Retiring landlords risk fuelling rental shortage

justwhat

So.. cheap affordable housing is not available due to BTL's. And as soon as LL sell up the cheap housing stock will be invigorated. Rental property charges are high due to the filthy rich LL's capitalising on the rental market.

Don't think so ...
What's actually going to happen here is. LL's are going to sell up or a small number move onto properties with a better EPC.   Rental availability is going to diminish. And sooner or later the government is going to  have to do something about the housing stock. 

In the meantime society is going to blame current housing situation on LL's until it is too late.
The legislation changes for LL's over the last 20+ years have been brutal. Government legislation often fuelling the publics perception of LL's.

MultiFuelBurner

So from a LL's perspective with 12 properties ranging EPC C-E.

We will keep going until the government makes it impossible to continue it's been 20 years so far and only one small BTL mortgage left.

We are making plans in the main block to cover the roof in solar and investigating wet heat pumps for those with gas and air to air for those with storage heaters but the local council are not being helpful in this regard with planning for such systems.

Where our properties are there is a distinct lack of availability, probably 20-30 applicants per property and rents are continuing to climb.

ArbitraryRandom

MultiFuelBurner said:

So from a LL's perspective with 12 properties ranging EPC C-E.

We are making plans in the main block to cover the roof in solar and investigating wet heat pumps for those with gas and air to air for those with storage heaters but the local council are not being helpful in this regard with planning for such systems.

And the EPC requirements are also 'not being helpful' - scoring heat pumps as less desirable than keeping gas. 

YoungBlueEyes

Don't forget to take account of all the new people accidentally deciding to become landlords because they think it's basically free money. Being younger they haven't hindsight to draw on and weren't doing it in the 'good ole days' so it doesn't look as unpalatable and onerous as it does to the wise heads on here who've been doing it for decades.

Finger in the dam certainly, but still.

Robbo66

[Deleted User] said:

On the plus side it means more properties available to buy, and lower prices.

This doesnt help with the current housing shortage, all that happens is one family is displaced to make room for another.

tooldle

badmemory said:

I am afraid that some peoples logic is seriously flawed.  If there are 200 households needing rental properties & there are only 100 available then there will be 100 unable to find a property.  If the landlords sell 10 of them leaving 90 properties but now 190 households looking making the odds worse.

The basic problem is too many households & not enough properties.  There are only 2 answers to this.  Build more properties or kill off a lot of people.  The way things are going recently the second option would appear to be the most likely.

Or encourage people to live differently. Multi generational living, for example. 

Tiglet2

tooldle said:

badmemory said:

I am afraid that some peoples logic is seriously flawed.  If there are 200 households needing rental properties & there are only 100 available then there will be 100 unable to find a property.  If the landlords sell 10 of them leaving 90 properties but now 190 households looking making the odds worse.

The basic problem is too many households & not enough properties.  There are only 2 answers to this.  Build more properties or kill off a lot of people.  The way things are going recently the second option would appear to be the most likely.

Or encourage people to live differently. Multi generational living, for example. 

Good point. 

Not only should people consider living differently, they should also consider what their realistic expectations are.  Too many people want to move out of the parental home, into their own home with a partner, have children etc, all without making the initial effort of saving up to buy their first home.  At this point, a rental seems like the easy option.  But then, it becomes difficult to improve their lot, since so much of their income is now taken up by the cost of living independently.

jimbog

tooldle said:

badmemory said:

I am afraid that some peoples logic is seriously flawed.  If there are 200 households needing rental properties & there are only 100 available then there will be 100 unable to find a property.  If the landlords sell 10 of them leaving 90 properties but now 190 households looking making the odds worse.

The basic problem is too many households & not enough properties.  There are only 2 answers to this.  Build more properties or kill off a lot of people.  The way things are going recently the second option would appear to be the most likely.

Or encourage people to live differently. Multi generational living, for example. 

or HMOs being the norm 

[Deleted User]

jimbog said:

tooldle said:

badmemory said:

I am afraid that some peoples logic is seriously flawed.  If there are 200 households needing rental properties & there are only 100 available then there will be 100 unable to find a property.  If the landlords sell 10 of them leaving 90 properties but now 190 households looking making the odds worse.

The basic problem is too many households & not enough properties.  There are only 2 answers to this.  Build more properties or kill off a lot of people.  The way things are going recently the second option would appear to be the most likely.

Or encourage people to live differently. Multi generational living, for example. 

or HMOs being the norm 

HMO becoming more common but only mainly for individuals.

won’t be suitable for families. 

Slightly easier to buy properties as a couple rather than indivituals increased comobined income/affordability.

But then need to be earning a decent income in order to pay rent and save a decent amount for deposit etc.

tooldle

jimbog said:

tooldle said:

badmemory said:

I am afraid that some peoples logic is seriously flawed.  If there are 200 households needing rental properties & there are only 100 available then there will be 100 unable to find a property.  If the landlords sell 10 of them leaving 90 properties but now 190 households looking making the odds worse.

The basic problem is too many households & not enough properties.  There are only 2 answers to this.  Build more properties or kill off a lot of people.  The way things are going recently the second option would appear to be the most likely.

Or encourage people to live differently. Multi generational living, for example. 

or HMOs being the norm 

When my parents married (1961) there was a serious shortage of housing in their city thanks to bombing. It was common for newly married couple to rent a few rooms in a house. My folks lived with an owner occupier. They had the upstairs and their landlady the downstairs. There was only one bathroom and the landlady would use it whilst my folks were at work, leaving money on the side to cover the cost of the water heater. 

The arrangement worked well for them and they remained good friends until the landlady died. Mum would take us kids to visit the ex landlady reasonably regularly. My parents bought their own place within a couple of years of marrying and found a suitable replacement tenant for their rooms, and I believe the next tenants were a childless couple who stayed for many years.