renters should support their landlords against the government

[carmellas3]

The government are starting to tax landlords more (removal of interest tax relief and ware and tear rules). If nothing is done renters will just end up paying more for rent and landlords fees increase.

There are some bad landlords, but the vast majority just want a stable income and provide a good service for people to rent.

I think the time for landlord bashing has ended.

Morally dubious is putting it lightly.

Why?

Seriously. That question was sort of ignored on the last thread. Well, the only answers were a bit odd, talking such emotive stuff as food from the mouths of babes, etc.

Why is being a landlord morally dubious?

Because each home owned by a landlord is a home that could have been owned by someone who would have lived in it. You really think that everyone renting is happy with the situation? Most landlords will not let you decorate or have pets, or even children in some cases. And of course everyone loves not being sure whether they can stay in their home for more than six months at a time. Renters are not in this situation because they've pissed all their money away on iPads, they're in this situation because greedy bastards have outbid them on a basic human necessity. Could you buy the house you are living in now at current prices on your current salary without the benefit of a large amount of unearned equity? The vast majority of home owners couldn't.

Landlords aren't 'providing a service' they are hoarding a finite and essential resource.

At least people who own holiday homes don't think they're doing the world a favour even if they haven't thought about it enough to realise that they are being wankers.

"Renters ...are in this situation because greedy bastards have outbid them on a basic human necessity"

Quite. I think we would all agree it to me "morally dubious" in a food shortage if the person at the from of the queue bought up all the bread and resold it at a hefty profit. That is why rationing was introduced. Disgusting behaviour

Thank you, QueenStromba, for answering that question so much more eloquently than I was able to. I wrote and deleted a post about 4 times, and gave up!

It's almost as if the govt has realised the harmful effect btl has had on owner occupation more likely the govt has realised that the electorate has realised that the govt has allowed them to be shafted by BTL LL's

Homes do not stop existing if not owned by a landlord but the way they talk you'd think they built the properties themselves....single handed in the heat of the midday sun.

as usual the LLs insist that they are doing society a favor and should be rewarded for their philanthropy

I think we would all agree it to me "morally dubious" in a food shortage if the person at the from of the queue bought up all the bread and resold it at a hefty profit

great analogy which perfectly and exactly maps onto the landlords modus operandi

However, they speak as if they were the bakers toiling night and day to provide bread to feed the hungry population.

Landlords are profiteering, plain and simple

Indeed. No-one needs more than 1 house per family unit or single person. There would, in all likelihood, be very little housing shortage in this country if housing were kept in good order, housing laws overhauled and applied properly, and people actually allowed and expected to live in houses of a size appropriate to the size of their family unit - be that a single person, or a large multi generational family. And if people who wanted to buy a house, could actually do so and were not continually outbid by BTL landlords given unfair tax advantages by the government.

the only answers were a bit odd, talking such emotive stuff as food from the mouths of babes, etc

surely you can see that the roof over your head, your refuge, sanctuary, the place where you can relax and fully be your private individual self is as just as essential as food?

Without a place to call home most of us do not feel fully human and certainly we cannot flourish and live a full life

It also galls me that I can't put nails or picturehooks in the walls. So what, you say. So don't hang any pictures. Or use shelves over 4ft high. Or fit any kind of storage (there is no built-in storage or shelving anywhere except half a fitted kitchen). I'm paying more on my rent, than I would for a mortgage, to live in a house that's never been finished.

But if we complain, we'll get chucked out. They can just decide they want to put the house on the market, get us out, then mysteriously change their minds a couple of months later. I've seen it happen.

There used to be a time when there was virtually no property to rent in the UK and still 20 year waiting lists for council houses. That was before assured shortholds came out which meant landlords were prepared to let (because suddenly they had a right through the courts to remove a tenant at the end of the tenancy). Before that pre about 1980 it was very hard to rent anywhere in the country so lots of people lived with parents and brought children up with 3 generations under the same roof a lot of the time. I don't think reverting to a period where no private landlords will let properties is going to help tenants very much.

You know, most landlords that I've come across in my years of renting all think they are great.

Every single house I've rented has been dirty on move in day, faults with the electrics that don't get repaired, plumbing issues that don't get repaired, other fixtures and fittings that don't get repaired.

Some landlords toe the line when it comes to their obligations. They do just enough to keep environmental health off their backs whilst renters are required by law to continue to pay full rent when stuck in the fixed term.

How the fuck is that fair?

And it's not a minority. Only the MNers and other LL on Internet forums think it's a minority.

I'm not talking of my own experience either. I have friends, family and work colleagues with the same issues.

Oh and I forgot about the wonderful S21's or the sly S13 (extortionate) rent increases if you dare say anything.

And LL's moan it is weighted in the tenants favour....

I don't think reverting to a period where no private landlords will let properties is going to help tenants very much

why would we end up in a situation where private landlords decide to not let their properties out?

The other advantage LL's have over tenants is the referencing process.

If you don't bow down to your previous landlord you are screwed with getting a reference which will severely impact on where you end up next.

Tenants don't have the same vetting process. You don't get a choice even if you were able to contact the previous tenants because decent property is becoming like gold dust. You either take it or you become homeless.

Tenants are massively on the back foot.

Mmm!

You really think that everyone renting is happy with the situation?
No, I don't and have said so! More than once!

Most landlords will not let you decorate or have pets Yes. What's wrong with that? Really, why is it wrong to place such restrictions? If you rent out anything else you wouldn't allow the renter to modify it: cars, clothing, etc etc. If a LL had an 'anything goes' policy then the renter would lose more of their deposit at end of term in order for the property to be put back on the market. And no, not all LLs retain all of the deposit. Some but not all.

or even children in some cases. Mmm. Might some of those some cases be properties that are unsuitable?

And of course everyone loves not being sure whether they can stay in their home for more than six months at a time. Having only stopped renting last year I have never been in that position. I know others who are, but would just like to point out that not all LLs insist on that sort of relationship with their tenants. So it isn't everyone who finds themselves in that position. It is that sort of absolutism that I am objecting to.

Renters are not in this situation because they've pissed all their money away on iPads, Don't think that would be the reason most would give for being a renter. Many just would not be in the right place in life to buy, I started to recreate one of the lists of natural renters upthread. I can only repeat that there are a great many people for whom renting is the perfect answer.

they're in this situation because greedy bastards have outbid them on a basic human necessity.
Less emotively stated as: someone who could actually raise a mortgage bought a house. And, again, owning a house is not a basic human necessity. Living in one is and renting is a longstanding normality in the UK.

Could you buy the house you are living in now at current prices on your current salary without the benefit of a large amount of unearned equity? The vast majority of home owners couldn't. Yes. After renting for decades, and without any unearned input whatsoever.

Again, I am nor saying there are not truly shonky landlords out there. But to say that they are all greedy bastards stealing the homes out from under honest folks is truly OTT with the emotive rhetoric.

Why do I bother arguing with complete idiots?

Landlords seem unable to view themselves as anything other than benevolent

whatever
hopefully things will change and the housing market will be regulated in a way which reduces it's predatory effect on society as a whole

It also galls me that I can't put nails or picturehooks in the walls. So what, you say. So don't hang any pictures or use those new fangled hanging strips. They are now really affordable and leave no marks. I can vouch for that, we are using them now.

surely you can see that the roof over your head, your refuge, sanctuary, the place where you can relax and fully be your private individual self is as just as essential as food? Where have I said that I don't? But having rented for decades I have never felt any differently. Not saying that this is not the case for some. Just pointing out that the idea that ALL LLs are gobshites of the highest order is fallacious.

Before that pre about 1980 it was very hard to rent anywhere in the country so lots of people lived with parents and brought children up with 3 generations under the same roof a lot of the time Oh you need to back that up with some evidence. My whole family, grandparents, parents aunts and uncles me, cousins, siblings, ALL rented through that period. No one lived with 3 generations under one roof unless they had aged parents and young children. Larger nuclear families were more the norm than a lack of rental property. You have made an incorrect correlation.

why would we end up in a situation where private landlords decide to not let their properties out? And imagine what it would be like if they did! Students, young people, people relocating for work and on and on... where would they live?

It really isn't a one sided issue. Not ALL landlords are bastards. Not all tenants are put upon. And it isn't just MNers or LLs themselves saying so. The reality is that there are hideous behaviours on both sides. But there will always be people needing to rent and there will always be people with properties to rent to them. That is why a charter that deals fairly with BOTH sides is what we really need. Not one that sets out to demonise any one side.

Why do I bother arguing with complete idiots? Because you hold an entrenched position and will not countenance anyone who disagrees with it? I don't really care that you think ALL LLs are gobshites. I know you are wrong through decades of personal experience. I also know that we need rental properties. Many people need them at different times in life.

hopefully things will change and the housing market will be regulated in a way which reduces it's predatory effect on society as a whole Exactly. And demonising one section of it won't achieve that. Oh, I am not and never have been a LL, by the way!

There is quite an interesting and politicaly neutral objective summary of the history here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rent_control_in_England_and_Wales

The fault lies mostly with govt failure to properly regulate the housing market, LL's are merely being entrepreneurial, they see an opportunity to make a profit and they take it.
It's the rational thing to do.
However many people do seem to struggle to appreciate that the current situation, the dysfunctional housing market is harmful to society as a whole.

LL's have been favoured by the govt but if the 'wind' changes they may well find themselves in a very precarious position where they have no alternative but to sell their investments at a loss.

but that's business, and it behooves the business person to look into all possible and probable scenario's before going into business.

'Rent controls would be a very bad idea, its interference with the free market and might discourage people from investing their hard earnt money in providing a service for renters. If they all stuck their money in gold where would the renters live?'

The price of gold would have been pushed up higher and house prices would be lower

Win-win ?

the OP has it all arse about face