Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To object to paying two lots of council tax

254 replies

googlenut · 19/02/2015 20:08

We pay really high rates on our own property. We have a rental property - a small flat- which we have been unable to rent. We have just been faced with a £650 council tax bill. If we had students in it the flat would be exempt, if we had one person in it we would get 25% discount but instead we have to pay the full amount when it is empty. I just can't see the fairness of this - but willing to listen if someone can explain the justice of it.

OP posts:
christinarossetti · 21/02/2015 19:57

I'm not particularly critical of individuals who do it, specialsubject, but the whole BLT culture in the UK has contributed to the dire housing situation for many. I am very critical of that.

It doesn't sit well with me, when there are other (albeit less lucrative) ways to get a return from capital because of the larger housing problem it's part and parcel of.

It wasn't that long ago that 'many years behind a desk' resulted in the sort of income and capital that meant that people could buy more homes than they needed to live in. I know lots of people in their 50s and 60s in that position.

Now 'many years behind a desk' means that private renting in an area that they would like to live in/have ties to etc is beyond so many people, and buying even one home an absolute pipe dream.

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 20:00

Property prices are also high because IHT favours those who have parents in a position to give them large sums of money as deposits and because self-build is effectively discouraged in favour of large firms of housing estate developers, who make most profit out of large, expensive, family sized houses.

Tondelayo Someone who is committed long term, a professional, experienced with an understanding of the market and the regulatory requirements.

Would you like to explain who these professionals are, and where they get training? I've never met a letting agent with an appropriate degree. I rent out the flat I bought as a single person, and no longer live in, as DH and I bought a house together.

Are you seriously suggesting that a landlord like me, who is a lawyer, is less likely to be able to rent out their own property than some random person who just chanced into working for a letting agency, or a housing association? How on earth do you think any landlord manages to comply with the extensive, protective regulatory requirements that we have at present without understanding them? Considering many of them are enforced by hefty criminal penalties?

So just because someone gets a job in a letting agency suddenly makes them an expert? And what would make that person committed long term (as opposed to someone who has a 25 or 30 year mortgage)?

Maybe you think a limited company might be a better bet? After all, if it goes out of business, its limited liability would enable its owners to start up again without paying their outstanding liabilities!

I wouldn't even let my property through a lettings agency because they know so little about the market!

Perhaps if you feel that you personally, need more assistance from a landlord when renting property, a rental that includes a concierge service, or perhaps even a serviced apartment or a hotel might suit better?

FafferTime · 21/02/2015 20:17

What a load of utter nonsense you are talking. Yes, I too have been "doing tenants a favour" for the last 10 years so so. Oh, no, actually I was just renting a house out for someone to live in.

Just drop the rent to get someone in or sell the house, stop all the whinging. I'm doing the selling because I can't be bothered with it all now, and I was an accidental landlord because I started when my house was in negative equity.

googlenut · 21/02/2015 20:42

Maybe it depends where you are in the country but in my area (north of England) there are no shortage of homes for sale at every budget.
I think for most areas apart from maybe London and the south east you could put your budget into rightmove and find a large number of houses to buy.
The problem is not lack of housing as far as I can see but the price of houses and the difficulty of most people finding a deposit. Add to this that when I bought my first house you only needed 5% deposit and and now most lenders are asking for 25%. It can be done if you save hard and I know plenty of young couples in the north who have worked hard at fairly average jobs and bought their own properties (no help from parents). Because they started with a small home and worked their way up. Anyone who lives in the south east and can move elsewhere is being a mug as far as I can see (I used to live in the SE and know the quality of life is rubbish as well).
So no I don't think us With a second home are causing the housing crisis - haven't been convinced at all by this thread.

OP posts:
Justanotherlurker · 21/02/2015 21:07

Your not accepting that you run a business, with that business you inherit costs, to cover those costs you need to price your business accordingly, not accounting for any of these doesn't make it unfair.

As for your false dichotomy of living in the north, you seem to ignore the growing priced out generation across the country, it certainly isn't a South East only problem. You have contributed to this by buying a second home as an investment (which I have no issue with) by being in the position of having capital (your existing house) behind you so are offered a greater mortgage/willing to pay more than the averadge 20 something's who are trying to get on the ladder.

As practically everyone has said, reduce the rent or sell.

babygiraffe86 · 21/02/2015 21:14

I live in the north east - mirtgage is 500 a month. Next door neighbour rents - exact same house, pays 700 a month. Shows the profit margin really, even here in the north!!

MartinJD · 21/02/2015 21:24

As the owner of a few rental properties myself I feel obliged to come to the OPs defence here, These costs do add up, Yes some of us build up our portfolio's so that we can enjoy the finer things in life, but this is, after all, free market capitalism at work. I and many other landlords offer our tenants good value. We're not all evil tyrants you know :)

OP, maybe try another property agency, if your property has been vacant for a while your agency may not be doing enough to get tenants in.

Cheers!
M

TalkinPeace · 21/02/2015 21:29

martin
I fired my agent as they were crap

I had the right house in the right place renting to a non family market
I "advertised" it with a sheet of A4 in the front door window

I sold it the same way FWIW

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 21:32

babygiraff86 I live in the north east - mirtgage is 500 a month. Next door neighbour rents - exact same house, pays 700 a month. Shows the profit margin really, even here in the north!!

That would depend on the size of the mortgage of course.

Say it did cost exactly the same as yours. Before you even get to that stage, would have come an outlay for decorating and buying furniture most likely (and obviously a sizeable deposit, legal costs on buying, stamp duty, etc.). Landlord registration, gas safety certificate, electrical safety certificate, EPC, (if its an HMO then obviously much more), preparation of lease and inventory, viewings. Say that uses up 2 months of that profit = £400. Deduct agency fee (15%? of the total plus the first month's rent = £510). So that's £910 of the potential annual £2400 profit gone already.

No-one is obviously adding up the landlord's time if there are any burst light bulbs minor things needing fixed, or the cost of more major repairs.

So from the £1500 left, deduct 10% for wear and tear (since mine is an HMO, I find my license fees and the costs of the latest change which can only be provided at great expense by one company mean that 10% is more like 25-30%) and you have £1350 or so left before tax. Now I pay tax at 40%, so that leaves me with £810. Not bad but not exactly rolling in it either! In reality, that £810 goes towards another £1500 or so buying nice stuff to keep it looking like a decent place to live in, decorating, new carpets and flooring, upgrading to nicer sinks and taps or kitchen units, etc.. I can't claim any of that in tax, only wear and tear. If I did run it as a proper business, as a limited company, I could do. (obviously if I did, at least I would immediately become a "professional and have a better understanding of the market, as Tondelayo suggests - the difficulty is in getting a commercial mortgage, although at higher interest rates, I would pay almost not tax at all as I would run at a bigger loss!)

I actually find it quite possible to run things at a loss most of the time, because costs have risen significantly since I started doing this (mainly due to government legislation, not tenants), and that doesn't really quantify my true "losses" or expenses, which come out of my own earnings. And obviously if you have a void with no tenants in, that means an even bigger loss and less tax! So its not all bad OP.

I'm not moaning about any of this, just pointing out that what you describe above is unlikely to be the actual profit margin. I see mine more as a pension, and pensions are tax deductible but a bit risky, property I see as less tax deductible, but also less risky. Who knows what the government are going to do next though, both with pension funds and property!

babygiraffe86 · 21/02/2015 21:47

New build, unfurnished and just finished when tenant moved in so no decorating costs. (owner actually asked us to water the turf for her when it was laid as she didn't want to come round daily to do it and wanted it nice for tenants, also told us she could have charged less but wanted 'nice' pepole in the house) as soon as she found out dp is an electrician she has asked for our number for problems/annual certs as he 'will be cheaper than calling someone in because you're just next door' tenant is lovely - owner is a little odd in my opinion.
To be fair chandler you sound like a lovely landlord, in my experience of 7 years renting ll would not have even entertained me if I'd called them over a light bulb haha, I even got told a leak in a ceiling every time it rained wasn't an issue as it was a spare bedroom! I've always furnished the places myself, that's how buying my place wasn't as expensive as it could have been - had a 3 bed house worth of furniture already!!

TondelayoSchwarzkopf · 21/02/2015 21:50

Chandler, I wasn't talking about letting agents, I was talking about landlords.

Maybe work on your reading comprehension eh?

TondelayoSchwarzkopf · 21/02/2015 21:52

Also thanks for the kind advice but I'm a home owner.

TalkinPeace · 21/02/2015 21:53

the chandler
I rented to students : short hold tenancy £5 from staples
furniture = Oxfam = £300 the whole house (admittedly every blerdy year)

and if you pay tax at 40% then you are in the top 25% of the country, unlike your tenants

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 21:55

babygiraffe86 To be fair chandler you sound like a lovely landlord, in my experience of 7 years renting ll would not have even entertained me if I'd called them over a light bulb haha

Aw thanks (flowers). I'm just a bit obsessed with property and a frustrated interior designer. and I'm rapidly becoming obsessed with tax And to be fair, some light bulbs are hard to replace - I'm thinking of some bathroom lights. I've also been called out to replace curtains which have been pulled down, to switch on a fridge and a water heater, to fix a slightly dripping tap and a hoover bag - again surprisingly complex if you only do it once every 6 months, but was so impressed they were contemplating hovering, I did go out!

Theres a lot of tradesmen who try to overcharge you/do unnecessary work, so I'd use someone I knew if I could, and give them repeat business.

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 21:58

Tondelayo Chandler, I wasn't talking about letting agents, I was talking about landlords.

Maybe work on your reading comprehension eh?

I actually have no idea what you're talking about, as you seem to be making it up to suit yourself, but with your attitude, I'd be avoiding you as best I could.

TondelayoSchwarzkopf · 21/02/2015 22:03

Seriously? I have never mentioned letting agents. Not. Once. You're the one who has a bee in their bonnet about them. And FWIW I agree with you.

Are you OK? (Head tilt)

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 22:13

Seriously? I have never mentioned letting agents. Not. Once. You're the one who has a bee in their bonnet about them. And FWIW I agree with you.

So who on earth do you approve of letting property? You've ruled out private landlords (even ones who just happen to be relevantly qualified by lucky chance like me), letting agents - who is left?

Housing associations? Charities? Anyone setting up a company and calling it "Professional Property Holdings Limited"? But even they may make decisions to sell or change the letting profile of a property, and evict tenants. And tbh, the standard of care provided by some housing associations is much, much lower than that provided by many small private landlords.

BrandyAlexander · 21/02/2015 22:14

Blimey! In amongst the vitriol somebody called it right and council tax is not a tax for using services it is just a statutory property tax. Youre understandably going to be a bit hacked off like the OP if you actually believe the propaganda and think it's anything to do with using services and find out the truth the hard way!

TalkinPeace · 21/02/2015 22:19

lets move to a USA style land tax shall we .....

a 1/2 m house owner would pay around £8000 a year
empty or occupied

land banking developers would also have to pay good thing too

Justanotherlurker · 21/02/2015 22:27

TheChandler at least your honest that it is your retirement pot, being legal in the furnished HMO market does incur costs, and from what you have said you are one of the minute generous landlords, however over the past 10 years your adverage btl'er isn't paying for burst light bulbs or allowing for wear and tear within the deposit when it is being done to the lowest possible standard.

When interest rates are the lowest they have ever been and rents haven't reduced in value, yet landlords are whining because the 'should have been anticipated voids' are making them incur costs as 'unfair' will naturally be grating for some. Profits should never be considered by the consumer, your offering a service, it's not down to the consumer to make sure your yields are positive.

The issue I have with OP is that they consider themselves as offering some kind of social good by renting out homes to those that can't afford to buy, whilst over bidding the same demographic for personal gain and yet expect everyone else to pick up the tab to help pay for local services because they have entered the market blind.

The fact that the thread has moved goalposts during its time shows this isn't btl'er doing it for the social good.

TondelayoSchwarzkopf · 21/02/2015 22:28

Seriously Chandler you are extrapolating a whole lot from a comment that was specifically about "accidental landlords" ie home owners who can't sell for the price they need/want and instead reluctantly rent out their property - going into the lettings market without necessarily having the right business knowledge, cash flow and experience.

My point was that I would prefer to rent from a party (a housing association, a private limited company, an individual, a charity, a local authority, whatever) that had a long term professional commitment to supplying housing for rent.

A letting agent acts on behalf of a property owner and isn't a landlord per se so I'm not sure why they come into it.

Justanotherlurker · 21/02/2015 22:45

It's interesting to see a change in threads such as this, the general consensus of left wing(which mn prides itself on) ideaology is the government should step in to protect the disadvantaged and tax the wealth creators accordingly, but when personel ££ and house prices are involved it seems to go out the window

TheChandler · 21/02/2015 22:46

I would say that competition is for the social good justanotherlurker. I think its healthy to have a mixture of private and non-private landlords. Once you restrict competition, its nearly always results in increases in costs and loss of quality.

The government seems to be changing the goalposts at the moment in the student housing market, in that various institutional investors have seen it as a potential cash cow, and getting planning permission for inner city student housing developments seems surprisingly easy. But the prices that students pay for what they get are high.

No-one seems to consider the longer term effects on society (affecting the mix of people in inner city areas, encouraging students to think that leaving home means an en suite bathroom and someone always looking after you instead of learning how to live independently, paying bills, etc., pricing private landlords out of the market, etc..)

Justanotherlurker · 22/02/2015 00:05

Competition for the social good is essentially free market economics, if you believe in the former you can't object to the latter within your statement. The problem is that certain people only believe in the free market when there own money/profit is on making a gain.

The government isn't restricting private individuals from entering the btl market, in fact you could say that it has been actively encouraged and propped up over recent years. Universities wanting to enter this market isn't solely due to the government either, many uni's where actively building student accomodation before fees was introduced.

as for your en-suite bathroom (wider economic issues) comment, I presume you rent out your properties within line of of your local hmo's or have you reduced your rents in line with the reduction of interest rates?

If you want to complain that big players are entering the saturated market of property then you should also shine the light on nimby-ism that wants to protect personal wealth.

I think we may be on the same page, but have had a few glasses of red tonight.

Jamie1981 · 22/02/2015 00:57

What you are actually asking is for the state (i.e., me and all the other hard working people on here) to pay your share of the bills for you.
Here's some news for you: your property didn't rent because it WAS TOO EXPENSIVE.
Strangely, you didn't feel able to drop the rent to make life easier for a few students, so why do you expect the council to drop the council tax bill to make it easier for you?
I own a house so i'm insulated from this nonsense, but other posters are right: buy to let landlords are a scourge on humanity.