Council houses owning brand new cars?

Careful! You're spoiling the Greedy Bastard Landlord trope.

When we decided to sell our rental we offered it first to our tenant, at slightly below the market value, because he'd been such a good tenant and he desperately wanted to buy it. We were happy to take a hit on our profit to help him onto the housing ladder. But unfortunately he couldn't get a mortgage offer in place.

But, yeah, we're all just evil gits, of course.

Yes, yes I am. Because the young woman concerned is single, had animals that she loves that many landlords would reject, and works in a minimum wage job. I know her - not well - but enough to know that she wouldn't trash anything deliberately - and trust her to keep it in a reasonable condition, despite the animals. She hasn't let me down and she knows she's landed on her feet. It works for us both.

Somewhat ironic, considering you called @Macaroni46 unlucky landlord friend 'greedy' and crowed that her rental property was absolutely trashed by the tenant? Plus, despite me clearly being sarcastic, you were very quick to say that, yes, all landlords were venal, money grabbing bastards.

And if providing a very good standard of rental property at a slightly below market rate price, whilst fostering good relationships with tenants, makes me smug, then so be it. All tenants should be so lucky.

What a smug, self satisfied person you sound. There’s really no need for personal insults, is there?

Sorry, is there something inherently virtuous about being on the bones of your arse? We never evicted any of our tenants, and I don't 'think' I was a good landlord, I know I was.

Obviously there are bad landlords out there, and some dreadful stories. But it's incredibly tiresome to hear this constant litany that we're all evil bastards. We sold up because it just stopped being viable, as did several other (good, responsible) landlords we knew. From the tenants POV this can only be a negative result, fewer decent rental properties now available and fewer decent landlords.

What an embittered, resentful person you sound like.

Oh good, i was starting to think you were a LL on the bones of your arse! for LLs with a mortgage? welcome to real world business - interest rates can go up too but whats the betting that rents wont fall when interest rates drop again??

I was answering the wide spread lie that being a BTL is some sort of money loss scheme and LLs are doing a social good and not lining their own pockets.

No matter how good a LL you might think you are, at some point a LL is likely going to evict someone from their home, through no fault of their own, a council will not do this.

Having witnessed the stress a good friend of mine went through after being evicted, after 21 years of a good tenant/LL relationship (she lost her hair and became quite ill) its not something i'd like to be party too.

I'm also seeing this almost weekly on the local FB page, LLs evicting/selling, people desperate to stay in the area or just have a roof over their heads but can get nothing, demand is massively outstripping supply and no council housing.

Glad you recognise that.

Nope. 19% of new leased cars are Motability. Not even bothering to respond to the rest of your post because the same kind of ableist shite appears daily on MN

We didn't have a mortgage on our rental property, so yes it provided an income and appreciated in value. Yes, and...? We all live in a capitalist society and that is never going to change.

We were extremely careful about who we rented to and if our tenants were good then we really looked after them.

Can't remember if it was this thread or the other. Private landlords what is included in the rent?

Without a Mortgage, yes it can be very profitable, even charging below market rent - plus you have, over time, an appreciating asset.

Average rents outside of London are £1350 pm.

My home town in the SW, avg is £1240, no one can tell me that its not profitable, thats £14900 per year.

Tax @20% minus expenses, such as insurances and a yearly gas cert, account for at most 30%. EICR is every 5 years.

Yes i know you can be unlucky and get a shitty tenant but thats not usual.

Well, you must be letting it out for peanuts.

Quite. Clearly we're all just venal, money obsessed, bastards who are sniggering all the way to the bank [rolls eyes]

Or does that not fit with your nasty evil landlord rhetoric?

Surely the landlord takes responsibility and insures anything hat belongs to them?

Not if you rent it out furnished/part furnished. Obviously you're going to insure furniture and fittings that you own as the landlord.

Surely the tenant insures the contents.

No, it really isn’t a get rich scheme. I inherited my buy to let. I hold on to it because it’s a bungalow and smaller than the family home. I will logically retire to it in a few years. It makes sense to rent it out until the day comes I need it. I rent to a young woman I know at a very reasonable rent. She’s a fab tenant. It works well for us both. After expenses, I make around £100 a month.

And contents insurance. I never suggested profit shouldn’t be taxable.

Oh please do stop with the ill informed, inverse snobbery. Have you ever actually been a private landlord? Of course you haven't.

We have and we were damned good ones. We had good relationships with our tenants, kept the houses in excellent repair and freshly decorated for each new one. We charged a very reasonable rent and were flexible with our tenants.

When we decided to sell (it was no longer viable to be a landlord) we offered the house at slightly below market value to the tenant in appreciation for what an excellent tenant he had been. Sadly he couldn't get a mortgage though.

Yes, there are bad landlords but equally there are very good ones too. We rented privately for 11 years between leaving university and buying our first home and all our landlords were really good.

That’s what happens when you’re greedy and treat housing as a get rich quick scheme. Hopefully she’s learned her lesson.

You’re wasting your time @Pickledpoppetpickle
MN hates landlords. An acquaintance of mine ended up working two jobs trying to pay the mortgage on both her own home and the rental property. Couldn’t sell the rental as the tenant was classed as vulnerable and had trashed the place. Took months to rehome him. Whole place needed gutting costing her thousands plus the interest on the missed mortgage payments.

Council tenants in work pay rent. People on benefits don't. And council estates would become really problematic if everyone who lived there was on benefits. This is a huge issue for councils - it becomes a vicious cycle as the only people who will move in have no option and the deprivation keeps people stuck. This was a huge problem in Glasgow in the 80s. There was a big tower block called the Red Road Flats. I was a student in Glasgow then and the council offered flats there to students as they couldn't get people to move in. My boyfriend took one - it didnt last because of the antisocial behaviour all around. No local authority wants an area to become like this. It has to be mixed to work.

Benefits the state obviously. If the state is currently paying the private rental of a family because no social housing is available, the state would financially gain if social housing is made available (via building or if a family that can afford to move on does so) for that family to move into.