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.

It's an issue with the structure of the housing market, you can't say people are immoral for buying property to rent out! I can't see that it would be practical for the government to pass a law to prevent it either. There's nothing wrong with renting per se - lots of other countries have big stocks of rental homes and it is normal for people to rent long term. It is starting to happen here - big financial institutions are starting to invest in large blocks of residential property for long term rental. However, we need a big change in the type of tenancies offered - 6 month Assured Shorthand Tenancies do not work for long term renters, even 3 years is too short. I think the government needs to address this issue, as well as the shortage of housing.

I do feel queasy about holiday homes though, I don't like the idea of houses which are only used a few weeks a year going for big prices in otherwise mostly economically deprived areas.

big financial institutions are starting to invest in large blocks of residential property for long term rental

That does sound, potentially, like a better situation compared to large numbers of 'hobby' landlords with BTL mortgages and very thin profit margins.
This group will be up the creek ??without a paddle if interest rates rise and / or regulations change, eg the recent change concerning tax relief on mortgages
??

Until recently I lived in a part of the UK where private rentals were more or less in line in price with social rentals, and where even a single person on a below average income could afford to buy a starter home, provided they had a modest deposit. Supply of housing of all tenures was more or less in line with demand, which makes being a landlord far less attractive than in places where undersupply ensures that the market always works in a landlord's favour. Private landlords tended to be those doing it professionally as a long term investment, with tenants able to stay as long as they wanted. It's only when you get situations, caused by lack of availability of homes, where demand is so in excess of supply that landlords are willing to kick tenants out on a whim so they can raise the rent or sell up for a big profit.

landlords are willing to kick tenants out on a whim so they can raise the rent or sell up for a big profit
Which has a devastating effect on family life, causing huge amounts of stress and upheaval.
Moving is stressful enough when it's elective??

The net effect is very damaging to human potential, to communities and society as a whole.
A secure home is a basic need, without it no one can live anything like full life

Whose job is it to provide that secure home, suzanne? BTL is not - in most areas - the majority of the property market, they are bought and lived in by private buyers.

Very selective editing of the quote as well, suzanne.

It is the job of government to regulate markets so that they are efficient and don't have a negative effect on human wellbeingFiz

The trouble is that the last attempt to regulate the housing market - the Rent Acts - was a disaster and I see no reason to believe that the next would be any better.

A huge part of the problem in London is developers marketing their properties to overseas investors before anyone in this country has a look in.

Would you say that people are selfish to buy several cars when there is a shortage of parking space? Or would you reply that both your husband and you need a car to go to work, and your son has a car too, so you only do it because you need it?

Buying a second (or if you are really lucky, a third) property is not greedy, it might be the only way to have a pension to survive in 30 or 40 years.
Of course, in a way everybody is selfish and put their family first. When someone buys a council house at a huge discount, and then sells it after a few years at full market value, making a very tidy profit, don't you think that's greedy too?

Most people planning their retirement are not doing it to be spiteful towards others, they just try to do what is best for them.

I always hear about housing shortage, but I keep seeing empty derelict buildings everywhere (South East). Just 5 mn drive from here lays an abandoned school, including what must have been former teacher houses. You can imagine the size of the land. I always wonder why nothing is done, they are an eyesore, and a waste of space.

BTL bumps up private rent, this is also one of the problems that I don't think anyone's quite laid out in this thread so far. The majority (not all!) of BTL landlords have bought the property with a mortgage. So they've calculated (understandably) what rent they can charge which will cover a) the monthly mortgage payments, b) the costs of maintaining the property, and c) a bit of profit on top for themselves. That's a higher amount of money, obviously, than rent paid to (say) a large corporation that owns large amounts of property and operates on economies of scale (ie rent only covers their maintenance costs and their profit, not also a mortgage).

That means that private renters who want to save up a deposit to buy their own property, in the intervening time, are paying out additional money to pay off somebody else's mortgage, without gaining any equity themselves. And of course if you have lots of BTL landlords charging the aforementioned higher amount of rent, then that's what 'the market' locally will bear, so any cheaper rents (as a result of companies/landlords who have lower overheads) also get pulled upwards accordingly.

For all the one-or-two-property landlords, this might help explain why people who rent get a bit twitchy when discussion turns to how much money you can make out of BTL :/

The few people I know that have bought to let make no profit on their investments, and don't expect to until the mortgage is paid off. They charge enough to cover the mortgage, insurances and maintenance, but they aren't making any profit on a monthly basis, even though they still have to pay tax on the rental income.

They really are just doing it to provide for themselves in their retirement. Or in one case, because they know they'll have to help their kids through university if they want to go because their dc won't get enough in loans or grants because of their parents income. I don't think it's at all selfish or greedy just to try and provide for yourself and your family, thats what everyone should do if they are physically able.

Well my husband and I rent out 4 properties but do not consider ourselves greedy. This is our pension for the future and why shouldn't we buy to let? My husband and I are very good landlords and do not over charge our tenants, all of whom are very happy. It would never occur to me that we are being "immoral" but there you go.

I think it depends on how you define greedy.
I have a house I rent out, I bought it because I don't have a pension.
So are people who have pensions greedy then?
What a ridiculous statement.
I'm a good ll, any problems are sorted straight away.
My tenant always pays on time and if there is a problem like when she was paid differently she called me immediately.
Because of this I let her take as long as needed to sort it out.
I charge her £25 per month less that the going rate as the house isn't in tip top condition.

I don't think it's at all selfish or greedy just to try and provide for yourself and your family, thats what everyone should do if they are physically able.
and this on the same website where posters harangue and are rude to those who try and put their family first when it comes to immigration and welcoming refugees. sorry off topic but I do wish people would not assume a righteous tone about being landlords (always very good landlords) and do not have a sense of how patronising and virtue signalling they are being.

people who have pensions are not greedy in the same way - it is obvious to me - pensions are paid for out of income, renting out a property and getting the tenant to pay the mortgage and reaping the benefits of HPI while depriving someone of owning a home themselves is greedy.

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 agree that private renting in the UK isn't attractive. The solution to that should be a better form of tenancy, not banning private landlords.

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

Landlords are not the reason property prices go up. That makes no economic sense.

I think prices are determined by earnings (what people have to spend) and interest rates (what they can afford to borrow.) On average over time the cost of ownership and the cost of rent will track each other, as if one moved out-of-line people would choose the other option.

To everyone saying that btl is still providing homes, it is. But the point is that it's denying people the chance to own their own home which many many many renters would love to do but have been priced out by rising prices which is partly driven by investment properties.

How does it deprive someone of owning a home though? As I spent 11yrs as a sahp, my pension was rubbish. Buying a small terraced house in a cheap area where most people rent seemed the most financially sensible thing to do. We don't over inflate the rent. We are very good landlords. We have kids ourself so I would never condone people living in nasty damp cold conditions esp with children. Just because they rent, doesn't mean they're not entitled to a decent standard of living. The plan is to sell the property in about 20yrs and any equity to help fund retirement. I don't really see it as greedy, just making sensible ways to save.

Our property was paid for outright from savings from our incomes. No btl.
We also have pensions. We decided to provide for ourselves in retirement.
If savings rates had stayed decent we would have probably put it in the bank and not provided a home for someone.
We also set our rent at below market rate. Bad business maybe but hardly greedy and selfish!

mollie

My tennant needed/ needs somewhere to live. I provide that service would you prefer she lived on the streets and lost her job as she wouldn't have an address.

A huge part of the problem in London is developers marketing their properties to overseas investors before anyone in this country has a look in

If foreigners want to pay over a million pounds for a new flat when a nicer second-hand one like mine can be had for 25% to 50% less, I say let them.

I don't think foreigners overpaying for off-plan London flats is a bad thing. If anything it incentivises more building. Just don't allow them to leave them empty. In most cases they aren't planning to live in them, so force them to rent them out.

I doubt builders are marketing to foreigners because they like them more than locals. I suspect they are doing it because they can take advantage of their ignorance to extract more money than local people will pay.

"The few people I know that have bought to let make no profit on their investments, and don't expect to until the mortgage is paid off. They charge enough to cover the mortgage, insurances and maintenance, but they aren't making any profit on a monthly basis, even though they still have to pay tax on the rental income. "

Then there's the profit! minus deposit & tax

If someone gives you £500/m and you pay it towards a house that's nearly pure profit.