I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating.
About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. ( Maidstone area ). When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan. He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment.
Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers.
I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit.
Absolutely agree. It’s too late for many as swathes of new builds have been bought by foreign owners. We need either an outright law banning it, or the gvt to tax the hell out of it so as to make an unviable investment.
Yeah but I'm about to go to the supermarket and get myself lunch. Sadly by 2pm I won't be able to get on the property ladder as well. I'm 36, in a dual income household with no children, and owning anything in London that isn't a miserable box is a remote prospect. Something is fucked, and just like in football it's fucked in the favour of the existingly wealthy. And you people wonder why we're angry?
I can sympathize with this. I’m only a few years older than you and last year bought my first house with my missus. We were lucky in that we had the deposit and it was more than 10% of the price of the property, but so many just cannot get there now (and yes, many have worked hard in the past doing a 100 jobs a week, selling lemonade and not spaffed all their income on Starbucks), but the game has changed significantly since then and despite saving money and not getting a credit card etc are good principles in life, without some sort of inherited chunk of cash, or a very, very well paid job, a deposit is beyond most people.
The challenges still remain for those of us who are new to house ownership as well, namely seeing your mortgage go up by £1200 a month, and that again, is a sign of a broken property market, exploited by the wealthy and powerful. There will be many repossessions next year, believe me
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Farmers have to buy stuff, landlords only buy stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
Yes supermarkets provide a service, they bring food from farmers to us extremely conveniently. Why should they not profit from this? A landlord hasn’t built the home (usually) themselves. It’s literally just an investment to make more money out of what they have.
But they’ve bought something that others cant / don’t want to, that’s the service they provide.
Along with all the maintenance, servicing and risks involved. I didn’t buy property here for years and years as I always thought the bubble would burst, so was more than happy to pay various landlords rent.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on? It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Farmers have to buy stuff, landlords only buy stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
that's not unique to landlords though, it's for anyone that owns a property.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Farmers have to buy stuff, landlords only buy stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
Farmers have to replace roofs as well. Costs will be far higher for farmers after the mortgage has been paid off.
One man's greed is another's return on investment - risk/reward. Nobody is seriously saying that there are many, if any, private BTL landlords who are doing it for some societal good. Like it or not we live in a supply/demand capitalist system which is predominately outside of state ownership. There will always be differing opinions based on personal circumstances - those priced out of the buy market, those who rent privately owned property, those who have a mortgage, those who have paid off their mortgage. For some BTL it is a pension, for others a (failed) get rich quick scheme.
If anyone is to blame it is not private landlords (we've always had them and in reality less now than 50-60 years) it is successive governments for failing to invest in social housing, failing to call to task private builders sitting on land banks or in building affordable housing and a whole host of other factors that have lead to a dysfunctional housing infrastructure.
Arguments about this will be circular in nature based on personal circumstances so best maybe to chill a little. Enjoy
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Farmers have to buy stuff, landlords only buy stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
that's not unique to landlords though, it's for anyone that owns a property.
I have been trying to format an answer to that, I mean, where do I start?
That has literally nothing to do with the point I am making or the theme of the thread.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Farmers have to buy stuff, landlords only buy stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
that's not unique to landlords though, it's for anyone that owns a property.
I have been trying to format an answer to that, I mean, where do I start?
That has literally nothing to do with the point I am making or the theme of the thread.
Not sure how it isn't. Far better for something like that to happen at a property you rent out than the one you live it.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
I do get what you are saying KA, but playing devils advocate, food and water are human rights, so why should supermarkets and water companies make huge profits?
Wouldn’t it be possible to introduce rent controls by law? For example within reasonable parameters base it on square feet, or facilities, or the average wage, or anything that can be related to realistic affordability. And by affordability I don’t mean two people having to each work a 70 hour week just to pay the rent. I would guess that somebody or a group of on the ball people could come up with a sensible algorithm that could establish fair rent controls.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
I do get what you are saying KA, but playing devils advocate, food and water are human rights, so why should supermarkets and water companies make huge profits?
Water companies shouldn't, but they do. I can shop around for cheaper food but I can't do the same for water.
Didn't we have rent controls then got rid of them in the 80s?
Yes, although the responsibilities of the tenant and landlord were very different to now. We still have one last tenant on those old rates, generally the houses are in very poor condition as a lot is the tenants responsibility and they don't bother.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Because both are making a profit from providing an essential service, so surely both must be greedy? Why is ok for a supermarket to make a profit, but a landlord not?
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
I do get what you are saying KA, but playing devils advocate, food and water are human rights, so why should supermarkets and water companies make huge profits?
Water companies shouldn't, but they do. I can shop around for cheaper food but I can't do the same for water.
You know MORALLY. In reality - when all is said and done.
What is right about someone being able to sign a bit of paper for a house and then getting someone else to find someone else (lets call them a victim) who cant sign a piece of paper for 25 years and them then paying £300,000 as a guess amount over that period and then the first person (lets call them the parasite) OWNING the house outright and telling the person that paid for it to get out.
Its basically bullshit isnt it? You know when you actually think about it.
because they take on the risk, you know, the risk they don't want to have to actually deal with when it goes tits up.
Landlords do carry the risk though. The property and/or mortgage are in their name - the buck stops with them.
To manage risk you either accept it, mitigate it or transfer it.
Clearly at the moment that translates to increasing rent to cover increased mortgage costs for some landlords who can do that & still retain a tenant.
Its not immoral unless they have found some way to demand & secure a rent way in excess of the market rate.
If any investment rises in value someone is (relatively) 'losing'.
As others have said what will drive down rents being so expensive is more being provided by central/local government where market rates will not fully apply. The economic cycle is not in your and other 'renters' favour currently but will likely change in the future. How soon is a very different matter.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Because both are making a profit from providing an essential service, so surely both must be greedy? Why is ok for a supermarket to make a profit, but a landlord not?
Profit margins at a supermarket are around 1-3%. If landlords were only making that the situation would be far different.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
I do get what you are saying KA, but playing devils advocate, food and water are human rights, so why should supermarkets and water companies make huge profits?
Water companies shouldn't, but they do. I can shop around for cheaper food but I can't do the same for water.
I have to say "you can't be renting if you want to have an opinion on what renting is like" is quite a position, but there we go.
I am making an assumption here, but I would imagine the majority of our fellow lifers have rented in the past? I certainly did from the age of 17 to 24.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
In my (well, our) case we pay tax on income from our property and what's left we go out and spend at supermarkets, restaurants, on travel, etc. Greasing the wheels of the economy as you rightly put it. I am sure many small landlords do the same. I have no pension, we made a decision a long time ago that property would be my pension, and made sacrifices to pay off the mortgage early (and stay afloat when we had a property each when we met, both with negative equity and both paying interest that climbed to 15% at one point), we made sure that we had insurance cover should there be health problems (which paid off) and yes, we have inherited a bit. I don't see why we shouldn't use that to create an income that we pay tax on and put back into the economy?
Do you have the same attitude to people making money from stocks and shares, ISAs etc or just bank interest, KA?
No, because people who invest in stocks etc understand the risks and it's on them if it goes tits up, stocks and shares aren't a fundamental for people to living a very basic existnce, either. For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude, and it's an investment, not a service which ultimately *is* based off greed - ie i have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value.
"I have some money, i want to have more money, so i invest in things that i think will go up in value." - isn't that just like investing in stocks and shares then? The value of property can go down - as I experienced in the 90s, and wrote about in my previous post. You wrote: "For some reason landlords don't seem to have the same attitude". I am wondering what you are basing that claim on?
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
Providing a human right is not a service imo. I'm not saying people shouldn't pay rent, or that it's bad to be a landlord. But, as you say, it *is* an investment, not a service.
I do get what you are saying KA, but playing devils advocate, food and water are human rights, so why should supermarkets and water companies make huge profits?
Water companies shouldn't, but they do. I can shop around for cheaper food but I can't do the same for water.
Seriously. What's the matter with some people? I'm 49 with no pension. So if I decided in the next couple of years to buy a 2nd property as a pension, some would be happy to see it go tits up for me.
I personally don't see a problem with buying a second property outright and then letting it out at a fair price.
I do have an issue with taking out a mortgage and expecting tenants to pay for it.
So all rental properties need to be mortgage free - that's going to work, NOT! Who decides a fair price? They tried something in Scotland that just made it worse for tenants. A fair price is market price.
You do realise a lot of businesses you buy from take out loans and by doing business with them you are paying off their mortgage loan
Right, I agree. But don’t become dewy eyed when the market turns on landlords who’ve overleveraged themselves and expect tenants to pick up the tab. Having your cake and eating it comes to mind - something for nothing.
Who is going 'dewy-eyed' about anything?. If you mean by 'overleveraged themselves' is this exactly the same as many owner/occupiers due to amongst other things, the worldwide economy? Don't be surprised when rents go up - and tenants have no choice about it and some of the reasons rents have gone up because the government has passed more costs on to the landlords.
And then the landlord passes it on to the tenant? What kind hearted people they are. If you can't afford to own a property and rent it out, sell it. It's quite simple - it's the market.
Many more would have to sell up than currently are, which would be even worse for tenants - I'm not surprised you aren't able to purchase your own place if you don't understand the fundamentals even if you must have predicted the end in the recent low interest period that so many others didn't! I know lots of people in their 20s buying a property
I don't know why you simply don't understand the rules of supply and demand apply to both tenants and landlords. If scores of landlords sell their properties then supply outreaches demand, prices go down, tenants who want to buy that otherwise couldn't afford to buy can now afford to buy - the whole social contract begins to work again. There is obviously the problem of foreign "investors" and domestic investo- i mean landlords then hoovering up the cheaper properties - but that's where maybe a fat stamp duty on a second property could be useful to then make it unprofitable for greedy landlords and investors. This extra stamp duty could then be funelled into building social housing. I know people who've purchased their own property, but they're either doing extremely well in life or have moved to areas that bring their commute up over an hour or more. As many have said on this thread, the current system is unsustainable and delaying the inevitable (prices dropping) is just roping more and more people of my age into the hellscape of negative equity in the future.
I'm getting a vibe that kentaddick is a tenant, who doesn't earn enough money to buy his own property.
lots of people are in that position - that is not humorous - it's just unfortunately true.
The thing that sticks in my craw a little as someone in that position - I can just about afford to pay the monthly mortgage for the place I live in, as a renter - and in fact that is what I am doing - but apparently i'm not trusted enough to get a mortgage - but I can pay someone elses off and nobody sees the issue.
It's a bit sick tbh - the system seems kinda set up against me.
edit for clarity - 9 years of renting thus far. Never missed a single rent payment. seen my rent rise by 25 -50 quid a month each year in that time, (until recently) for a one bed flat. After the latest rise i requested to hand in my notice and planned to go back to parents - my (decent) landlord called me (first time in nine years i've even had to speak to the guy) and asked me what he needed to do to keep me in the place.
Yeah it was clearly meant as some kind of dig, but the majority of people of my generation (>50%) are now renters, it just comes across as hopelessly out of touch.
One of the craziest threads i've seen. Rents are high because are willing to pay them, people can't get on the ladder because they spend too much time on Charlton Life, buying property is like investing in crypto. WTF? Bet there's other gems that i've missed.
It's a bit weird, I'm still yet to be told why some one would become a landlord other than accumulating wealth off the back of some one else (their tenant).
I simply don't understand how you cannot understand the situation and think that landlords selling up means rents will go down. It's what is happening now and rents are definitely not coming down. If there weren't landlords, there wouldn't be properties to rent. Most business 'accumulate wealth off the back of some one else'!
The idea is not to have rents go down, but prices of properties to go down. Heaven forbid it'll be more affordable to buy your own property than live in some one else's. If there were no longer any private landlords, then i guess the state would have to look at providing social housing, again - heaven forbid..!
Most businesses don't trade on a fundamental human need that then soaks up >50% of their customers wages. Although thinking about it in these terms sums up the attitude of landlords, it's just a business to suck up some wealth.
This is the point most people are missing. You're not trading crypto.
I've spent the last day or so being told that being a landlord has nothing to do with greed and sponging wealth off people, and now i'm told it is and it's fine because "it's a business".
Because you think it is greed but it isn't. No one is 'sponging'. You are entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make you correct. Am off to do some more work now
I'm going to ask this for what feels like the tenth time, how is it not greed? How is it not sponging when you're contributing nothing to the productivity of the country? and, something i've definitely asked before - Why do people become landlords in the first place?
Do you hold supermarkets in the same contempt?
It's pretty clear when you buy food you're paying people for their productivity. You pay the supermarket for your food and they pay their suppliers, farmers etc. There's a much wider economy around it which helps grease the wheels of the country's economy. What productivity is a landlord contributing?
The landlord is proving access to a home which you can't or don't wish to buy for the long term.
It is a reasonable that the landlord provides that 'service' and makes a profit as he carries all the risk - mortgage costs, no tenants , bad tenants, maintenance etc.
All we are really discussing is the market rate of rents which has grown hugely & to a level that (at least in London) isn't sustainable for many.
We either rely on market dynamics of supply & demand to push rents back down or some better legislation designed that makes the cost 'fairer'. Its not wrong to be a landlord per se.
I'm not saying it is, but lets be realistic, is it morally right to have an investment that is fundamental to people's living whilst that is completely out the reach of their tenants?
Change tenants for customers and the same point applies to a supermarket, they’re profiting from the ultimate fundamental things in life.
They could service all their suppliers at cost, if it wasn’t for pure greed, apparently.
I don't get the analogy. There are landlords who own a property outright so only have to pay utility bills and upkeep, whereas farmers work on the farm and have to keep buying things like livestock to keep the farms running. Furthermore people aren't paying half of their wages or more at the supermarket each week.
Because both are making a profit from providing an essential service, so surely both must be greedy? Why is ok for a supermarket to make a profit, but a landlord not?
Profit margins at a supermarket are around 1-3%. If landlords were only making that the situation would be far different.
Drop that to zero and how many wouldn’t need those foodbanks? Either investing for profit is greed, or it’s not.
Comments
The challenges still remain for those of us who are new to house ownership as well, namely seeing your mortgage go up by £1200 a month, and that again, is a sign of a broken property market, exploited by the wealthy and powerful. There will be many repossessions next year, believe me
Don't get me wrong, I can see your point - it's all about scale - but why is it "only" in one case and not the other? But expenditure is expenditure, no?
I "only" have to buy a new roof if the old one wears out... But that's maybe 18 months income gone overnight. You can't insure for wear and tear.
It could be argued that I am providing the "service" of putting a roof over someone's head?
Anyway, in order not to be an ogre, and not be a pauper when I retire, what should I do to retrieve the situation and become a good guy again?
If anyone is to blame it is not private landlords (we've always had them and in reality less now than 50-60 years) it is successive governments for failing to invest in social housing, failing to call to task private builders sitting on land banks or in building affordable housing and a whole host of other factors that have lead to a dysfunctional housing infrastructure.
Arguments about this will be circular in nature based on personal circumstances so best maybe to chill a little. Enjoy
That has literally nothing to do with the point I am making or the theme of the thread.
For example within reasonable parameters base it on square feet, or facilities, or the average wage, or anything that can be related to realistic affordability.
And by affordability I don’t mean two people having to each work a 70 hour week just to pay the rent.
I would guess that somebody or a group of on the ball people could come up with a sensible algorithm that could establish fair rent controls.
Yes, although the responsibilities of the tenant and landlord were very different to now. We still have one last tenant on those old rates, generally the houses are in very poor condition as a lot is the tenants responsibility and they don't bother.
To manage risk you either accept it, mitigate it or transfer it.
Clearly at the moment that translates to increasing rent to cover increased mortgage costs for some landlords who can do that & still retain a tenant.
Its not immoral unless they have found some way to demand & secure a rent way in excess of the market rate.
If any investment rises in value someone is (relatively) 'losing'.
As others have said what will drive down rents being so expensive is more being provided by central/local government where market rates will not fully apply. The economic cycle is not in your and other 'renters' favour currently but will likely change in the future. How soon is a very different matter.
many, many landlords won’t be amassing excessive wealth at all. It’s just a ridiculous blanket statement.