Goat et al; it is the most simple and basic economics.
If a LL BUILDS a new property or renovates a derelict building they have provided a house to the market. I would consider that providing a service, albeit an essential one. If they have appropriated a property already in existence, all they have done is take that opportunity in place of (away from) someone else. There is a huge demand for housing; far, far in excess of supply, and many cannot access housing at today's high prices, hence the problems.
If the LL did not buy it, the house would simply be sold to another buyer; if necessary the price would fall until someone bought it. The sudden increase in availability of cheap BTL mortgages added more buyers to the market at the higher price, adding to demand and keeping prices higher. This is a FACT, not an opinion.
The huge long term capital gains are clearly the main attraction, possibly in addition to any monthly income. There is still a high demand for BTL mortgages and so clearly people are finding it very profitable and attractive - in the long run at least. I would very much like to pay say £20,000 as a deposit, £4000 in fees and then have the tenant pay my mortage for 25 years and then whoop whoop pocket anything from £100,000 upwards! Plus the ability to cahs inat any point and to use the one investement as security to generate several more. The maths is undeniable!
It is not about hating LLs as indivuals. It is about recognising that some behaviour, whilst legal, has a negative impact on other people and wider society. And yes to create a better society, I think we should think about how ALL of our decisions affect someone else.
So Ptolemys there is resentment towards many LLs 'as a whole', is because the problem is that nowadays there are so, so many BTL mortaged LL, who might be indiviuals but because they largely have similar interests they all tend to act in the same way affecting huge sections of society; and so their actions and effects have to be considered as a whole.
When you consider that mortgage holding LLs, have in turn their choices controlled/ manipulated by the (few) mortgage companies. The effect is in fact close to being an oligopoly - a few players having the potential/ actual ability to wield massive power. This is a problem - for society and capitalism.
And so to start with.. people who have the opportunity to make the investment decisions to become LLs, are clearly not so limited in resources to start with that you can forgive them whatever actions they may take - steal or go hungry, kill or be killed. Before anyone pleads poverty, it must be the case or you would never afford the deposit, be eligible for the mortgage or have the cash to invest!
So you have to then question their motivation/morals when they willingly choose a path that damages someone else. You aren't being FORCED to make a horrible choice between two evils. Unlike the OP who has few choices and all of them undesirable. Because lets be honest much council housing is horribly undesirable to most people; and many cases it's ONLY redeeming feature is security of tenure.
Water companies are not allowed to cut customers off for non-payment. AT ALL, because it is considered an absolute necessity. Same could (and should) be said for housing.
As I said before, LL insurance is a new product that goes hand in hand with BTL mortgages as the affordability of those mortgages often relies heavily on achieving close to 100% rental payments - ridiculoulsy slim margins hence some landlords panicking over one or two void months.
In a market where there was not a HUGE excess of demand over supply; these slim margins would not be sustainable eg retail. restaurant etc, and no insurer would accept the risk of insuring against all bad debts, except at prohibitive expense. Shops automatically build in an amount for shoplifting into their projected costs typically 10% because some risk is EXPECTED and a given. The huge excess demand for housing underpins the availability of insurance products.
2 months notice is an impractically short amount of time to find a new house. Even a high earner might struggle to find something suitable that becomes available at just the right time. Fine if sooner, and you can afford the double rent but what if not until the next month or 6 weeks? They might afford temporary accom at vast expense but what happens to their address for the bank etc in the meantime? You can really screw up your credit rating if you have gaps/ inconsistencies in your address history. 2 months is the legal minimum but realy does put the thumb screws on everyone involved. Just out of common decency it would be good to give as much notice as possible.
GUILLEMOT you could try contacting your local council and let them know you would accept an HB tenant. They may be able to link you directly with a tenant or they may point you to an agent who deals with it for them.
It makes me happy to know that there are some good hearted people out there 