditions. I cant see it would make too much of a difference to the vendor economically if it is bought by an OO or Landlord.

CLAPTON

HornetSaver wrote: »

It's only irrelevant where that mix is constant. It's of some relevance where the mix is changing at a steady rate, and highly relevant where that mix is changing at an accelerating pace.

it provides no guidance on how to solve the problem.
if indeed there is a problem to solve.

HappyMJ

It's a free market. Isn't going to happen. The property I live in isn't really ideal for an OO. It is however an ideal BTL investor property.

I live in 2 bed flat where the average length of occupancy is just a few years. Buying it to sell on in 2 years isn't worth doing. It's much cheaper just to rent it even if I had the money in the bank I'd keep my money earning interest and pay rent for it.

seven-day-weekend

mwpt wrote: »

Every time a BTL buys a property they either outbid an OO, or they got it at a discount due to being a BTL and having connections.

We bought an investment property recently. We didn't outbid anyone. The flat was marketed at one price, with no interest. After the owner dropped the price he had two viewings, one from us and one from someone else. The other person did not put an offer in. We did, and it was accepted.

Other people could have found it on rightmove, just as we did.

I agree that sometimes a 'deal' is done, but not every time.

mwpt

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

We bought an investment property recently. We didn't outbid anyone. The flat was marketed at one price, with no interest. After the owner dropped the price he had two viewings, one from us and one from someone else. The other person did not put an offer in. We did, and it was accepted.

Other people could have found it on rightmove, just as we did.

I agree that sometimes a 'deal' is done, but not every time.

Was this property of a certain type which OOs have no interest in buying at any price? I hear about these places but living in London I never come across them. If not, then there would have been a lower price found that an OO was willing to pay, hence you have outbid an OO implicitly. It may not have been obvious because no one else bid at the price asked, but that is what happened.

seven-day-weekend

mwpt wrote: »

Was this property of a certain type which OOs have no interest in buying at any price? I hear about these places but living in London I never come across them. If not, then there would have been a lower price found that an OO was willing to pay, hence you have outbid an OO implicitly. It may not have been obvious because no one else bid at the price asked, but that is what happened.

It is a new development and OOs are buying them.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

Was this property of a certain type which OOs have no interest in buying at any price? I hear about these places but living in London I never come across them. If not, then there would have been a lower price found that an OO was willing to pay, hence you have outbid an OO implicitly. It may not have been obvious because no one else bid at the price asked, but that is what happened.

indeed
it seems to me that anyone buying a property is outbidding, possibly thousands of people, would might have bought otherwise.
simply evil and should be banned.

mwpt

CLAPTON wrote: »

indeed
it seems to me that anyone buying a property is outbidding, possibly thousands of people, would might have bought otherwise.
simply evil and should be banned.

Why must you complicate or try to spin the story? It is a simple fact that the top bidder on a property wins the property. If that bidder is a BTL bidder, he has outbid anyone else.

When I bought my property, I outbid any other potential buyers. For some reason, BTL landlords are very averse to simply admitting that they outbid OOs. It's weird.