Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

261 replies

horlickslover · 11/09/2015 01:58

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.

OP posts:
NKFell · 11/09/2015 17:12

In my small market town in Cumbria it's full of empty second homes and holiday lets.

The homes they put up as 'local occupancy' are all small and overpriced. It's a protected area so building new homes isn't viable and the local economy doesn't support the values of local properties.

I'm not saying people shouldn't have second homes and the holiday lets allow the tourism that pays my wages, albeit a zero hour contract minimum wage. It's the price I have to pay for wanting to live close to my parents and grandparents BUT surely there should be a better balance.

Why not put some houses on sale first with a local occupancy clause then if they don't sell in a certain time allow for second homes or holiday lets?

Walking around the streets close to my house it's mad that there are so many empty houses over winter when I know at least 5 local people who would love to move back 'home' instead of being forced to move away.

BoffinMum · 11/09/2015 17:14

I rent a home to people who are usually temporarily in the area for relocation or study or house hunting purposes. The average stay is 9 months. I am happy to sign longer tenancies, but usually people don't want to. I try really hard to be a good landlord and provide a beautiful home in excellent repair at a reasonable rent that represents about 25% of their average household incomes.

There have been times when we have had very high mortgage repayments and have had to top up the income from the rent in order to keep the show on the road. More recently the property has generated a profit. So there are ups and downs. Some years we spend a lot on maintenance, sometimes relatively little. That is how investments work.

One day we will move back into this house when we downsize, after the kids have grown up. In the meantime, nobody is deprived of a home at all and in fact it allows some flexibility for people in the rather strange housing market in our area. If there were no rental homes they would presumably have to stay in guest houses for weeks or months while organising themselves and learning about the local area, or arranging to buy a home.

So yes, I do provide a service, my tenants appreciate this service, and I am proud of being able to do this.

I do have a concern with older people living alone in huge houses they bought really cheaply in the 1960s and 1970s because of a lack of incentive to move, and I think this is a bigger aspect of the family housing supply problem locally. Perhaps if there was a bedroom tax for all of us, for unoccupied rooms, we might be able to share the available housing out rather better. But ultimately we need to build more.

IsabellaofFrance · 11/09/2015 17:15

We have an rental property, we lived in it and then purchased out current house. We allow pets and have had the same tenant for 2 years and that won't change until they decide to move. Not everyone wants to buy.

We also have a DS who is unlikely to ever have a job or be able to support himself so its an investment for him. So IMO yabu.

suzannefollowmyvan · 11/09/2015 17:16

renting out property is an easy way to channel other peoples hard earned wages into your pockets.

You'll have enough money when you're older, they.....well who cares about those suckers who weren't smart enough to get a foot on the ladder anyway

Andrewofgg · 11/09/2015 17:17

Why not put some houses on sale first with a local occupancy clause

Because part of owning a property is being able to sell for the best price it will fetch without concerning yourself about the buyer's plans for it.

If you were selling your car would you be willing first only to accept offers from people who did not already have one and only then if nobody bought it accept offers from people who wanted a second car for the same household?

suzannefollowmyvan · 11/09/2015 17:19

I do have a concern with older people living alone in huge houses they bought really cheaply in the 1960s and 1970s because of a lack of incentive to move, and I think this is a bigger aspect of the family housing supply problem locally. Perhaps if there was a bedroom tax for all of us, for unoccupied rooms, we might be able to share the available housing out rather better

I agree, but this seems like a very difficult area to tackle!

PausingFlatly · 11/09/2015 17:20

Wha...

Are you planning to choose your tenants to always be the same age as you? When you're 60, you'll be turning away 20-somethings?

Not that I'm sure what the moral difference is between being supported by your own generation and being supported by a different generation, but it seemed to matter to you.

suzannefollowmyvan · 11/09/2015 17:23

Andrew, but there are important differences between homes and cars, there are good arguments for treating property differently to other things

Being able to sell for the best price is only 'part of owning a property' because that's how things are set up currently, it is not an immutable fact of owning property.

I'm pretty sure that other countries have rules about who can buy property (?)

PausingFlatly · 11/09/2015 17:23

"Because part of owning a property is being able to sell for the best price it will fetch without concerning yourself about the buyer's plans for it."

Feck as like.

Restrictive covenants are precisely about someone concerning themselves with the buyer's plans for it. Compulsory purchase orders also possibly a bit of a shock to you.

Osolea · 11/09/2015 17:24

renting out property is an easy way to channel other peoples hard earned wages into your pockets.

So what do you suggest? If people can't afford to buy their own home they should be given somewhere to live for free while someone else manages the maintenance and financial risk for them?

People aren't paying for nothing when they rent, they are providing themselves with somewhere to live, like we all have to.

NoMoreRenting · 11/09/2015 17:24

But so is running a business especially one that people are reliant on.
And if people need to rent they are always going to be handing over their hard earned wages to someone else. They will never get closer to owning that home. What to you suggest? That if my current tenants stayed until my mortgage was paid off that I hand they house over to them? Surely that's maybe the way to go with council houses rather than private rentals.

Andrewofgg · 11/09/2015 17:25

Are you serious suzanne?

If you own a house it's yours. It's not part of a pool to be shared out. If what used to be a child's bedroom is now the study or the guest-room or the hobby-room - that's nobody else's business.

It's like a private pension; when the time comes to draw it then whatever it is, it is paid, and nobody counts your dependents or your other income if any.

Hands off!

PausingFlatly · 11/09/2015 17:25

And yes, suzanne, I've lived in countries where I wasn't eligible to buy property because there were rules about who could own it.

They'd been brought in for very good reasons, to do with absentee overseas LL and hoarding of national resources.

MrsUltracrepidarian · 11/09/2015 17:26

We have let out our flat, below market value to reliable tenants

  1. local teacher sharers
  2. 60's couple who were on a low income, had always had tied accommodation (pub landlords) and who were in no position to buy or rent at commercial prices 3 yrs until they made it on the list to HA flat
  3. Friend whose wife got the house when they divorced. None of those people were in a position to buy, nor did they want to at that time. Win win.
suzannefollowmyvan · 11/09/2015 17:27

Osolea the problem is that rents and property prices are too high in relation to wages, housing is un affordable....surely that's not news to you?

BTL LL's have helped to over inflate house prices

suzannefollowmyvan · 11/09/2015 17:28

to do with absentee overseas LL and hoarding of national resources

which is exactly what we have in this country!

LocatingLocatingLocating · 11/09/2015 17:31

In the large village I live in, which is 3 miles from nearest village, there are NO houses to rent. The second one becomes available (which is not very often) it is rented within hours. Surely in this situation we need more rental properties. Not everyone can or wants to buy.

Andrewofgg · 11/09/2015 17:32

suzanne cross-posted. No country in the EU (except in respect of some properties in Denmark) restricts who can buy houses; nor, SFAIK does the USA, Canada, or Australasia. In England there has never been any restriction.

PausingFlatly Agree about restrictive covenants but they are there when you buy - they can't be imposed later. If you choose to impose a new one when you sell and take the hit, that's your privilege. CPO has to be at independent valuation - nobody can tell you to sell for less. If the property is one which on the open market would be snapped up by a second-homer and it is bought by CPO for a road or whatever the buyer has to pay the inflated price and cannot say that if would be less if only there were no second-homers!

CalmYourselfTubbs · 11/09/2015 17:34

YANBU.
it's a bit of a sickener really.
i know one older gent who has 5 rental properties, which he is maintaining for his 'retirement'.
he has everything. except his health. his 5 rental properties can't buy him that.

Shiningdew · 11/09/2015 17:35

Property is for sale, somebody buys it.

Greedy HOW? Don't get it.

Iwantakitchen · 11/09/2015 17:36

Greed really? How about securing a future retirement fund as we cannot count on pensions anymore; low interest in banks; other investments are too risky; secure a flat where your children can stay when older; subsidise children's university fees, etc. you call it greed, I call it a solid investment for a hard working family who want to ensure a secure financial future. From my point of view yes completely selfish but not greedy. Just good financial sense.

PausingFlatly · 11/09/2015 17:37

Indeed.

I am watching the current growth of sales to overseas LL, corporate and individual, with a very jaundiced eye and waiting for the shit to hit the fan on that one.

Once it gets past a critical density in any given area, LL and (possibly informal) cartels of LL can operate control over rents and "type" of tenant. That will go well.

I've also been wondering about the impact on the balance of payments as all this rent starts flowing out of the country. It will be tiny to begin with... but may not stay that way.

NewBallsPlease00 · 11/09/2015 17:42

But the vast majority of renters o know cups by afford the mortgage or the risks that come with home ownership
Eg a 2 bed Terrace here costs about 115k, and rents at 450 month
To buy required a full time salary min 35k, or joint of 20&20k ish with deposit c.20k
Wages here are average so it's not a given people buy, because they can't get the deposit and mortgage but can afford the 450 month
So I don't really see problem?
If you own a home and something goes wrong you're responsible
If you inherit a home why should you have to sell it
If you choose to not buy a home and choose to rent (plenty do) why should there be less on Market because is a closed authority led offering
Why if me and my partner both used to own a home should one of use be forced to sell rather than BTL

thehypocritesoaf · 11/09/2015 17:46

Who sells to investment buyers? Those people must be really annoying (greedy) too.

Andrewofgg · 11/09/2015 17:53

The same people who sell to second-homers. People selling the biggest asset they have who want to sell it for as much as they can - and don't want to be told to try local people or non BTL-buyers first!

Swipe left for the next trending thread