Right to buy on privately rented homes

The-Joker

Green_Bear wrote: »

I agree in general terms, but I suspect REITs and property funds will be left alone.

Socialism doesn’t leave anybody alone

Green_Bear

The-Joker wrote: »

Socialism doesn’t leave anybody alone

Depends how socialist they go.

There are some social housing REITs (eg SOHO) that may do well under Corbyn.

Failing that, I've heard vodka can be used as a currency.

DannyGold

Green_Bear wrote: »

Depends how socialist they go.

There are some social housing REITs (eg SOHO) that may do well under Corbyn.

Failing that, I've heard vodka can be used as a currency.

Socialist governments always run out of other people’s money eventually

But until then they get the poor and middle class behind them because everybody loves free stuff

And right to buy private rental properties is going to win votes, especially if there are government incentives like help to buy 3, which is said to be 50% interest free for 6years with only a 3% deposit needed.

The-Joker

Green_Bear wrote: »

Depends how socialist they go.

There are some social housing REITs (eg SOHO) that may do well under Corbyn.

Failing that, I've heard vodka can be used as a currency.

The people love socialism, the masses will always vote for socialism

Take money from rush landlords, or any landlords for that matter and give tenants the right to buy their rented homes at knock down prices and you have got a vote winner

The-Joker

westernpromise wrote: »

I've let out four different properties over the last 24 years and in that time not one single tenant, of I suppose 20-odd, has ever asked me for a three-year tenancy.

I was myself a tenant for ten of those years and I never asked for a three-year tenancy either.

A real headache trying to find new tenants every few years

All those void periods. Higher risk of a bad tenants if you keep changing

If you have good tenants then you should look after them

Good tenants are hard to come by nowadays

chucknorris

The-Joker wrote: »

All those void periods.

In over 28 years and multiple properties (between 4 and 8) we have only had a total of 3 months in voids. That equates to less than a one day void per property per year.

Cakeguts

We don't have many voids either. A 3 year tenancy for us would be short.

chucknorris

Cakeguts wrote: »

We don't have many voids either. A 3 year tenancy for us would be short.

Our longest standing tenant has been there for 9 years now, and they have just had a baby, and also have children at school, so I don't think they are likely to move soon. Especially when you consider that they have just refurbished the bathroom for free labour. They re-tiled it (including the floor, which was previously lino), new bathroom suite and redecorated, we obviously paid for the materials. They asked us, I would have never dreamed of asking them. Obviously that is very unusual.

Cakeguts

chucknorris wrote: »

Our longest standing tenant has been there for 9 years now, and they have just had a baby, and also have children at school, so I don't think they are likely to move soon. Especially when you consider that they have just refurbished the bathroom for free labour. They re-tiled it (including the floor, which was previously lino), new bathroom suite and redecorated, we obviously paid for the materials. They asked us, I would have never dreamed of asking them. Obviously that is very unusual.

We have two long standing tenants. One house the tenancy is about 15 years and the other about 14.

The-Joker

Cakeguts wrote: »

We have two long standing tenants. One house the tenancy is about 15 years and the other about 14.

How would you feel if the law says you are forced to sell these properties to your tenants for greatly reduced values and you have to take the loss yourself?