what if, everyone is only allowed to buy their own home, no more buy to let, what happen then?

[happyfishcoco]

just a hypothetical question.

I am very curious.
as some people cannot afford a house and blame the landlords.
And they are very happy that nowadays landlords are selling up their houses because of the interest rate going up. They think this will make house prices go down and become affordable.

SO, is that true?
from an economic perspective how would it be, if the UK government do not allow people buy to let?
(also not allow the company to do so.)

where do people live?
Why gov cannot have more affordable houses for people?

Where I live private landlords are not big bad wolves, because there is so little privately rented accommodation and next to no social housing either. People are desperate for private landlords but rents are low because wages are low, so it's not really worthwhile.

If I was choosing a landlord I wouldn't be bothered if they were a professional landlord or an amateur landlord. I'd just want a decent human being. I've had a professional landlord before who owned multiple properties. He was the worst landlord I've ever had. Equally I'm sure some people have had some appalling amateur landlords too.

It is a total mess I am selling my BTLs now after government tinkering section 24 and 21 anyone - I have been a landlord for 25 years. Hamptons estimate 28000 landlords leaving the market every month where will
people live an yes corporate landlords charging market rent not subsidised housing like councils or HAS

Eh? Why shouldn't a landlord have the mortgage covered and money left when renting out properties? How would that work?

Well, if that had been the rule when I was younger, and there was no property to rent:

I would have had nowhere to live in my second year of university.
I would have had nowhere to live upon leaving university, so wouldn’t have been able to take up my job in London. I would have had to move back in with my parents in an area with fewer job opportunities.

DH and I would have both had nowhere to live when we first married. We probably wouldn’t have been able to afford to buy a house in the city we were living in, but more crucially, we didn’t actually plan to settle there long-term anyway. Maybe we would have bought a house, settled there and still be living there.

Instead we have had the opportunity to follow job opportunities around the globe. We’ve rented in numerous cities, then moved on. We rented before finally buying a house as it was a completely new area to us.

Renting and home ownership fulfil different needs, and both should be available.

But what is realistic about repairs? Tenants often get a better deal than homeowners in that respect, it one of the benefits of renting.

We own our house it's lovely and a good size however it is also likely a 10year project. Currently if you want to use the toilet in one off the bathrooms you have to turn on the shower after you flush it or it doesn't stop flushing. We own it, I could fix it but don't see the point as if we don't move that space will be part of a bigger second bedroom. MN would have any tenant calling the council if we rented it out.....wonder if I could call the council on DH not fixing it!

Over the years have seen us live with no kitchen cupboard doors (they all fell off), single brick walls, no carpets as they had flees when we moved in. Winter 2020 was fun no boiler for 2 weeks in January followed by a garage door that didn't open or if it did had to be forced back onto the runners, the best one was this house when we moved in the electrics were so bad if you turned on the sockets the lights dimmed!

The dream is something isolated, Victorian or Edwardian so I fully expect damp and having to run the heating October to April. Imagine MN attitude if we were tenants in it. MN has the perception tenants expect new build luxury and to never have to move at short notice (DH had us moving with 1 weeks notice last time).

Where would students live in university towns?
What would people do with their house if they had to work abroad for a year or two? Just let it sit empty?
I think It’s holiday homes/second homes that cause a bigger issue, a pretty village near us is virtually uninhabited Monday - Thursday.

I needed to rent asap when I split up
with abusive XH. I couldn’t buy as I was still on our mortgage so then would be a second home owner liable for capital gains tax

I think what’s really missing from the UK market is secure, long-term private rentals at a reasonable cost.

I’d like to see rentals fall into 3 categories:

Social housing provided for as long as it’s needed, for life if needed, but to be reviewed as and when circumstances change
Long-term rentals that are basically a private version of current social housing - restricted to landlords being companies rather than individuals, and company could make a profit, but there would be controls on things like rent increases and extortionate profits.
Short-term rentals - like the existing rental market, and available to individuals, but it would be a much smaller market as anyone who wanted or needed to rent long-term would use one of the other options.

Is there a reason why rental caps couldn't be introduced? Prices could be set by county/borough in line with that region's average wages. You would need to ensure there are no loopholes for 'optional' add-on charges that try to play the system.
I don't think removing rental is a solution as it is the right choice in a number of situations, but neither is allowing LLs to push up house prices then shoulder none of that cost themselves and simply push it onto the renter.

@AllegroConMoto but who is paying for this utopia?

My local council has been in the news recently because the quality of their social housing was appalling. Black mould and damp everywhere, and despite the tenants regularly complaining, nothing was ever done. It wasn't until it was featured on prime time national news that anything was fixed.

It is not a given that corporate, social or council landlords would be any better than a private landlord.

Companies building to invest - some of the bigger pension funds are already starting to do this, so no reason it couldn’t take off. There’s a lot to be said for a reliable return, even if it’s not going to be exciting.

@AllegroConMoto that now tho what the OP wants is to push house prices down who going to want to invest then? That's before you consider they are likely absentee landlords paying a firm to run the properties at the highest margin possible as they don't intend selling just getting the next tenant in.

You need to rethink as you are contradicting yourself!

If letting a property should be a means to live (your contention) then the LL would HAVE to charge enough rent to cover all costs, plus some profit to live on!

No-one is going to let a property making a loss every month. That would be stupid. Where are they going to get the shortfall from? Pull it out of their arse?

Have another think.

And I willake the point that gets overlooked on these threads.

BTL mortgages are (mostly) interest only. So no-one is buying anyone a house.

I rented two properties before buying. Both landlords were great. Things were fixed when needed, they left me to my own devices, one was happy for me to paint if I wanted to, neither of them tried to take money from my deposit. There are some amateur landlords out there but the two I rented from had several properties each and the experience (and funds) to see the value in maintaining them. My sister's council flat is an absolute pit in comparison.

When I was finally able to buy it was only because I met my DH who had a flat to sell for us to move to a house together. Otherwise I'd still be relying on renting from a landlord. I couldn't afford to maintain a property on top of a mortgage and the usual bills by myself.

The reality is REITs. All the stock would be bought by a management company that passes the profits to the holders. Definitely wouldn't make it cheaper or better! The issue is the lack of supply, it makes no real difference who owns the limited supply, it'll stay expensive for as long as demand outstrips supply.

i so do not follow.

I want to stay 1 night in nice village. I want a cheap bed in not-shared property. I use AirBnB. Would this not be allowed under OP's scheme, or would social housing cover one night stops, or do I need to only have a hotel/full BnB option.

I want to sell my home & take my time deciding what/where to buy next. Would a social housing scheme house me, is that right?

Council Housing! Used to be a respectable way to live on a low income

That BBC documentary on the current housing crisis is a real eye opener. No long term thinking in any of the government housing policies, Labour or Conservative.

When Martin Lewis was talking about the rise of 'property porn' on tv and the correlation with the rise in BTL landlords, he wasn't wrong. Homes under the hammer and Sarah Beeny have a lot to answer for!

We haven't learnt a thing from the CDO crisis in 2008. We just repackaged the problems.

I really hate this myth that gets perpetuated on every thread about LL. I know 72 LL only 2 of them have a repayment mortgage so only 2/72 renters paying off mortgages for LL. Most LL mortgages are Interest Only so not paying off any mortgage.

There are loads of properties for sale on Rightmove. There is no shortage of properties to buy for FTB's. What prevents many people buying a house is lack of deposit or they can't pass the test of salary multiples. Most LL buy with Interest Only mortgages. This helps keep the rent lower because the LL only had to cover I test on the mortgage, maintenance and mandatory safety checks with a small profit. If a FTB bought the same house with a repayment mortgage they would be paying far more out each month as not just interest to cover and liable for all maintenance and repairs.

Which, if you think about it is actually a really bad situation from a housing perspective.

97% of the LLs you know are treating the property as an investment instrument, which they are hoping will bring in an income and increase in value so they can sell later down the line for profit. But, in the current situation many will fall into negative equity as the property market slides and may move into negative yield as interest rates increase. Perfect storm for the BTL market. Scary echos of the 2008 CDO debacle.

You do realise the problem isn't Sarah and Tom who both own a flat when they met... And when they got married kept one flat as a BTL and bought a house?

It's foreign investors and private companies.

For various reasons people will always want to rent and social housing won't always be suitable (students for example)

I think your fictional world would be better having rent control zones.