To think that Landlords have a bad name.

Lol. When I despise things, I don’t need reminding that I do. Genuinely hilarious.

You said you despise them.

You recently posted,

‘I just used to shrug and accept it, but quietly despise LLs - and still do, as a group.‘

I’ll take the criticism for contradicting myself on my view of landlords in two threads. Though I do think researching people is weird and creepy - and IIRC - against MN rules, not that I’m bothered by that.

’Lying’ is wrong. Inconsistent I’ll accept.

If you have anything worthwhile to say on the subject of landlords do go ahead.

You lied about not hating them, so what other bollocks have you told on the thread? 🤔

How embarrassing for you.

Top marks for searching! Bit odd but fair play.

I withdraw my earlier comment in this thread that I don’t hate landlords as a group. The last few posts (not yours, assuming you’re a landlord: you’ve just been assiduous in your research) have reminded me that I do in fact have an intense dislike of private landlords as a class of trader. They are, often, unwilling to accept any criticism or suggestion for change. And of course many are thoroughly bad and unfit to offer housing to anyone, as I’ve already said in this thread. Not every one of them of course: some will be very good.

None of that has anything to do with reform of the housing market.

You said you despise them.

You recently posted,

‘I just used to shrug and accept it, but quietly despise LLs - and still do, as a group.‘

As it happens I don’t hate private landlords as a group. I have been entirely civil to the OP despite her prickliness.

My irritation was at a halfwit (landlord) who called me a liar.

I just think the system should be reformed.

It is interesting, though, how defensive and how ready to insult others landlords are on this thread.

It really is.

Yes. @WhatsTheUseOfWorrying clearly hates landlords as a group and it’s coming through loud and clear.

Where have I said that stringent regulation does not have a place.

Your "proposal" would only allow large companies to have properties to rent out and most slum landlords are the ones with huge portfolios.

You would take away a property from someone a that could cost them their families home because of you believe that only large companies can afford, because anyone that was told that you have to sell at a huge discount would not sell, just look at compulsory purchase buys at the market rent, plus pay all associated costs. I can assure you most of the public would not allow this to happen because their houses could be next.

2 of our properties are rented out for less than the mortgage (which we can afford to pay without a tenant).

To add to the views on removing properties from the market, a lot of people will argue this doesn’t happen and landlords are martyrs for providing homes for people.

This isn’t true.

When we were buying our first home we were repeatedly outbid in auctions by buy-to-let investors on houses we would have afforded. So yes, you are stopping people from buying their own homes.

I think there should be structural change in the housing market.

Being called a liar on a thread by a poster (with you as a hanger-on) whose contributions have before that simply been vacuous insults might explain my ire.

Yes. @WhatsTheUseOfWorrying clearly hates landlords as a group and it’s coming through loud and clear.

That you have said that you are above getting personal, and you have no issue with LLs per se, and then I can see that you are a LL and how you make your money.

I could see that you were just trying to keep a lid on your true feelings.

Do you think barristers are inevitably not Tories?- what an incredibly strange question, for someone that has quoted quite a few times how they want people to think they vote, to show that they are not socialist.

You tried too hard.

That you have said that you are above getting personal, and you have no issue with LLs per se, and then I can see that you are a LL and how you make your money.

I could see that you were just trying to keep a lid on your true feelings.

Do you think barristers are inevitably not Tories?- what an incredibly strange question, for someone that has quoted quite a few times how they want people to think they vote, to show that they are not socialist.

You tried too hard.

I have been waiting for this comment, all the BS about market economy and I am a Tory.

You have tripped yourself up.

God help your clients if you are a KC, its laughable. I can just see you in chambers.

I wouldnt bother arguing with that poster. Its just someone pretending to be legally qualified 😂🤣

I knew it ! Those that call themselves "lawyer" are simply not properly qualified and hide behind that ambiguous title 😂

Where have I said that stringent regulation does not have a place.

Your "proposal" would only allow large companies to have properties to rent out and most slum landlords are the ones with huge portfolios.

You would take away a property from someone a that could cost them their families home because of you believe that only large companies can afford, because anyone that was told that you have to sell at a huge discount would not sell, just look at compulsory purchase buys at the market rent, plus pay all associated costs. I can assure you most of the public would not allow this to happen because their houses could be next.

2 of our properties are rented out for less than the mortgage (which we can afford to pay without a tenant).

I’m not going into that much detail. It’s irrelevant. I am an experienced practitioner. I know the law.

Their comments are not childish.

Your comments and vision have been a little outlandish and unworkable.

So much for your Tory leaning views, you and most posters on here can see what you are trying to do, if you think that LA will be able to afford to buy, maintain and then sell the properties on to tenants when they can not even afford provision for SEN kids, pick up bins or fund SS, then yes you are away with the fairies.