So what is BTL? Finders Keepers?

HammersFan

SN. You really have lost the plot. Is your idea that we should have a Communist stae of some sort, where making money is somehow illegal? If so, it seems strange you frequent a site called Moneysaving expert. I have BTL, the tenant pays me less per month than if he was buying the place. I look after the repairs and maintenance, he pays rent late sometimes, but always pays - so I never hassle him (unlike a mortgage lender who would be right on his case). So he gets less hassle than if he owned the place, and he gets it cheaper. That's a deal (Although your post has got me thinking, I might need to put his rent up! Thanks SN). If I ever sell he will get first refusal and I would give a decent discount (because of no EA fees and no voids). But if I keep it longer term I'll probably give it to my kids so that they can get a start without having to pay some rip off, scruffy, Rigbsby character their hard-earned cash that they get from selling the Morning Star.

SN, try to relax a little. All this stress and frustration cant be doing you any good. (and that landlords in front of trains thing...you need to see someone with good qualifications in head doctoring if you are starting to think like that).

subjecttocontract

HammersFan wrote: »

SN, try to relax a little. All this stress and frustration cant be doing you any good. (and that landlords in front of trains thing...you need to see someone with good qualifications in head doctoring if you are starting to think like that).

Just humour him.....most of us do.

flower_72

HammersFan wrote: »

SN, try to relax a little. All this stress and frustration cant be doing you any good. (and that landlords in front of trains thing...you need to see someone with good qualifications in head doctoring if you are starting to think like that).

Ah! But now the head doctor is faced with a dilema. Head doctor has just bought a property with a BTL mortgage. He finds out about SN's fantasy. Should he treat and attempt to cure SN or should he get him unethicaly locked up in some bad head hospital? :rotfl:

halia

well in my scenario it goes like this:
Single person on benefits is unable to buy (due to being on benefits), this is a lifestyle choice for them as they want to be an artist and so chose to stay in a low income brakcet and receive housing benefit so they can spend more time on their art. They also don't want the 'hassle' of owning a house "cos then I'd have to deal with gutters and double glazing and stuff like that" (I'm quoting from my tenant here)

I have a house I bought to live in, then met my partner and we wed and moved in together. I decided to rent out my own little house after 2 years of struggling to sell it.

I rent house to tenant, I sort out the leakign gutters in the autumn, I pay for the buildings insurance and basic contents insurance. I let the tenant change the gates to give them room for their bike/art stuff and I discuss what colour carpet they would like when its time to refurbish. I pay for the hosue to be redecorated, the gas to be checked over, a new washing machine when the old one breaks etc etc.

In return the tenant gets a house at LESS than what it would cost on a mortgage now per month and none of the hassle factor they wanted to avoid.

Exactly how am I evil again?

Some people will always want/need to rent. Its the mark of the terminally lazy or hopelessly stupid to decide that one group of people are evil simply because of their job/means of earning an income/....... you know the way Jews used to be considered to be scum because they were money lenders.

We got hit badly by floods here, its now 8 months since some people had to move out of their homes. If there were no landlords to rent property to them they would currently have nowhere to live!

halia

SquatNow wrote: »

Appologies if you think I was inciting people to kill landlords, that was not my intention yet. What I was trying to highlight was that the landlord is NOT DOING ANYTHING apart from demanding money for access to something that has always existed... land.

The Nurse isn't being paid for allowing the man into the hospital, she's being paid for treating him.

um no, the landlord is asking for a contribution/payment for the use of a facility. The landlord carries the long term risk of buying the property and maintaning it. (See other posts about just what a landlord actually DOES PAY FOR and DO)

Its not just land, its a house which costs money to build and maintain.

mr.broderick

SquatNow wrote: »

A strange ethical question for you, relating to housing, in a short story:

A man, who works as a fireman, and his nurse wife are walking down a street with their 2 children. Despite dedicating their lives to helping the community, they currently have no-where to live.

They see an empty, run-down, 3 bedroomed semi-detached house and approach it. Being tired after a long day at work, the couple decide to spend the night in the empty house.

As they approach the door, a scruffy man steps out from behind a tree and blocks the doorway. "You have to pay me" says the man. "Why?" questions the fireman. "Because you do. You have to pay me if you want to go inside."

"But why do we have to pay you" asks the nurse. "Because" replies the scruffy man, "if you don't I'll wont let you in. Then the police will come and arrest you for vagrancy, and social services will take your children away".

"Oh no, we don't want that", says the Fireman. "How much do we have to pay you?". "Half your income" says the scruffy man.

"Half our income!" exclaims the nurse. "That's extortionate! What gives you the right to demand that money from us!". The scruffy man grins and says "I got here first, see. Finders Keepers. See all these houses on the street... I got to all these first. So you gotta pay me else you'll freeze to death... it's gonna be cold tonight so you have no choice".

The fireman thinks for a moment and then asks "how about if I give you a quarter of my wage... it's a fair amount and it's better for you as otherwise you'll get nothing".

"nah thanks" says the scruffy man. "It's no skin off my nose if ya freeze to death". The scruffy man grins and steps closer to the fireman: "Don't cost me nuffin if the place is empty, so why should I care? Pay up or freeze!"

The couple think and chat for a while and decide they have no choice as otherwise their children really will freeze to death. They give the landlord his money and in exchange he steps aside and lets them live.

The ethical question is this:
Given that the scruffy man was happy to put make the family spend the night on the street and possibly freeze to death, if he went to hospital should the nurse treat him? If he crashes his porche into a tree, should the fireman cut him out or leave him to die.

Disn't you ask this question a few months ago squatnow?
It was boring then and is still boring the life out of me now.
What is your malfunction?

weegie.geek

Wow. This is one of the most !!!!!! arguments I've read in a while, even by internet standards.

There's no ethical question here. A landlord rents out his property. He's paid a lot of money for the property, or gotten into a lot of debt to buy it. He bought it with the intention of renting it out. Why should he let it out for free? I could perhaps understand your question if BTLers had bought every available property, and were letting them out at extortionate rates, leaving people with the no choice, but that's not the case.

I'm not entirely sure what your argument is to be honest. You seem to imply that investing in property is a bad thing or that the ownership of land is a bad thing.

I don't particularly have an opinion, to be honest. They're providing a service that people want. I don't know where I'm going to be in 5 years. I certainly don't want to be tied down by a mortgage, so renting is the way for me. Does it matter how the landlord came to own the property, as long as he'll rent it to me for an amount of money that I find reasonable? If it's not reasonable, I'll look elsewhere. There are plenty of properties.

All this finders keepers nonsense too. They didn't find them. Someone bought the land. Someone built the house. Someone bought the house. It might've been bought or sold a few times between then and now, but that's generally the way things happen. We're talking about houses here, not caves or hollowed out trees. Nobody just stumbles across a house. Houses are not "found".

Some of the things you say, and your sig, worry me slightly. You seem obsessed. It can't be healthy.

real1314

If I want to use someone else's car to get to hospital, but they don't let me unless I pay them some money, and then I have to walk to the hospital, is it fair that I refuse to treat the car owner when I get there and put on my uniform?

If I stop on the way at a supermarket but they don't let me have food without paying, can I refuse to treat any shop-worker?

If a glazing firm refuses to repair my windows without payment....

If the gas and leccy co want money too.....

If the council expect me to pay council tax.....

IF,
If,
if,

SquatNow, tell us all what you DO for a living, and if you'll do it all for free. Tell us what possessions you HAVE, so we can all lay claim to them.

Anyone would think you are Mother Theresa.

IveSeenTheLight

real1314 wrote: »

SquatNow, tell us all what you DO for a living, and if you'll do it all for free. Tell us what possessions you HAVE, so we can all lay claim to them.quote]
I recall him saying he has a sporty car and I'm sure he said he paid rent (albeit a small amount) to a landlady for a garden cottage or something.

Maybe we could all take turns to live in his country garden cottage at the weekend.
Let him pay but we get a free weekend break.
Sounds good to me

Strapped

Ooooo, I'm looking forward to my next holiday now...at SN's house (or rather, SN's parents' house - you do still live at home, SN?) :beer:

ETA: I'veSeenTheLight, we crossed posts ;-)