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.

pauldacreshairlessnutsack - exactly what are we taking advantage of? Saving hard for a deposit - passing the mortgage criteria in order to afford the loan - choosing to invest in property rather than shares - paying tax at our highest level of income - having the government change the tax basis without consultation - not sure what you think we're taking advantage of? And yes house prices are high - but that's not just because of buy to let landlords- and even if they did drive up house prices - many ordinary people who have bought their own homes are benefitting from that.......

BusyDays13 - the main form of government help for BtLers is Housing Benefit; this benefit allows landlords to charge higher rents than they would if the benefit did not exist.

I absolutely hate the buy to let market. I work in London and for a number of years have worked with people both young and middle aged who just cannot afford to save a deposit to buy their own place whilst forking out astronomical rent. When did owning a home become a commodity? Surely having a home is a basic need. I've met people who have portfolios of 100+ properties and squeeze every penny they can out of their tenants. Unfortunately I live in Surrey due to working in London and Surrey is now as bad as London (Sussex is catching up too!) and the markets is flooded with 'investors' and 'cash buyers' making it virtually impossible to buy. One of my colleagues has viewed over 80 properties but keeps losing out to cash buyers. I absolutely detest it and if I had my way no one would have the right to own more than a 'home'.

this benefit allows landlords to charge higher rents than they would if the benefit did not exist.

Really? Do you honestly think all these accidental and amateur LL would continue to remain LL if they couldn't cover the costs they incur?

and given that most BTL mortgages excludes HB tenants - it's just not possible for HB to be paying off those mortgages, is it?

madhurjazz

Jealous are we?

So, without private landlords you think that the housing market would suddenly go into decline and everyone would happily be able to own there own home?!

Property has always appreciated, that will never change.

Lots of people rent because they choose to due to work/school/ testing the water before moving in with someone/students. Would you like to force all these people to buy because you are jealous of so.eo e making a profit?

Get a grip.

Did you post this for attention?! If so well done it worked!

busy
Saving hard for a deposit - passing the mortgage criteria in order to afford the loan
in fact the criteria for BTLs is NOT the same as that for owner-occupiers and although this is tightened of late (the need for a 25% deposit is now required) it used to be v v easy to get a BTL mortgage without even a regular income as the amount to be borrowed (often on interest only basis) was based on a putative rental income that was not checked or verified.
It is good that the rules have tightened up but it should have been done years ago.
To me people who boast of their portfolio and how many properties they 'own' (all down to their hard work of course) are selfish and they seem to feel that gives them the 'privilege' to look down on those who have no BTLs or any hope of having a home to call their own (and they are not the ones who are 'so happy' to rent)

If the country was awash with houses then nobody would be complaining. The problem is that this Government (and the last) have been criminally incompetent at ensuring enough are built for the growing population. So why are landlords being blamed for this?

Inshock, but if that was the law then we would have been stuck, unable to move to the new job that DH took at the other end of the country. Properties were being reduced and reduced and still sitting on the market for 2yrs+ We initially rented down here but renting was very expensive and stressful as ds3 has asd and likes to make holes. So we took most of the equity out the other house and bought another down here.
Granted we could sell the other house now but a draconian law prohibiting us from buying before selling would have made things very difficult for us.

Inshcok73 One of the rights which you have as a houseowner is to sell to whoever will buy without considering or even knowing whether they already own a house. You could restrict ownership of new build but I doubt if it could be enforced.

We had to make huge sacrifices to be able to afford a second house once first was letout. Won't go into details because it will out me but sacrifices which most people with a young family wouldn't consider.
I know some people will never be able to afford a house but others could if they would be prepared to cut back on everything, move somewhere cheaper and save hard for several years like we did.

The problem is that this Government (and the last) have been criminally incompetent at ensuring enough are built for the growing population. So why are landlords being blamed for this?

Sure this is a big part of the problem but the housing market is incredibly complex and it is quite clear that there is not just one cause of the current crisis. The recent growth in mortgage lending is largely driven by buy to let (see e.g. telegraph and it seems basic economics that driving up demand will increase prices (as, of course, is the limited supply). Given the huge problems in affordability in housing, this is adding fuel to a market that already looks overheated.

It's also quite clear that the Bank of England has serious concerns that buy to let could cause instability in the market, that's why they have been trying to tighten up lending on BTL mortgages and why the last Chancellor altered the tax regime to make BTL more unattractive. E.g. see theBOE assessment that:

"Buy-to-let lending could pose a risk to financial stability.
The actions of buy-to-let investors affect the broader housing and mortgage markets as individuals compete to buy the same pool of properties. Looser lending standards in the buy-to-let sector could contribute to general house price increases and a broader increase in household indebtedness. And in a downswing, investors selling buy-to-let properties into an illiquid market could amplify falls in house prices, potentially raising losses given default for all mortgages."

Plus you have all of the problems discussed up thread with loose regulation of the rental market and the consequent issues of unstable and unsafe housing, driven in part by BTL amateurs.

Now it is clearly simplistic to 'hate' all landlords or to blame landlords for all of the woes in the market but it is surely evident that BTL landlords are having a significant impact on the market, that that impact is often harmful and that many people have well-founded concerns about that impact.

TBH I'm a bit incredulous as to how anyone can afford their OWN house in this day and age, let alone a second house.

I rent and yes I am jealous that I slave away to pay a very high rent (which is ever increasing) with no chance to save for someone who owns their own lovely home already plus my humble dwelling.

I think I'm a good tenant; I pay rent on time and the agency makes sure that I keep the house up together through regular inspections. The ll does minimal effort as the agency deals with it.

It is the smug snobbery that goes with home ownership. A snobbery that lets everyone know how wealthy you are and you are wealthy because you and your dp work much harder than the poor people. A snobbery which says that you are much better at saving and have made better life choices than none home owners.
Everything seems to be centred around it . I have heard comments such as
"Do you JUST rent?"
"People who own their own homes take better care of their house than renters."
"You MUST get a mortgage"
"Are you on the property ladder yet?"....er...HOW?
"Jealous are we?"
To quote a few.

AS far as I can gather on the continent, home ownership is not so much of a thing. It is normal to rent.

Then again there are many benefits to renting:
More flexible.
You don't have to stay in a job you loathe for a of the house being repossessed.
Can claim housing benefits if needed.
Someone else does the repairs
A tiny deposit
More money for holidays etc (due to not saving for a deposit and realising that life is too short to scrimp for 20 years!)

I just don't really get how a couple can get £50, 000 plus for a deposit together unless in very well paid jobs or unless they get a lump sum inheritance.

So yes, I am envious as would many people are if they are struggling to get on the ladder.

And btw I am not talking swanky holidays here; I'm talking cheap, family hols and camping trips which give my dd happy childhood memories.

In order to save I would have to move to a very cheap house thus move dd out of a school she loves,Get a better job with more hours and never see dd(have tried; I have a post grad degree and experience), buy nothing for 5/10 years, no holidays, no treats, no nights out, value everything, no car. NO FUN AND NO KIND OF LIFE.

In other words my dd would have a shit childhood if I saved for a deposit. Not worth it.

My daughter purchased a part-buy, part rent flat before she met her husband. His father died suddenly leaving him a house but as he didn't have life insurance her DH had to take out a hefty mortgage for such a young man in order not to lose the lot. At this point my DH found herself pregnant, disabled and without a job. She wasn't entitled to benefits if she moved in with her soon to be husband but she couldn't live in the flat as the life kept breaking down. She told the HA she would have to sell but their conditions were so onerous, prospective buyers were put off. As she was getting deeper and deeper into debt with the rent piling up she asked the HA could she sign the flat over to them long term to be let through them at a reasonable rent for people on the housing list. All she wanted was for them to charge enough to pay her mortgage which was a pittance, she didn't want to profit from it. They just threatened to repossess. However, they did agree she could sell the property to someone who wanted to buy it all instead of under the part rent/part buy scheme. The consequence of that? Her flat was sold to a LL who would rent it out far in excess of what the HA would have charged. It's madness.

We rent because we cant get a mortgage. We earn lots and have deposit but due to slight chequered past we can't get a mortgage.

I hate renting.

My brother and his wife are going to buy to let because they can only get a small mortgage to buy a flat in an area they do not want to live. They will rent where they want to live instead and eventually sell flat when in a better position.

Lots of different reasons for renting. But I do agree most are because people cannot get a mortgage or the right mortgage.

LikeDylan People point to the experience of mainland Europe where renting is the norm. But there tenants have a right to a longer term contract and rent protection The contracts may be longer, but the landlord can still give you notice within that contract...mine can give me three months at any time, despite having a 9 year lease. We have the 'protection' of the rent being index linked, which means it has risen annually each year of the contract.

We pay in Belgium, as tenants, for gas servicing, the gardener, buildings insurance, the chimney being swept, and it is expected that the property is given back as it was taken over, so no wear and tear. You are lucky to get out of a property with €3k for damages, and it goes to solicitors if you want to argue the case. No deposit protection scheme either.

Be careful what you wish for before you start espousing the European model. It isn't all it is cracked up to be.

OP if you dont like paying someone's mortgage then dont rent from them. My rentals use all my capital. They are my pension. Voters agreed the market economy. If we have a socialist government I'd be delighted because I won't need them. Till then I'll treat my tenants well and bank the rent

Gini99

I couldn’t agree more that the housing market is very complex but I then disagree to the same extent on your views about fuelling the market and the comments by the BoE.

Landlords have not added to demand and in fact have taken a great deal of pressure off upward price pressure.

Firstly when they buy a house it is with the intention of letting it out, so it is filled with someone needing a home. That person or persons has therefore been taken out of the demand side of the market.

In addition LLs have brought many, many properties back into use that had been empty for years. We have personally re-introduced 8 unloved houses that were unfit for human habitation until we purchased and renovated. One of them had been boarded up for over 10 years!

Some landlords (and whilst this doesn’t apply to us, I certainly know landlords it does apply to) will buy houses ‘off-plan’ and by doing this they provide finance to builders to continue building. An owner occupier could do this but often don’t so where would you suggest that builders get their finance from??? Banks don’t like lending on property projects and when they do they charge phenomenal rates. This would mean higher prices for houses , or maybe some developments just wouldn’t complete.

Then of course there’s the landlords that have taken big old houses and made better use of them by converting to houses in multiple occupation. There are many, many thousands of people that live in these places. Thousands! If landlords hadn’t done the HMO conversions they would all be looking for starter homes.

As for the BoE, I’m afraid it is dangerous to take Mark Carney as anything but a political puppet. You only have to look at his pre-Brexit guff to see just what I mean by that. I guess when you take into account that he is set to earn £7 MILLION if he stays for his 8 year term you can understand his motivations for doing as Osborne told him, but most of what he says can be easily discounted.

For example he likes to say that BTL imposes a financial instability in the market – more guff! The figures he has used about mortgage arrears are actually a lie because, for whatever reason best known to the Bank, they lumped BTL in with second-charge owner-occupier loans, where indeed there are significant arrears. The arrears on BTL mortgages are tiny, absolutely minute. Therefore when they also like to promote ‘big increases in BTL arrears’, you’re talking about an increase on such a small figure it is completely insignificant.

Mark Carney is/ was Osborne’s puppet. Osborne saw BTL as a tax cash-cow and his tax changes were simply to take advantage of that opportunity. Unfortunately it means that rents will rise significantly over the coming years, more and more people will be unable to save a deposit, there will be a step-function in evictions and less houses will be built.

As you said, housing is a complex issue. Mrs May has an opportunity to prevent much damage but she will need to act very quickly indeed.

Oh and I forgot to mention the landlords that convert commercial buildings to residential. I have friends that specialise in that and have created some beautiful apartments from disused old office buildings. Thus there are more homes created by landlords that wouldn't have been there otherwise!

It seems to be government policy to subsidise short term private accommodation with housing benefit rather than to provide social housing. It isn't therefore surprising that some private land lords provide housing to people on benefits. Long term, this seems to be a plan with many holes.

However, the electorate did vote for the Conservatives and George's policy of extending the right to buy. Labour are busy doing whatever it is they now do and the government have to sort out Brexit (whatever that means).

Who knows when housing policy will be back on anyone's agenda?

It's notable that l/l on this thread haven't engaged with posters who say that they would live to be able to save for a deposit but can't because their rents are so high, and instead reiterate the 'choices' that tenants have.

Not everyone wants to buy ( that's why social housing should be protected), but there are thousands who do and aren't ' choosing: to rent.

As far as I can see, the world over, your housing status depends pretty much on when and where you were born. What economic st

Pressed send too soom. Your parent's economic status is some times a factor.

It's very defensive and dishonest to blame those who want to buy and can't entirely for their own fortunes.

christina that's back to political ideology again - whether or not you believe social mobility is possible.

Plenty of people on this thread have explained that sacrifices they made, and choices they've taken in order to get on the housing ladder.

While a couple may not be able to save if they rent a home they enjoy living in, by relocating or downsizing, they may well free up that money to save for a deposit.