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?

When interest rates are relatively high, savings and investments outside property might seem a better option for some LL

My brother rents our mum’s old house to a lovely retired couple with a couple of dogs. They’ve never owned property and are happy to rent as they don’t have to worry about maintaining a home.
Theyve redecorated and took out the longest lease they could. They pay under the market rate but they’re good tenants (and he’s a good landlord)
Private renting works for many people.

I'm an 'accidental' landlord (I got married and moved in with my husband). I rent my house to a lovely family for literally the mortgage amount - about half market rate. What are my other options? My tenants will never be able to afford a mortgage. I've even offered to sell them the house at a vastly reduced amount but they cant get a mortgage. So what can i do? I can sell the house and make a tidy profit (this is the Bristol market and house prices are obscene) but then my tenants are homeless. Or I can carry on renting it to them for half the market rate. I'm not saying my situation is normal but really should I feel bad for being a landlord here??

Very similar situation here! I actually rent to a family member and so far as I'm concerned the house is their home. They've fully redecorated, they have pets and lodsnat thenlocal school and there's no way they could ever buy or rent something similar. They pay way under market rent but they look after the house and are no bother at all. It's mutually beneficial.

@Peacelily001 @SABM10 It's great that you're charging reasonable rent, but what happens when for whatever reason you need to access the equity from that property. Let's say you have a life changing event where you really need the money, you then need to sell the property. Those lovely tenants will be forced out into the real world where they won't be able to afford market rate rents because the wider issue of BTL LLs/AirBnBs/second homes has created an unsustainable housing situation.

As lovely as you are and as altruisticas it seems in isolation, you're collectively still part of a wider issue that needs to be addressed.

If all the private landlords sold up there would be a lot of people homeless.
People on a low income aren't going to suddenly be able to afford to buy, even if prices dropped, and the social housing waiting lists are too long as it is.

Alturistic not altruisticas!

So they built a big block of housing near where I live, but the condition of buying them was that they had to be your "primary residence", so no BTL to airbnb etc. It was a bit of an experiment in the developer's eyes. What they didn't say was "no overseas investment"...
the whole block is like a ghost town. I know someone who lived in it a few years ago and it was so creepy....tens of empty brand new flats.
So if the law were to change, they'd have to change it so that there wasn't a loophole that foreign investment could take advantage of.

@Alexandra2001 Another benefit of council housing is cheaper rents, more money in the local economy, less poverty, better quality housing assuming good regulation of construction.

You do realise that it is the taxpayer who foots the bill for increased spending on local authority housing? The budget has to be split… what would you decrease spending on to achieve what you suggest? Schools, hospitals, infrastructure, etc, etc?

There is a finite amount of money available and there has to be balance as to how it is spent.

People keep saying this over and over, like it's a mantra that's going to stop what is already happening. It's not.

What it does mean though is the next government needs to get a grip on what it's going to do in that vacuum. Rent controls without tenant options will create a problem, like in Scotland. Rent controls with options for the tenant to buy (shared ownership/100% mortgages) alongside excelerated programs of building social housing, creates opportunity.

This is an interesting thread as I was expecting the usual landlord bashing.

One thing not many people mention, some people WANT to rent. The family who rented my house, now sold, openly admitted they do not ever want the responsibility of owning their own home.

Boiler breaks? £2500 bill or ring the landlord?
Roof leaking? £1000s bill or ring the landlord?
Back door has no safety glass? £700 bill or ring landlord?
Shower conked out? £400 bill or ring landlord?

You get my drift. I’m talking about responsible landlords obviously who would fix these things. The tenants have every right for these things to be fixed. My point is my tenants said there’s no way they want this kind of responsibility. It’s just the way they see it.

They were prepared for the dreaded notice coming through, which is one of the reasons why I would not want to rent, and understood that this was part of renting. In 17 years they’ve had three houses which is good going, mine included, all local and they are prepared to move to avoid the, what they see as, the millstone of a mortgage and being a homeowner.

Obviously some tenants experiences are terrible at the hands of unscrupulous landlords but some are happy with the benefits of renting. Ironically it’s often the one man band landlords/ family properties who are these kinds of landlords and the same kind who are selling up sadly.

I'm actually in this situation at the moment. I've had a life changing event which means my mortgage will go up to closer to market rate rent and have offered my tenants a few options. I can sell to them for less than half the market price. I can sell to someone else for market price and give them half the profit so they're (hopefully) set up for life (this would be about £100k so not insubstantial). Or I can put the rent up to match the increased mortgage amount. They've gone for the last option and who am I to say they should do otherwise? Honestly I get what you're saying but what else can I do in this situation? The housing market is terrible but not all landlords are bad people and not all renters have any other options.

It’s not really an option.

Students need private rentals as there aren’t enough halls places and some don’t want to live in halls, and people who aren’t yet in a position to buy for whatever reason. Not everyone wants to live in social housing, and sometimes it’s not viable to - when I started my career I did a grad scheme where I needed to move every 6 months to take on placements which would have been impossible without private rentals.

This is really unwise. You have no money set aside for a new boiler £3.5k. blown and leaking double glazing. Gas check annually, insurance annually. These are expenses that cannot and shouldn't be avoided. I do hope that you are regularly checking the property. Making sure that the plumbing is okay, windows aren't leaking, gutters and drains not blocked. That carpets aren't worn (tripping hazard).

Corporate / social landlords are likely to be much worse that the good private landlords. The corporates will be about maximising profits and social housing is rife with black mould and dangerous windows etc etc. and no budget to fix anything.

Govt should be concentrating on improving the quality of private lets not obsessed in making them unprofitable. That is no good for anyone. Better security if tenure wiuld be a start.

Inown my own home but have rented. Apart from the student landlord my landlords were all great. Lots of landlords are. And most tenants know they need to open windows etc and clean so their landlords can just leave them to it.

I've never had a social landlord but the corporate landlords I have had are light years better than the private landlords I have had. Professionals are better than amateurs.

Gas cert, insurance etc are all covered. I have savings to cover boiler costs etc if needed. I ultimately pay more out to cover the mortgage and all expenses than I receive in rent. I'm renting to my brother and he is very practical, we have an understanding whereby he takes care of any repairs etc and in return I charge him minimal rent and leave him alone to do what he wishes with the house. I know it may sound mad but it works for us! It's his house really and his family home. Like I said the alternative is to sell it and perpetuate the gentrification in Bristol while putting them out on the street with no chance of ever getting a place that's similar to either rent or buy.

But the rent doesn't just cover mortgage payments. What about the maintenance of the property, annual gas safety check, and electrical certificate?

No one is an "accidental landlord". You didn't wake up one day and just find tenants in a house you own.

Council housing is paid for by rents, not other taxpayers, who in fact benefit from those rents.

So say 5000 new council houses need to be sourced/bought. Who buys them? Tax payers money.
Say they need a new roof, new windows, new kitchen - who pays? Tax payers money.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have council housing. I absolutely do believe we should but it's not true that rent covers everything necessarily.

No but your situation can completely change 'accidentally' meaning you have to leave without time or equity to sell.

Sorry, that was to Ginmonkey

I never wanted to be a landlord, that's what I mean when I say 'accidental landlord'. As I've said repeatedly my choices were sell the house to some rich hipsters and contribute to the gentrification of Bristol, rent it at market rate, or rent it to my brother at a massively reduced rate. I went for the last option - it's given my brother and his family a family home at an affordable amount (less than half the market rate!). How is what I've done wrong??

But it still isn't an accident. Even in those circumstances you have choices - leave the property empty, sell at a loss or rent it out. You chose to rent it out, there is nothing wrong with that, but it is not an "accident". Going in to business to provide a life essential service to someone else should not be described as an "accident" it is a proactive choice. You are no different from a corporate or investment landlord under the law and not should you be.

Tenants are people looking for a home, not handy mortgage paying units.