arnt you the veritable Florence Nightingale!
You would need to transition and allow the markets to adjust ....
House prices rose 7.3% this year, average now almost £250k
- Thread starter HACO
- Start date
- Status
arnt you the veritable Florence Nightingale!
You would need to transition and allow the markets to adjust ....
I don’t claim to be but this is the market. People can’t buy so they need to rent.
if I could sell it easily maybe I would so desperate people can buy it. Reality is no one is going to snap it up based on the market.
What is your proposal to transition ?
Imagine if a significant amount of people in this country were priced out of buying food. Actually you don't need to imagine currently do you. See the outrage over food banks and the rate at which people are being forced to beg for food to feed their children in this country. Sad, in the UK, we've reduced our citizens to begging for help from charitable people, to feed their kids. What a world.
Anyway back to houses... there should be *more* outcry that a significant % of people are paying up to 75% of their income as rent. And no, that does not apply just to London. Cornish people too typically pay between 55% and 75% of their wages on rent.
And in any case, I'm absolutely not against people buying houses, doing them up and then flipping them for a profit. So you can make a profit if you add some value. That's how the world should work. Add value, make money. Build an extension, put in a new kitchen, redecorate, flip, make some profit. All of these add value and are completely fine in my book.
Completely different from BTL tho. The "value" in BTL - as it is allowed to operate in this country - is very disputable. Esp for those landlords who insist on buying up all the basic starter housing they can lay their hands on, and thus forcing people out of ever entering the property market in the first place.
You can blame everybody else in this equation if you like. Blame employers, blame the govt, blame the workers.
But the fact remains - if landlords didn't insist on buying as much basic housing as they could get their hands on (which they do because it's profitable) then charge rents that are multiples of their mortgage, then people wouldn't be bled dry to the point that they will never be able to afford a deposit.
Question: Does paying 2x the average mortgage on rent (to you and others like you) help people to save for a deposit?
Do you actually care if the answer is "No, it keeps them down whilst I profit."
One thing absolutely cannot be disputed: landlords directly benefit when people are locked out of home ownership and locked into renting.
The more people locked out of home ownership the more landlords can be sustained and the greater the rents they can charge.
It would be nice if BTL landlords wouldn't pretend that their interests are not diametrically opposed to the interests of renters who aspire to be home owners.
This.
I don't think people realise that the perk of being able to offset mortgage against property is gone from now on. That profit it now going to the tax man. No relief. Nada.
Landlords either have to just try to pay off the mortgage or raise rent (or both). Looking at the title of this thread this scheme hasn't helped to stop landlords (although it might turn some away now) or reduce house prices. It's just given more money to the tax man.
Well said.
I don't see the value in getting ahead and contributing to a toxic society where people view each other as walking $$$ signs. Because I'd simply rather not be a part of such a society in the first place.
Would rather go live penniless in the wilderness somewhere. As said many times, the only thing tying here is family, or I'd be off. The UK is getting more uncaring day by day, perfectly exemplified by our 100% uncaring government. We all just want to get rich (it seems). The limit of our empathy ends at the walls of our family home.
Im not a politician, I am a dreamer at best and we are just chewing the fat on an online forum.
It would take 10 years for the markets to adjust.
Raising tax from rental income on a sliding scale until the market is balanced.
Marry that up with a NEST style savings taken tax free from wages until first house is purchased. No-opt out. Interest added and can even add a bonus of some description depending on how the markets and society reacts.
Same, my rent is very fair for the area. I respond to issues quickly.
All increasing tax is going to do it give more money to the tax man.
- The biggest perk to BTL (mortgage interest offset) is gone.
- This has been on a steady scale downwards for years - so if landlords were going to react and sell up they would have done it by now.
- There needs to be a balance between profit and providing a service. Make it too unattractive and rental prices get driven up
What doesn’t market balance mean. I think they already got rental income sorted.
All this won’t solve the fundamental issue of supply and demand.
Obviously there are some very charitable views on here which is great. But I think that just because people make some money it doesn’t mean they are money grabbing monsters.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,361
If you live in Cornwall you are priced out because you live in a tourist hotspot. You get the benefit of this and also the downsides. Move if you don't like it.
The problem is mostly down to not building enough new houses compared to the population increase and also under investment in anywhere other than the SE.
I live where houses are cheap. It has advantages and disadvantages. Sure I own a house but there arent as many high paying jobs. Less trains and they are Deisel. Hello we dont even have lights on the motorway in one part. There are more poor people. Things arent as nice. Not loads of fancy restraunts and shops.
When you solve my problems. People in more expensive areas will have thier problems helped as people spread out across the country.
The problem is mostly down to not building enough new houses compared to the population increase and also under investment in anywhere other than the SE.
I live where houses are cheap. It has advantages and disadvantages. Sure I own a house but there arent as many high paying jobs. Less trains and they are Deisel. Hello we dont even have lights on the motorway in one part. There are more poor people. Things arent as nice. Not loads of fancy restraunts and shops.
When you solve my problems. People in more expensive areas will have thier problems helped as people spread out across the country.
Last edited:
Caporegime
I'm not personally saying every landlord is an evil moneygrubber, but to think anything more than 1% got in to it "to provide a needed service" is laughable, everyone who does it, does it to make money/invest for their future, how they go about doing that (good landlord or evil landlord) doesn't detract from the reason for starting.
Associate
That is fair, but other people will correct market gaps.
I bought a house intending to live in it. Ended up moving away and can sell for either a 1/3 more than I paid for it. Or can rent it out and get my 1/3 back in 5.5 years. I'm not going to say no to those figures...
Market balance means the links between renting:buying:building:investing. Such a massive change would need time to settle into the markets and people to decide how to proceed be it sell, reinvest, turn to building etc. The market would change and would need to time to adjust.
It would address part of the supply and demand model. As investors buy the properties that people want to buy, this adds to demand, increasing prices, people need bigger deposits and mortgages and therefore need to rent for longer creating a market for landlords to exploit the initial buyers looking to get on the ladder. It's a racket.
But yes, there also needs to be innovation in building. Pre-fab tech' could be encouraged, reducing the cost and amount of time and effort needed to erect a house. as personal preference I would also like to see green innovation pushed, but that isn't part of supply demand issue.
Planning needs to be shaken up and more land needs to be made available.
You still need workers to work in Cornwall. They can't all commute from Newcastle or Slough or something.
And the jobs in Cornwall that serve the tourists when they come aren't well paid.
With housing that's unaffordable for vast swathes of workers in Cornwall, your solution is for them all to move away?
There would be nobody left to serve those tourists
Or care for the elderly (another low paid but essential role).It's just not a solution at all.
This is where a lot of landlords are. And needs to be discouraged with tax IMO. you COULD sell and put the property back into the market and help solve the problem, but you have CHOSEN to compound the problem for monetary gain. I would do exactly the same. This is where the government should step in and adjust what is happening.
There was a great meme near the beginning of 2020 lockdown where it was saying something along the lines "Look at all these people buying up the hand sanitiser and PPE and charging a fortune for it, now imagine that was housing. Oh wait."
Perhaps if Asda was buying up all of the food and denying others access to it by inflating prices out of reach of most normal people... Try again..
It is in question. I'm questioning why you are so quick to call people entitled, when you are so blind to the fact that are you acting supremely entitled by making money out of other people's basic human right. And at the same time being part of the biggest social-economic problem in the world today.
What would you have done if you were me then? I bought a flat to live in, which I did for a number of years. My partner and I then decided we'd move in together, into her flat (as it's in a better area) which she has a mortgage on.
Should I have sold my place immediately to provide a home for someone else to purchase, despite not knowing if it would work with my partner and I?
Should I have left it empty, continuing to pay the mortgage and increased insurance costs and not providing anyone with a home?
Should I rent it out, for a fair price, and do what I can to ensure the tenant is happy?
Something else?
I accept there are bad, money grabbing, landlords out there whose only concern is money. But there are plenty of, almost 'accidental', landlords that have a property they let out for little profit and let it out as a home.
We need to take away the mindset in this country that property is an asset, an investment, a means of generating regular (continual) income.
Property (residential) should be about servicing the needs of the population, not the desires of landlords (to make some nice cash).
This one. Then when it doesn't work, buy another. As if this was the norm' prices would be more manageable and better houses accessible.
The government should make this the normal route with a taxation system. You could build in a small buffer say around 6 months.
You probably won't like this, but in my world I'd tax you heavily if you left the property empty.
I'd also tax you on any rental income so that you could break even but not a whole lot more.
Your choice would then be to sell up, or keep the property (rented out) for the security of still owning it, but not making any kind of profit on it.
Then you would in future be able to sell if things went well with your GF, or move back in if they didn't. But you wouldn't be making profit from the tenants in the meantime.
But you'd be virtually forced to have those tenants or face crippling taxes on the empty property.
Rent caps (etc) would stop you making any kind of significant profit. And other regulations designed purely to protect the tenants.
To me that's better then you basically becoming an "accidental" landlord, but deciding even after you married your GF that you'd still like to keep the other place, because the rental income was really quite nice... then before you know it you're a landlord with intentions of buying another, and maybe another...
- Status