I should have the right to buy from my my to let landlord after 6 years here

[chocolatekatie]

No government will ever do it as loads of them are into buy to let hence why they do all they can to prop up the bubble.

My landlord thinks he's some businessman doing me a favour by letting me live here. Actually he's the problem, he just had money so can afford to buy up property - push up the price and force people like me to rent.

Lotus - as a free market capitalist, what would you do about the rental sector? High rents, so the state has to step in with HB, insecure tenancies, with consequent social problems, and exorbitant agency fees to tenant as well as landlord.

Yes, I'm interested in how the how the whole housing picture works in Lotus' vision.

I believe that she has previously said that she would like to see all HB scrapped.

I have no problem with people making the choice to go to university but I do have a problem with people insinuating that it is somehow essential to do so and it is therefore a barrier to getting on the property ladder before the age of 22.

conventional wisdom says that going to university or training for a trade will help, not hinder, buying a property. Several studies have shown this.

So, you are suggesting that people should have disregarded economic studies (that they probably didn't know about), rebel against conventional wisdom (because of course everyone knows what will happen to the property market in the next 15 years), and forgo training to get on the property ladder? That makes no sense. While you may have worked hard, you should admit that you were incredibly lucky and bought at precisely the optimal time, in a part of the country that wasn't already too expensive. You can't expect everyone (or anyone for that matter) to know what the future property will be like. Your good fortune is a combination of hard work and great luck, and while it's easy to say to people that they should work harder, you certainly can't tell them to be more lucky.

The only reason I mentioned that I am a home owner is that I don't take the attitude that because I could do it, anyone could. The facts right now are that for many people no matter how hard they work and save, buying property is just not going to happen. I know it's shit right now.

"Lotus - as a free market capitalist, what would you do about the rental sector? High rents, so the state has to step in with HB, insecure tenancies, with consequent social problems, and exorbitant agency fees to tenant as well as landlord.And where do you stand on social housing and RTB?"

Most landlords I know do not rent to anyone in receipt of housing benefits so it's pretty irrelevant to most London rents.
I would increase demand by giving citizens the right to buy unused state land as long as they build a home on it.
I would abolish the 2014 mortgage criteria and let banks set their own loan policies.
Tenancies are insecure because tenants choose not to enter into long term tenancies. Whenever we have offered more than a year the tenant being transient will not accept a longer term.

The state does most things badly so the more housing provided by the private sector the better so I am not against right to buy from local authorities. Right to buy from private companies like housing associations is a different issue and I have not read the proposed new law so cannot comment yet on it.

The bottom line in the thread is that those of us who put jam tomorrow and got our finger out have done well and the moaners have not done. life is a hard veil of tears and you just have to get on with it and work hard and then you'll be happy and do fine or you can whinge and you end up fed up without the property you want to buy.

I certainly think it is very helpful for those of us who have made a reasonable financial success of our lives helping others to achieve that. They can take our advice or not - my graduate postman son has taken one choice (his choice) and my lawyer daughters who have bought in London in their 20s in the last 2 years a different one. We tend to reap what we sow in life.

If I may step in with my views on that issue. In Scotland, there is a lot of legislation regulating the quality of private rental provision, so that it is now of a very high standard. There is a "Repairing Standard" that must be met, HMOs are inspected annually, often multiple times. Landlords must be registered and so on. New legislation is introduced almost every year increasing the standards.

Now the Scottish Government is worried about rent increases over an equivalent period, although these are not out of line with inflation. At some point the system will break down - you cannot expect landlords to provide expensive fault-free standards, higher than those required in hotels and offices, at no extra cost. Someone has to pay for it.

There is also a social effect of the state doing too much to ensure someone else looks after all of a tenant's needs, which is ignored. There is a big problem with anti-social tenants (who adversely affect the lives of other tenants), with tenants who do not look after their properties and so on. They are the minority, but I think there also needs to be a focus on educating people so that they are capable of living in their own home without damaging it.

In countries where renting is more common, there is much more emphasis on tenants being responsible for standards themselves, and on landlords doing less. e.g. in Germany. In countries with rent caps such as The Netherlands, standards of private housing can be dreadful, because there is so little competition and getting a housing association property can take years. I think its similar in Belgium. In Sweden its very hard to rent as well, especially a family sized apartment.

At the moment, the balance is swinging too much towards blaming landlords for everything. As for social landlords, they have generally provided lower standards and the slums of the past, because they have been forced to take those tenants that private landlords can choose not to. How do you overcome this problem?

Is there any country in the world at all which provides generously sized high quality family accommodation at affordable rents or purchase prices on long tenancies in areas within easy and cheap commuting distance to good jobs in large cities? I'd argue that some provincial cities in the UK still do.

Most landlords I know do not rent to anyone in receipt of housing benefits so it's pretty irrelevant to most London rents.

There is a LOT of HB being paid in London.

Does anyone know if the countries which are constantly trotted out as being examples of long term stable tenancies to tenants offer housing benefit, or its equivalent? Is there housing benefit in Germany for example?

I've got a feeling that tenants in Germany need to be an awful lot more responsible, have an excellent full set of references before being accepted for a property and that a lot of them rent flats in shared blocks which are managed by a "hausmeister" who can watch their every movement like a hawk. If you play your music too loud, you will be left in no doubt that its unacceptable. If you start up your motorbike too early in the morning, ditto. If you make too much noise or mess in putting your bins out, same thing.

FWIW my year at uni had several single parents, who had no parental help and who lived in rented accommodation. They are all earning I think its fair to say in the region of 65k pa plus.

it's not worth much. If your solution is that people should make more than 65k pa plus, than really you are not going to solve any problem (that's well above the average wage) the fact of the matter is that people with ordinary wages are screwed because of insanely high property prices (in London in particular, but some other parts too). Crazy prices aren't anyone's fault. if your plan doesn't work for people on ordinary wages, it's just not a good plan. Keep in mind that property is the one thing we all compete for, so if housing is in short supply doubling your wage is a solution for you, but not a solution to the housing crisis.

You can't expect everyone (or anyone for that matter) to know what the future property will be like.

Nobody can know what the future property market will be like but I don't think it is unrealistic to expect people capable of living the real world to understand that saving for a house deposit whilst paying rent is quite difficult and much more difficult than saving for a deposit before they decided to leave their parents home. Most of the people complaining about greedy bloodsucking landlords seem intelligent enough to be able to draw the conclusion that paying rent + bills+ saving is a difficult thing to do.
I accept that some people have no choice but to leave home at a young age but a lot of people could stay with their parents for a few years longer if they wanted to do so and that would make saving for a deposit much easier.

I accept that some people have no choice but to leave home at a young age

Oh good - a glimmer of something.

So you understand that and the London issue?

Of course I understand that. If you read all my posts on this thread you will realise that I was one of those people who couldn't stay at home until I was into my twenties. I stayed as long as I possibly could because nowhere would house me as a 16 year old unless I wanted to be in a hostel full of addicts. I out up with physical abuse my whole childhood and until I eventually got my keys to my first house as a late teen.
I also worked with teenagers who had been thrown out of their family homes at the age of 16 and I know that those young people will unlikely ever be homeowners, but most of them would actually be quite happy to rent and have their own front door and somewhere safe to sleep at night. The lifestyle of those young people is very different to somebody who thinks getting a girlfriend pregnant and having to live in a bedsit to support a child is bad luck and unfortunate.

And I have stated several times that I understand London is different. Yes 20% of people live in London, but that means that 80% dont live in London and 80% is a far bigger majority.

Most landlords I know do not rent to anyone in receipt of housing benefits so it's pretty irrelevant to most London rents.

And here's where we fall down again. Most landlords you know is not equal in definition to most landlords in London.

In 2013, 281,774 housing benefit recipients were in private rental accommodation in London - so more than a third of London HB recipients.

That's a slightly higher proportion of HB recipients in private rental than the national average.

The bottom line in the thread is that those of us who put jam tomorrow and got our finger out have done well and the moaners have not done. life is a hard veil of tears and you just have to get on with it and work hard and then you'll be happy and do fine or you can whinge and you end up fed up without the property you want to buy.

I've got a third way. You can work hard, be lucky, get the jam tomorrow, pulled our fingers out, and still have a teeny, tiny scrap of humility and empathy to help us recognise our privilege.

What do you count me as, Lotus, a moaner or a worker? Genuinely interested in how you view those who don't fit your model.

I also worked with teenagers who had been thrown out of their family homes at the age of 16 and I know that those young people will unlikely ever be homeowners, but most of them would actually be quite happy to rent and have their own front door and somewhere safe to sleep at night. The lifestyle of those young people is very different to somebody who thinks getting a girlfriend pregnant and having to live in a bedsit to support a child is bad luck and unfortunate.

Family ruptures, toxic step families etc happen to people of all backgrounds. I know three people who had no family home to return to in Uni holidays, after graduation etc. They had the same background as most of our circle (intelligent, MC, prof parents, had grown up in 'nice' owner occupied homes etc). At least one of those had left home at 16 and had no option to go back. Another had been orphaned at 19 but the (hostile) step-parent had inherited everything.

The generalizations get irritating.

I can't really see how the OP's suggestion could work myself, but it's an interesting idea. The housing crisis is huge and it would nice to see a discussion that didn't descend into sweeping generalization and stereotype.

Ok here's a suggestion based on the OP:

I already own a home (well the bank owns part of it), but if OPs legislation was to become a reality (never going to happen) then what is to stop me from renting a house just so that I can get a discount after 5 years of paying rent? I could just pretend to live there and make sure that I am in every time the landlord wants to come around. I could pop in every few days and make sure the place looks lived in. It could be a good way to bag myself a huge discount on a property.

Did she ever clarify the discount part? (Whether there would be one? Who would fund it?)

As I say, I can't see it, myself.

Lotus - I don't know where to start.

There are thousands of renters on HB in London.

Many are working families. They would love to have longer tenancies because they have children in school, rely on local family for childcare etc.

Two of my neighbours have just been evicted. 'Accidental' landlords wanting to sell. The HB cap means they can't find anything in the private rental sector. They qualify for social housing but there are no vacancies. The council is paying a private landlord to house them in 'temporary' accommodation in another borough.

The state is an excellent landlord. Social housing was built to high standards. (Much bigger rooms than the rabbit hutches currently being thrown up by private developers.) Generally well maintained. Secure tenancies. Fair rents because non-profit.

The 3 bed council flat in Battersea which was once home to 'hardworking family' is currently being bought by my brother and his Russian wife on behalf of her parents who live in another country and will never live there but the £1,900 p.m. rent is a better return on their money than other investments. This is what happens to RTB 30 years down the line.

The rest of your post relates to ownership.

TheChandler
your difficulty in buying is not down to btl landlords
Firstly, I have not blamed buy to let landlords for my lack of owning housing.

Secondly, whilst I perfectly understand AND accept that people with a high "risk" rating will be charged more, I won't comment on the irony of larger payments making them more likely to default.

Buy to let, as a phenomenon, (and I 'll talk about low rate interest only buy to let mortgages) is corrosive to the ability of first time buyers.

it places additional demand on housing stock and therefore drive up prices. - this makes it harder to enter the housing market.

As a "thought experiment" what do you think would happen to demand for houses if BTL mortgages were outlawed today? - it'd reduce demand.
what do you think would happen to prices is supply outstripped demand - they'd fall.
would this make it easier or more difficult for people wanting to buy? (I'll let you figure out the answer to that one!)

Buy to let mortgages are easier to service as they can be interest repayment only, and tend to be at a better rate of interest than a first time buyer might be able to afford.
As another "thought experiment" have a think about what would happen if you hadn't got a better deal on the money lent to you.
The bank has a fixed operating costs, you are taking the same service as a first time buyer, and yet in paying a lower interest rate are having your service subsidised by first time buyers.

Of course if BTL mortgages were outlawed today, the rental market would basically dry up overnight too.
so I'm not demonising BTLs at all, I'm not criticising landlords either, I had no idea that they had such sentimental attachments to properties that they didn't live in. but there you go.

buy to let landlords do help to increase the barrier to first time buyers, but I have not blamed them for my situation in life.

You want a bigger house but you can't afford to buy one, so its the fault of someone else.
I haven't blamed anyone else, what I have said is that I wish that those who do have a house would at least acknowledge that they were lucky to have got that, that they bought in a better time, where the housing market was better, when you could get interest only mortgages, or 100%, 105% 110% or 120% mortgages. When restrictions on who could get a mortgage were not as strict, when you could self asses, (you know like you just can't get today! i.e you were LUCKY to have bought at a different time! - even if you can't admit that luck and absolutely refuse to pay it forward in any way.)

I'm not blaming them, or anyone else for my not owning a house, I spelled out in detail why I don't own a house, and how that has put my plans of having some sort of security "in bricks and mortar" as it were back a few years.
-my biggest issue with the current system, and those who seem to want it to be even harder for others is that whilst I've not been all that lucky, there are millions more who are even less lucky, who may never own a house, - and the way that the rental market is going, their state pension won't even cover the rent. -though I suppose you'll say that they should have just worked a bit harder, they didn't deserve a house, then because they didn't work hard enough? - and they similarly won't deserve to eat or be warm in the future?

Its down to your own ability and your ability to work hard. If you have children before you have established your career and housing, you have to work doubly hard to make up.

Once again,
It's got VERY LITTLE to do with hard work now,
someone could have the exact same experience of searching for a job just
if you take your head out of your arse and look in a paper you'll see that the average age for kids to leave their parents home is now in their 30's the average age of first time ownership is knocking on 40.

That's not because every one but you is a useless feckless layabout with no work ethic.

As said earlier it is nicer for you to ignore any luck you may have had and believe that you're some how perfect. but you're not.

you may think that I like to wish harm on others - I don't and went to great lengths to explain how what you read on the screen, and then what you made up in in your mind to form a reply were not the same.

you may think I like to blame others for my misfortunes - I don't and I haven't.

You may think that I don't deserve a partner because I whine too much that if you were my partner that you'd have left me. but truth be told you wouldn't have had the chance, I'd have left you long before because frankly I find what you're doing in this thread (denying that you've had any luck and acting like you're somehow better than those with a better set of ethics etc) is repulsive.

I challenge any buy to let landlord in this thread so far to be as frugal as they are claiming that it's "easy" to do.
no going out, no eating out, value food only, nothing branded, no new clothes, no new shoes, and no sex (you know because sex could lead to pregnancy). no Sky TV, in fact no TV then you don't need to pay a license, no internet (libraries can provide this). no phone.

I bet (even though it would apparently certainly lead to raising another deposit to expand their property portfolios within a year) that most people spouting off about hard work and jam simply couldn't stand it for even a week, let alone a month or a year!

I certainly think it is very helpful for those of us who have made a reasonable financial success of our lives helping others to achieve that. They can take our advice or not - my graduate postman son has taken one choice (his choice) and my lawyer daughters who have bought in London in their 20s in the last 2 years a different one. We tend to reap what we sow in life.
if it is not a personal question, did you help either of them in anyway? (financially speaking).
were they living with you before hand?

Nobody can know what the future property market will be like but I don't think it is unrealistic to expect people capable of living the real world to understand that saving for a house deposit whilst paying rent is quite difficult and much more difficult than saving for a deposit before they decided to leave their parents home
aaaaah penny drops...

My parents charged me rent whilst I was living at home and working. -which seems reasonable, why should anyone expect to earn and live for free?

notably, this doesn't make me unlucky, though there is clearly an element of luck if you weren't having to pay money to them and could save faster.

The hard workers and strivers are the ones on the thread who have made it. That is probably how we always have been - how mankind developed. It is just how things are - the fittest survive so if you want to move yourself into the category of striver and work smarter and harder and all will be well but if you sit back moaning waiting for the state or other tax payers to provide you probably will have quite a long wait.

Yes there are far too many housing benefit claimants in London. However it is true that many many landlords will not let to them. I think it is appalling that those who take very little from the state cannot afford to live in Central London and those who put little in are kep in that privilege by hard working tax payers.

Jenny, I cannot remember who you were or what you do - give me the outline and I can decide which category you are in and more importantly if you need help how you can help yourself.

On who is most frugal I certainly don't particularly claim to be but I don't drink anything but tap water, don't eat out. These things - the jam tomorrow - tend to be what make those of us who have done well on the thread gain those "riches".

Lotus, it is truly incredible given how much of an arse I thought you were from the outset, but you actually manage to become increasingly objectionable with every single post.

I might not own my own house but I thank the Lord that I am not as bigoted, boring and downright nasty as you. I'd much rather have lived my happy, fun-filled life, travelled the world, had a fantastic education to post-graduate level and now have a fulfilling life and career while renting, than be you.

Am I Jenny?

If so: I'm an immigrant London-living home-owning married university-educated higher rate taxpayer with 1.5 children. Who thinks that it's not just strivers/moaners, who knows (because the facts as there in black and white) that it is harder to get on the ladder than it was 30 years ago, but even when I bought (within the last decade). Who doesn't think that hard work is automatically rewarded with higher pay. Who recognises where I've been lucky or privileged, and the Impact that's had on the life I have.

So, I've 'made it'. But without losing the ability to put myself in another person's shoes, or developing the notion that I am where I am because of my inherent superiority as a human being.

I am, apparently, superior at reading and analysing statistics and understanding market economics than some of the contributors to this thread who have 'made it'.

I'm unsurprised you don't remember my name, though, as you seem to wilfully ignore any posts that point out the factual problems with your assertions - which most of mine have been.

Your understanding of evolution appears to be up there with your understanding of private rental demographics in London.

I think strivers/moaners is a good distinction and in fact most immigrants are strivers not moaners which is why many do very well - plain hard work.

It is the left who cannot put themselves in people's shoes (hence they lost the election). Most people in the UK want political parties who allow them to help themselves.

Plenty of us on this thread who are strivers are more than happy to give our time here free to help the moaners improve their lot.

bear's position is fine. I have never said owning a home or cash at bank makes personal happiness. Instead enough sleep, good food etc do that. Nor have I said everyone has to for jam tomorrow. Plenty find silent contemplation, the life of the nun or monk, the person who is kept by a husband or the state staring at the flowers in the garden is what they want. If they choose that course though they should not expect the strivers to keep them. You makes your choice and you takes your money or not as the case may be.

Onwards and upwards to all.

Lotus this IS deliberate self-parody now, right?

my new hate is people who falsely describe Labour as the "left"

they aren't. go to the political compass site and you'll see that new labour were every bit as right as Thatcher (economically) and a little more fascist. any whilst Ed Milliband was a little more "left" than Tony Blair he's still very right of center

coupled with people such as yourself who "claim" to not need the state.
last time I checked I was and my kids are born in a state hospital, which I got to using a road maintained by the state, I was kept safe by a military provided by the state, my bins were emptied and streets cleaned by the good ole state.

I paid near ten grand in tax last year, that is nowhere near enough to provide those sorts of infrastructure. So I believe that the state, (as a way of pooling money for the best outcome of all) is clearly a winning formula.

when you talk about free market economics yuo mean is that you are comfortable now and think that you can survive with a smaller state, what you really mean is that you want to keep more of your money for yourself!

but keep denying it, deny the luck that you've had, deny that the state has helped you just as much, keep thinking that you're a striver, who's worked hard for all.

If you ever did fall on hard times I've no doubt your attitude would change and suddenly you'd be crying a about bad luck. (wouldn't make you any less of a "striver" though.)

as far as the election goes, you can only count conservatives as those fully wanting to support people who want to help themselves, even UKIP want to make it easier by "kicking out immigrants" all the other parties are to the left of that, so, by that reckoning about 63% of those that voted don't really believe in what you are saying... if you want to count ukip then it's a slim 50 point something%

i.e yet another thing you are saying where you're talking out of your arse!

The hard workers and strivers are the ones on the thread who have made it. That is probably how we always have been - how mankind developed. It is just how things are - the fittest survive so if you want to move yourself into the category of striver and work smarter and harder and all will be well but if you sit back moaning waiting for the state or other tax payers to provide you probably will have quite a long wait.

so if everyone today worked hard and strived that would... magically solve the housing crisis?

hardly. There would still be too few homes and still be too much demand (in fact more demand).

I think it is appalling that those who take very little from the state cannot afford to live in Central London and those who put little in are kep in that privilege by hard working tax payers.

I fully agree with this. I don't think we should be supporting people in the most expensive place in the EU. What we should be doing is building more homes.

Ah, so in your book I'm a striver. But unfortunately, I'm a striver who thinks that you're spouting ill-informed, factually inaccurate bollocks, and that your 'moaners' have legitimate issues based in fact, and your insular narrative is frankly insulting and damaging not only to them, but to those of us who can understand numbers.

And if I were one of the 'moaners' I'd be very wary of any offers of 'help' from people like you and thechandler, given your very shaky grasp of statistics and economics.

(There, people renting. That's my free advice to you. Lotus says I'm a 'striver', so obviously my advice must be valuable.)

The logical extension of your arguments is quite interesting. Are you saying that all home-owners are right-wing?

Thanks for the kind words about immigrants, though. Not patronising at all.