to think all buy to let people are just in it to get someone else to work to pay off their mortgage?

[madhurjazz]

I wish people would say it as it is. Buy to let in my mind is just about getting someone else that can't afford a deposit / without a stable job to do all the hard work to pay off the mortgage of someone else. It does feel like a massive step backwards in equality.

Very few actually want to rent, the vast majority are stuck doing so as speculation keeps pushing ownership out of reach.

Bulit on Government land, at cost.
A three bed semi costs 30-40k to build, materials and labour included.
That is around three years housing benefit in some areas at around 1k/month.
It is a crime that the billions sucked out of the economy in housing benefit was not used to build houses.
I feel the time has come, sentiment and policy is changing.
Hurrah!

Funny, 'cos whenever anyone on MN is looking for somewhere to rent I see them saying there is hardly any choice/nothing suitable available? Yet you think the housing market is swamped by unscrupulous buy-to-let landlords? As if!

Taxation is one of the systems that redistributes wealth, I don't expect to profit from a stranger's inheritance nor do I expect them to profit from mine. But if my parents left me money and I bought a house with it, you'd expect me to donate it to someone else?

Genuine question User but what do you mean by government land?

Ex Mod, airfields, ex local government land.
The government is a massive landowner.
The will, until now has not been there.
As ever it is politically driven, driven by the electorates distain at the ridiculous housing situation.
In essence it is a vote winner.
As can be seen by the plummeting home ownership figures, i guess a very large vote winner

Becoming a buy to let landlord is nothing more than gambling on the government continuing to be useless and doing nothing about the housing crisis. It's profitable because the government pumps money into the housing market with madcap schemes like "help to buy" and by paying copious amounts of housing benefit which is hoovered up by landlords and pushes up market rents for everyone else (also hoovered up by landlords).

You only have to look at the archetypal buy to let landlords Fergus and Judith Wilson who left to the free market would have gone bust but instead were bailed out by the government slashing interest rates and subsequently their lenders cutting them preferential deals to see all is not as it should be in the housing "market". Instead they're now worth hundreds of millions of pounds. That they treat their tenants like dirt and are thick as two short planks isn't a coincidence either.

And no, I'm not one of their tenants, or anyone's tenant.

Again...not all LL fit into the small box you're trying to put them in, user.

In almost 8yrs, 12 different tenants, none have ever been in receipt of housing benefit.

Either you didn't fully read my post or didn't understand it. Money pumped into the rental market in the form of housing benefit has a knock on effect on the whole of it, not just people party to rental agreements where it is involved.

I read it but clearly I'm missing something. So yes, please explain how us renting out our house to affluent professionals is affected by the housing benefits system.

What about the village next to our former home? Houses rent for 10 or 12k a month there. Does the housing benefit system affect those? Or is the system adversely affected by those?

If BTL is such an amazing boon, then why not do it yourself? Or, if you can't afford a whole house, find some partners and go for it?

After all, you'll definitely have a free house in 20 years time.

Bulit on Government land, at cost.
A three bed semi costs 30-40k to build, materials and labour included

I hope we've learnt the lessons of the 1960s and will avoid creating large swathes of housing exclusively targeted at lower income households.

user the end result if that will be landlords refusing to let to people on low incomes so they end up in squalid accommodation with unscrupulous landlords. Who would want to rent a property and be forced to sell it after two years? Better to rent to the well off who are renting in the short term between houses or before they choose an area to settle down.

Yanbu. Btl is part of he reason people cannot afford houses. All the low end properties near me are bought up by landlords.

Housing should be somewhere to live before investment. Maybe a higher tax on all second homes and much higher for subsequent. I hate the I'm alright jack attitude that some have expressed on this thread.

But if my parents left me money and I bought a house with it, you'd expect me to donate it to someone else?

Posting quickly between arriving home and bed, but according to some it seems that's exactly how it should work; unfortunately, what hasn't been addressed is how deserving people would be identified. I imagine many would enjoy free housing, but separating the genuinely needy from the feckless would require a better mind than mine

Becoming a buy to let landlord is nothing more than gambling on the government continuing to be useless and doing nothing about the housing crisis

I hate to say it, and I know it shouldn't be this way, but on all experience so far I'd say that gambling on governmental uselessness is a pretty safe bet

The landlord hate is fuelled by envy

This lovely ideology tends to be thrown at anyone whom has the gall to challenge inequalities in society. Usually conservatives. Accept your crumbs gratefully...

I hope we've learnt the lessons of the 1960s and will avoid creating large swathes of housing exclusively targeted at lower income households

Huh??!!! I'll have to catch up in the morning now, but I thought housing for low income households was exactly what many were pressing for??

That is exactly why people buy to let, why else would they do it?

I'll have to catch up in the morning now, but I thought housing for low income households was exactly what many were pressing for??

Not exactly. The ideal is mixed use developments. A mix of houses and flats of various sizes. A mix of outright ownership, some affordable housing eg thru SO and some that is owned and let by the housing association/private counterpart.

Thankfully planners do seem to have learnt that building massive tower blocks and estates as 100% LA rent does not make for a nice environment to live in.

Shit load of estates you'd be lucky not to get stabbed walking through. Well, actually, that's an exaggeration because thankfully the gangs mainly stab each other. Change that to being mugged.

My last landlady rented out her house because she was trying out a career change in a different part of the country and wanted to keep her options open. It suited all of us. She did the new job for a few years then was able to come home.

This lovely ideology tends to be thrown at anyone whom has the gall to challenge inequalities in society

Inequality of what? Opportunity? Or resource?

It does come down to ideology - do you believe people should be permitted to benefit from their hard work and good fortune, or should resources be made equally available irrespective of the effort put in.

I am an accidental landlord and it's marvellous. Tempted to get another one tbh. My SIPP and ISA are static and give me no return at all. My flat's value has gone up 50% and yields 6.6%.

Ah yes - see what you mean, YelloDraw - certainly those tower blocks must have been an unattractive place to live. I imagine many would agree that turning to crime or stabbing folk was largely optional, though, which raises the old question of whether such folk are criminals because they're marginalized, or are marginalized because they're criminals ... ?

NNChange is correct that it's down to which ideology you prefer: capitalism or socialism/communism. Without doubt the first has its faults, but then the second doesn't exactly have a track record of success either, does it?

NNChange is correct that it's down to which ideology you prefer: capitalism or socialism/communism. Without doubt the first has its faults, but then the second doesn't exactly have a track record of success either, does it?

Quite right. For those of you who'd like the state to have a heavy hand in the housing market, Chairman Mao would agree.

'One House For Everyone In New China! No More, No Less!'

I'm lucky enough to own my own property but it's down to luck. I bought aged 22 in 1991 when there was a recession and property was cheap, we didn't need huge deposits and it was easy to do. All my friends bought young. We also.had the opportunity to go on the council house list as it was a given that you don't pay someone else's mortgage off by renting. I'm shocked when I talk to young people , it's so much harder to get on the property ladder and how difficult it is to find a home, private rents are so expensive. Most of them are struggling to get buy let alone save for deposit. These are couples who both work bloody hard, much harder than me. It's very sad and worrying. My grandparents strived to make it easier for future generations. Nowadays we don't give a fuck as long as we're ok. Very sad really.

"we complete any work pretty much straight away, and I'm at the end of the phone if the tenants need me"

It's good to read that you're not one of those awful landlords who doesn't do those things. But that doesn't make you amazing! That's just what you ought to be doing anyway!

"Isn't rent payment for a service?" No I don't think having a roof over your head is a 'service' being used. It's a basic human right being met IMO.

"Isn't rent payment for a service?" No I don't think having a roof over your head is a 'service' being used. It's a basic human right being met IMO

No. Human rights are inalienable, adding things that costs money to the list makes them all subject to revision. No, no, no.