Why Become a Landlord?

need_an_answer

I certainly agree its much more difficult to be a LL with just one property...

Although those that talk about big LL's it would be interesting to hear how many properties constitute a big LL.

I'm between 5-10 and that's enough for me...I don't consider myself to be big but I do and always have run them as a business albeit very much a "family" entity whereby we all muck in if needed during tenant changeovers.

Its not big enough to retire on (we tried it a few months ago ) but it brings in a second income meaning that perhaps instead of working full time I'm a little more home based,although" shift work and on call "can sometimes disrupt the best laid plans when something needs attending to.

AdrianC

The problem isn't landlords - or even "accidental landlords" per se.

The problem is that their proliferation has meant that certain segments of the housing market have got badly skewed, especially in certain geographical areas. And that skewing has had a knock-on effect on those now unable to become owner-occupiers.

What's needed is not some kind of wholesale economic cleansing of all landlords, or even all "accidental", but simply enough of a gentle nudge to allow it all to rebalance. The tax changes are primarily aimed at those who're massively geared, and will hopefully give them time to exit the sector in an orderly way, instead of waiting until mortgage rate rises force a firesale.

Cotta

AdrianC wrote: »

The problem isn't landlords - or even "accidental landlords" per se.

The problem is that their proliferation has meant that certain segments of the housing market have got badly skewed, especially in certain geographical areas. And that skewing has had a knock-on effect on those now unable to become owner-occupiers.

What's needed is not some kind of wholesale economic cleansing of all landlords, or even all "accidental", but simply enough of a gentle nudge to allow it all to rebalance. The tax changes are primarily aimed at those who're massively geared, and will hopefully give them time to exit the sector in an orderly way, instead of waiting until mortgage rate rises force a firesale.

I agree that removing some of the "accidental landlords" is perhaps a good thing, however in order for the process to work the government has to make the system favourable to Landlords. Surely it can't be acceptable to trash a house and or fail to pay rent for three months without some sort of consequence?

Comms69

Cotta wrote: »

I agree that removing some of the "accidental landlords" is perhaps a good thing, however in order for the process to work the government has to make the system favourable to Landlords. Surely it can't be acceptable to trash a house and or fail to pay rent for three months without some sort of consequence?

It's just a civil dispute, you don't need a new law for every situation. Existing laws are sufficient.

Cotta

Comms69 wrote: »

It's just a civil dispute, you don't need a new law for every situation. Existing laws are sufficient.

Not really, the Landlord is afforded no protection from my understanding, perhaps a Landlord can clarify this?

Comms69

Cotta wrote: »

Not really, the Landlord is afforded no protection from my understanding, perhaps a Landlord can clarify this?

What do you mean 'no protection'. That isn't a term that's clear.


- not sure why you need a landlord to clarify this, as I'm perfectly capable.


If a tenant doesn't pay rent you can:


1. evict them. The law on evictions is clear and is one of the factors in determining if your business is a good fit to you.


2. you can sue them for the outstanding money, just like any other debt.


What protection do you want to see?

Cakeguts

It is "accidental" or other landlords with big mortgages that are the problem I think. They can't alwasy get the needed repairs done on time because they don't have enough spare cash after paying the mortgage. It works much better for all concerned both landlords and tenants if you have more than one property and don't have any mortgages. If you get an unexpected repair bill the cost doesn't have to come out of just the one set of rent.

Crashy_Time

Comms69 wrote: »

I think you mean is this the end for mr jones who inherited a property and rents it out as a one off. probably.


Will the market be filled with large commercial landlords - definitely.


is that a good things - not sure yet. Large landlords are usually good for repairs (have their own people), up to date on legislation (again maybe with an admin person) and generally understand the dynamics better. Conversely they are more likely to stick to a policy and be less approachable.

If Mr. Jones inherited, can avoid too many voids, and is able to keep up his legal obligations then he will do better than those who over-leveraged on loads of BTL loans believing that "property always goes up" IMO. There will be an extra tax burden in future, but there are probably limits to this (Unless JC becomes PM?)

Facknats

Accidental Landlords are the only to allow dogs, or breathing in their property and manage to restrain themselves from en masses buying up all of the local affordable housing stock as a retirement investment, thereby inflating the number of people with no choice but to have a landlords ;p

JayRitchie

Comms69 wrote: »

Because mr jones is a one man band. His income is insufficient to employ people and must rely on contractors. his profits are squeezed by changes in taxation and he's unable to absorb the costs of voids like a large commercial landlord might.

No - Mr Jones inherited - no debt so can easily afford to pay. Plus if he lives locally he can do some work himself as and when. Tax changes don't hit him - he doesnt pay interest on a mortgage. Nor do voids - he presumably has a regular income so just loses out on some beer and holiday money.

The semi professional landlord with 8 properties on mortgages will have a far tougher time and genuinely be hit by tax changes and any legislative changes to protect tenants.