Why the bad news for landlords is just beginning

lisyloo

ukcarper wrote: »

It's not the fact that they are going to sell it's that they could and end tenancy, which can make it difficult to plan especially if you have children.

I accept that. isnt that something people need to accept if they choose to have children whilst renting?
Is that not a choice? (Bar a few extreme exceptions)

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

I accept that. isnt that something people need to accept if they choose to have children whilst renting?
Is that not a choice? (Bar a few extreme exceptions)

I suppose so but many people can't and will never be able to buy.

lisyloo

That has always been the case (roughly the bottom third).
The difference is that there is less public provision these days.

I accept what you say but I stil dont personally want to subsidise their concerns.

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

That has always been the case (roughly the bottom third).
The difference is that there is less public provision these days.

I accept what you say but I stil dont personally want to subsidise their concerns.

I'm not sure what you mean by subsidising thier concerns.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

Isn't that what I said and they would have to leave eventually.

So do owners, they face life events that force them to move often at far higher costs than a renter doing the same move thanks to the owners moving tax.

What I do not understand is why you think its such a huge burden to move home. I think I have moved home over half a dozen times and it was never unbearable.

ANGLICANPAT

GreatApe wrote: »

What I do not understand is why you think its such a huge burden to move home. I think I have moved home over half a dozen times and it was never unbearable.

Wow, lucky, or maybe youre made of sterner stuff than most of us- or perhaps just in a position where

You havent been in a complicated chain
You are single and have a job that can transfer anywhere or
You and partner both have jobs which can transfer anywhere.
You have no elderly relatives living in an area you need to be near
Youve never had a survey thats dashed all your hopes and dreams
You happily accept whatever school is nearest to the house you choose whether Ofsted good or bad.
Youve never had a buyer +solicitor who was super picky and slower than a three legged tortoise.
You have never had 2 or 3 buyers pull out at 11th hour
You have never offered on several houses , only to be gazumped
Youve never been gazundered at last minute during a sale

Youve never been biting your nails for days as buyer fails to exchange and argues over previously arranged completion date.
You have never ended up paying for both rental and mortgage for months .



If as I presume unless Very fortunate, you must have suffered at least some of the above hassles, yet found moving isnt stressful --it must be because you're the calm and collected type (I envy you) --but surely the majority of people find moving house really stressful?

lisyloo

ukcarper wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by subsidising thier concerns.

There have been suggestions in the past that regulations should be changed to provide some with more security of tenure. Usually these things aren't free and I'm saying I personally don't want it to change, because that's to the detriment of landlords AND some tenants as well.

Those who have particular concerns should make their choices accordingly (and yes even in central London there are choicesand compromises to be made - usually you can choose a worse/cheaper area).
I appreciate no-one has a crystal ball but my first rental was from a an accidental landlord renting her home whilst starting an experimental lifestyle business during a mid-life crisis. It was clear there was a risk she'd want her home back and she did.
Our second rental happens to be from a professional landlord who has several properties. Nothing is guaranteed, but they have fewer reasons to end the tenancy.
So these family renters are not completely at the mercy of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. They can choose the best landlord for their concerns out of the choices available or increase their choices by making a compromise elsewhere just like the rest of us do. ALL of us have to do that, it's just a question of where you make your compromises.

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

So do owners, they face life events that force them to move often at far higher costs than a renter doing the same move thanks to the owners moving tax.

What I do not understand is why you think its such a huge burden to move home. I think I have moved home over half a dozen times and it was never unbearable.

You don't seem to understand the difference between moving when you choose as compared to when someone else wants you to move.

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

There have been suggestions in the past that regulations should be changed to provide some with more security of tenure. Usually these things aren't free and I'm saying I personally don't want it to change, because that's to the detriment of landlords AND some tenants as well.

Those who have particular concerns should make their choices accordingly (and yes even in central London there are choicesand compromises to be made - usually you can choose a worse/cheaper area).
I appreciate no-one has a crystal ball but my first rental was from a an accidental landlord renting her home whilst starting an experimental lifestyle business during a mid-life crisis. It was clear there was a risk she'd want her home back and she did.
Our second rental happens to be from a professional landlord who has several properties. Nothing is guaranteed, but they have fewer reasons to end the tenancy.
So these family renters are not completely at the mercy of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. They can choose the best landlord for their concerns out of the choices available or increase their choices by making a compromise elsewhere just like the rest of us do. ALL of us have to do that, it's just a question of where you make your compromises.

From what can I can see the present rules covering rented property are not really fit for service. I would have thought it would be possible to have longer tenancies along side shorter tenancies. It's not just security of tenure for tenants it's also things like how difficult it is to evict tenants who do not pay rent.

HornetSaver

ukcarper wrote: »

I would have thought it would be possible to have longer tenancies along side shorter tenancies

It is possible. However it's not compulsory, and not to the moneygrabber's advantage, therefore in practise does not happen.