to be annoyed about investment properties when so many people have no home?

[horlickslover]

So many established people beginning to "invest" in property again these days. Buying up ideal family homes and first time buyer homes to rent out or use incresingly (depending on area) for airbnb lets. I have to say it really annoys me. I know a few people looking around to buy second or even third homes as an investment. We have a house that is our home I just think it is a bit greedy to go and buy up available housing like that when so many people just can outbid wealthier people looking to turn property into an income. It would be totally fine if their wasn't the housing shortage there is but as it stands I think it is pretty greedy, selfish behaviour.

YaSOnbu! No one needs more than one home and because of greed there are thousands who don't have one. Calling it "property" annoys the fuck out of me too - they are homes!

People are greedy OP. It's not fair....but many of those who are without would do the same.

Personally I've left the UK for Australia....I love home...everything about the UK....but we had no chance there. I would have been happy with a 2 bed house and a small garden and a secure tenancy but no hope of that.

Here in Oz renters are much more protected and it's just better all round.

In general those properties will remain family homes, regardless of whether or not the family living there owns them. So it makes no difference to the availability of property to live in.

I think the UK actually has a low amount of rented property compared to the rest of the world, so that's another argument that the number of rented homes isn't to high.

It's about the rental conditions.

People living in council houses are renting, but have a secure tenancy; can decorate or amend the property to suit them better; and don't have the landlord discussing whether to evict them if they get pregnant, keep a rabbit, or receive Housing Benefit.

I've seen all the above examples by private landlords here on MN.

That's what makes the difference.

And then there's the level of rent.

Which is obviously much higher when the owner's purpose is to make a profit on top of mortgage interest rates on a property bought at current prices, than when the owner's purpose is to house people while covering maintenance on housing stock built and paid for decades ago.

not to mention the favourable tax treatment of the co-called 'entrepreneurs' who use the rent to pay the mortgage
OP you realise you will be outed as a 'landlord basher'
IF renting was made secure so your home you are paying for is not snatched away from you after 6 months - that would be much more fair.

yes it is greedy and I would never do it as it does not sit well with my sense of fairness. (and of course there is the fact that landlords and investment buyers have pushed prices of all houses upwards )

The empty houses, because the tenants couldn't afford to stay because of the bedroom tax, are being sold by the HA at auction.

People have been viewing them to rent out, the rents will be higher than the HA set, which usually means that those renting them have no chance of getting back into work. We live in a low wage region.

The same thing happened when people bought their Council Houses and then lost their jobs.

I've even overheard conversations around "there's money to be made from the Refugee Situation".

People were brainwashed (and some leapt at the opportunity) that this was an acceptable way to make money since the 80's.

That's just the natural operation of things in this regulatory and market framework, by the way.

It doesn't require a moral judgement on LL either way to point out that LL will naturally behave in their own best interests under these conditions.

It also doesn't require a moral judgement on LL to point out that the effect is deleterious on the part of the population who are unwilling renters. And that therefore maybe the regulatory conditions should be changed.

I have to add all that, because otherwise some martyr-landlord will be along shortly whining about how high their BTL mortgage is, and how they have to evict pregnant families who've just gone down to one income because of insurance.

How many of us if we were selling - not, perhaps our own home but a deceased parent's home - would ask potential buyers what their intentions were?

If you would not care, don't blame BTLetters.

I have said it before but here goes: break NIMBY and the local authorities, get building, and put a covenant against BTL on new build.

Oh, and PausingFlatly, what do you suggest LLs do whose tenants stop paying the rent, pg and down to one income or for any other reason?

Yanbu. I know a lot of people who have done this and it just doesn't sit right with me.

BTL has definitely fuelled the housing crisis here in London. Ime the price boom is a crisis ... it simply isn't good for anyone!

Yanbu. Im hoping we can buy our first every property for us to live in after years of renting and im struggling as everything is being bought by btl (ea tell us) or not coming on market as someone in the family decides to have a go at btl when a house becomes Available within a family (again ea told us as they being told to come to see houses to give value so family members can buy others out). It is selfish but we have discussed it alot of mn and i dont think unless you in the situation we are trying to find something you realise how bad it is out there. I do know of loads of others in the same situation. There is a lack of property on the market at the lower end. I know one thing if ever we are lucky enough to get a house i never want to look at rightmove again. Can everyone on mn please keep their fingers crossed for us tomorrow as a rare house has come up. Hoping to leave the rent trap soon x

I think it's a bit simplistic to say that people are just being greedy.

Pensions don't provide the returns and security that they used to, and so people are just trying to find other ways to provide for their retirement and to possibly help out their children if they can. I understand the problem with the situation, and it get the irony in people buying investment properties to help out their children who will struggle to buy their first home because BTL is contributing to the problem, but you can't blame people for trying to look after themselves and their families. It's a good thing when people take the initiative and try to provide for themselves.

As long as properties arents sitting empty, then someone is being housed by them. So while they might not get to decorate or adapt their home how they want, they also don't have to worry about finding the money to pay when the boiler breaks down, or the roof needs repairs and such like. It's not cheap to maintain a property or to take the financial risk, so I really don't understand that landlord hate that goes on on here.

The rental property we bought had been empty and on the market for ages before we bought it and made it into a home for someone.

And we allow pets. People not wanting to buy for various reasons were falling over themselves to rent from us. We always prefer long term renters.

If you own your own home you may have offered more than someone else who wanted it too.
Do you feel bad about that?

Because if landlords didn't keep buying property then prices wouldn't keep being pushed up and up pricing first time buyers out.

Don't patronise renters by telling them how lucky they are not to have to maintain a property. We aren't stupid and would manage the same way a landlord would do.

I also think renters should have more rights and be better protected. If this is my home I should be allowed to live in it freely, keeping pets and decorating as I choose. This could be done with pre approval from a landlord or with an agreement that the property is returned to its original state before the tenancy ends

I'm not talking about tenants who don't pay rent.

I'm talking about tenants who pay the rent and claim Housing Benefit to do so.

Lots and lots of posts on MN from LL saying they'll evict because HB affects their mortgage insurance, and about the deliberate evilness of a tenant (who is paying rent on the dot each month) for not informing LL they were now claiming even a top-up of HB, because the LL's mortgage insurance has conditions about it.

Like the tenant would even know the details of LL mortgage insurance! Never mind trot meekly up and say, "We're about to have a baby, would you like to evict us?"

If you're running a business where you rely heavily on your customers acting entirely against their own interests, to the point of inviting you to make them homeless when their baby is about to be born, then your business model is wrong.

An increasing number of LL on MN are stating that their insurance does cover tenants receiving HB. Which is good, but makes me wonder why there was ever any other model.

I don't have an issue with people buying property to rent out - not everyone wants to buy property and not everyone can afford to buy. I have an issue with those buying these properties turn them into HMOs - I don't think they add anything of benefit to communities.

Agree. Talking as a long term renter. Want to buy, still can't as don't have enough deposit.

The idea of houses being used as investment does not sit right with me, as someone else said, they are homes. There are not enough of them.

How many millions of people are renting properties that are overpriced in this country? It is greed.

I don't think it's the fault of property investors that housing is in short supply, anymore than it's the fault of, for example, people with more than one child that there aren't enough school places for everybody. If somebody buys a property to let out, that property is still providing somebody (the tenant) with a home. Property investment isn't what pushes prices up, it's the opposite - it's rising prices that have made property investment very attractive. The problem is that housing of all tenures is in short supply because the UK isn't building enough overall and certainly not building enough in the places where most people want to live. If anybody is greedy and selfish then surely it's the people who don't want their town or village "spoiled" by a new development on the outskirts, or who complain that the UK is already "too built up" for more housing to be created.

Property investors have not caused the housing shortage nor have they pushed prices up - they buy at whatever price the house is on the market for - if the investor didn't buy the house at the price they paid someone else would.

The shortage of houses is caused by a lack of building and a growth in the population over the last number of years. The other thing that contributes to the shortage is there are fewer couples staying together - lots of single people staying on their own nowadays compared to 20yrs ago.

When you sell, will you refuse to sell to an investor - take a lower price from a family wanting to owner-occupy?
Ah, thought not.

Of course people are greedy, it's human nature to be self interested, we have government to implement rules and regulations which mitigate the effects of human greed and further the long term best interests of society as a whole.

Well, ideally they would

Suspect that the pendulum has swung too far and the 1 percent will have to take a haircut.

I predict a squeeze on BTL ??

Property investment isn't what pushes prices up, it's the opposite - it's rising prices that have made property investment very attractive
The two factors act synergistically