Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • rentmekid
    • By rentmekid 13th Jun 17, 2:36 PM
    • 75Posts
    • 29Thanks
    rentmekid
    landlord bashing
    • #1
    • 13th Jun 17, 2:36 PM
    landlord bashing 13th Jun 17 at 2:36 PM
    After reading a number of posts/replies on this forum, I have noticed that many people hate the idea of someone owning more than 1 property and renting out.


    Frequent comments are: "people cant afford to buy one property, why should you have 2", or similar.


    At the end of the day, a private landlord is providing a similar service to the housing association, so why the hatred, or is it jealousy?


    Also, its not the Landlords fault that someone cant afford a house.


    Are my view justified?
Page 4
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:31 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    750/mo is 9k/year. Less the service charge/ground rent is 8,100. For a 135k property, that's about a 6% yield - right up there at the top-end.

    90% mortgage (120k) is 540/mo, plus that service charge/ground rent - 75/mo - so that's 615/mo for the flat that your neighbour was paying 660/mo for.
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    A 90% mortgage only needs to be a 90% mortgage for the first few years though.

    You also seem to be comparing a purchaser in 2015 with a renter in 2010.
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:33 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    750/mo is 9k/year. Less the service charge/ground rent is 8,100. For a 135k property, that's about a 6% yield - right up there at the top-end.

    90% mortgage (120k) is 540/mo, plus that service charge/ground rent - 75/mo - so that's 615/mo for the flat that your neighbour was paying 660/mo for.
    Originally posted by AdrianC

    And in reality the RMove fantasy rental price is usually undercut by a lot when landlords attract long term tenants, even in London.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 13th Jun 17, 9:35 PM
    • 17,365 Posts
    • 15,701 Thanks
    AdrianC
    You also seem to be comparing a purchaser in 2015 with a renter in 2010.
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    My bad. I somehow read 660 when you moved out in 2015, but advertised for 750 now...

    Personally I think all rented housing should be council or HA owned
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    ALL...?
    Even the high-end/corporate rental market?
    Somewhere like http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-65241611.html ?

    Even those who can afford to pay more for a better property, but don't want to own for whatever reason?
    Somewhere like http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-47209620.html ?

    Where do you draw the line between holiday rentals? I rented what's normally a holiday cottage for four months over winter a few years back.
    Last edited by AdrianC; 13-06-2017 at 9:40 PM.
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:37 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    You'll have to excuse Crashy. He's not terribly bright.
    Originally posted by AdrianC

    I`m bright enough never to have paid 750 p.m for a 60k flat and bright enough not to believe what people who fear a price correction make up about rents



    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:39 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    My bad. I somehow read 660 when you moved out in 2015, but advertised for 750 now...
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    I'll let you off. I have no idea what the various inbetween stages were! Just wanted to point out that even with maintenance etc. its possible for buying to be cheaper than renting. Its certainly worked out much better for me than renting would have, and I hate to think of others not able to have the choice because they didn't have my sheer good luck (and good judgement in picking sensible properties perhaps, but won't blow my own trumpet too much on that one. )
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:40 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    I`m bright enough never to have paid 750 p.m for a 60k flat and bright enough not to believe what people who fear a price correction make up about rents



    Originally posted by Crashy Time
    I sense I may be wasting my time, but maybe read it again because you've got all the numbers completely wrong. Did you just glance at the post and put them in whatever order that you fancied?
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 13th Jun 17, 9:42 PM
    • 17,365 Posts
    • 15,701 Thanks
    AdrianC
    Just wanted to point out that even with maintenance etc. its possible for buying to be cheaper than renting.
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    Oh, absolutely.

    But not half the price, as was claimed.

    And, even then, that ignores all the other costs a landlord incurs.
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:43 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel


    ALL...?
    Even the high-end/corporate rental market?
    Somewhere like http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-65241611.html ?

    Even those who can afford to pay more for a better property, but don't want to own for whatever reason?
    Somewhere like http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-47209620.html ?

    Where do you draw the line between holiday rentals? I rented what's normally a holiday cottage for four months over winter a few years back.
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    I don't know, that's homework, I'll have to think about it!

    Certainly all housing that is intended to be permanent, full time residences though, yes.
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:43 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    I sense I may be wasting my time, but maybe read it again because you've got all the numbers completely wrong. Did you just glance at the post and put them in whatever order that you fancied?
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel

    Best solution is if you just post a link to the flats and let people have a look?
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:44 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    Best solution is if you just post a link to the flats and let people have a look?
    Originally posted by Crashy Time
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:46 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    In the building where I used to live, I paid less than 250 a month for a flat purchased for around 80,000. The year I moved in, the identical flat next door was rented out for 600pm. I've since moved out but I just checked on Rightmove and those flats are now going for 750pm. If I still lived there I'd have remortgaged and probably be paying even less than that 250, as well as having gained a lot of equity from the rise in value.

    Even when buying isn't instantly cheaper than renting, it usually is in the long term.
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel

    Lots to think about.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 13th Jun 17, 9:47 PM
    • 17,365 Posts
    • 15,701 Thanks
    AdrianC
    Lots to think about.
    Originally posted by Crashy Time
    Give it a go. You might find you like it.
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:47 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    Oh, absolutely.

    But not half the price, as was claimed.

    And, even then, that ignores all the other costs a landlord incurs.
    Originally posted by AdrianC

    Where did he claim half the price?
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 13th Jun 17, 9:47 PM
    • 17,365 Posts
    • 15,701 Thanks
    AdrianC
    I don't know, that's homework, I'll have to think about it!
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    <g>

    Certainly all housing that is intended to be permanent, full time residences though, yes.
    Intended by whom...?
    • Cakeguts
    • By Cakeguts 13th Jun 17, 9:49 PM
    • 4,363 Posts
    • 6,241 Thanks
    Cakeguts
    You're right about flexibility.

    I do think there are people for whom renting is a better option, but I don't think private landlords should be the ones to benefit. Personally I think all rented housing should be council or HA owned rather than so many people having to gamble on individuals who range from fantastic to criminal.
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    I don't think most of our tenants would want to rent from the council or a housing association. In fact one family moved out of a council house and into one of our privately rented houses. A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that people who rent are people who would rent council or housing association houses if they could. The people who rent from us rent because it suits them at that time. There are a lot of people who would probably benefit from social housing but not all. A wide choice of properties is good. We are running a business where the product is living space and we have customers who are tenants. This is no different from the local supermarket that sell food. Not everyone wants to buy the cheapest loaf of bread on offer.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 13th Jun 17, 9:49 PM
    • 17,365 Posts
    • 15,701 Thanks
    AdrianC
    Where did he claim half the price?
    Originally posted by Crashy Time
    At least pretend you're keeping up with the grown-ups' conversation...
    Ultimately something has to be done. Anyone who has been an FTB recently will tell you it is nigh on impossible to compete with cash buyers. It is then incredibly frustrating to see a house you could afford and offered over the asking pride for being let out for double what a mortgage payment would have been.
    Originally posted by LadyL2013
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:50 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel

    Sorry, but a link would give you much more credibility
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:51 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    Oh, absolutely.

    But not half the price, as was claimed.

    And, even then, that ignores all the other costs a landlord incurs.
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    I suppose it depends on whether you just look at the costs on the day of purchase/move in.

    If I still had the flat, say I was paying 230 now, and I'd have over 70k in equity.

    The person next door would be paying 750 to live in the exact same space in the exact same location, without the equity or the security. Even if you take into account the service charge and ground rent I'd still be paying, my monthly cost to live there (before bills) is in fact less than half.

    If the landlord who owned next door bought it at the same time and price I did, especially if they bought with cash, they'd be laughing all the way to the bank!
    • Crashy Time
    • By Crashy Time 13th Jun 17, 9:54 PM
    • 6,061 Posts
    • 2,345 Thanks
    Crashy Time
    At least pretend you're keeping up with the grown-ups' conversation...
    Originally posted by AdrianC

    So you are denying that any landlord ever got double a mortgage payment for a similar flat for rental?
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 13th Jun 17, 9:55 PM
    • 2,664 Posts
    • 7,137 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    I don't think most of our tenants would want to rent from the council or a housing association. In fact one family moved out of a council house and into one of our privately rented houses. A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that people who rent are people who would rent council or housing association houses if they could. The people who rent from us rent because it suits them at that time. There are a lot of people who would probably benefit from social housing but not all. A wide choice of properties is good. We are running a business where the product is living space and we have customers who are tenants. This is no different from the local supermarket that sell food. Not everyone wants to buy the cheapest loaf of bread on offer.
    Originally posted by Cakeguts
    Social housing usually offers solid, well maintained houses at affordable rents. The only reason people don't want to live in them anymore is that there are so few and the demand so high that they tend to go to the neediest and most poverty stricken people in the country, leading to an increased level of social problems and also a fair amount of stigma.

    If that wasn't the case, if all rented housing was social housing, why on earth wouldn't people want it? Why would anybody choose the extra cost, the gamble regarding landlord competency, and reduced security of private?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,233Posts Today

7,228Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin