To think it's selfish to deliberately plan to rent out the old house when you buy a new

[jdoe8]

I understand why people do it, its dog eat dog out there and people look after number 1 even if it means it screws others.

But how are the next generation going to ever afford to buy if people carry on doing this?

This makes for depressing reading especially the comments - www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/26/the-sad-cost-of-renting-never-having-somewhere-to-call-home

I don't believe any generation worked any harder, you just had to be lucky and in the right place at the right time. Its very well to say just rent but renters have such poor rights in the UK it's very undesirable.

If it is so enforceable, how come so many people are living in dangerous or substandard accommodation? Because it is not enforced and tennants that try to get it so are vulnerable to eviction so are forced to stay quiet, that's why.

As for the other, then maybe some landlords will realise that renting isn't the best form of investment for them. All financial investments have pros and cons - want top interest rates, then you can't withdraw your money at will without a penalty.

I'm a landlord btw, I just don't think it should be a route to a quick buck with no responsibilities.

The other end of the problem is that LL's are retaining properties to provide a nest egg for their children - very admirable, absolutely. However this means that house prices shoot up even more, as so many people have 30-40k available for them as a deposit when they are young, and those of us who earn fairly decent wages (myself and my partner clear £90k between us) are unable to get a mortgage as we are unable to save as rent is so high - because LL's can charge double or more of what their mortgage is. There should be a cap on the yield a property can gain on top of a mortgage.

I can understand the mind set that if you have already bought a house, paid stamp duty, legal fees and maintained the property that if you could afford to keep it when you move that you do. As long as the owner is a decent landlord then I can't see the issue with this.

cabbages 20% reduction in house prices would make very little difference to the majority of people who can't afford to buy. They would still need huge deposits which they can't afford to save up and they would still need to borrow more multiples of their income than is possible.

I live in the North West. Would love to live in the city I was born in but unfortunately I can't afford the house prices, so I am a 20 minute drive away in a much cheaper area.
House was 150k, now it's renovated hopefully worth nearer to 200k.

BarbarianMum As a landlord you cannot serve a valid s21 notice once a repair issue has been raised, unless it has firstly been remedied, most LLs will not serve a s21 where there could be a potential conflict between LL&T. Why aren't they being enforced? Because they are not being reported. If my tenants' reported me for not having statutory compliance I would absolutely get the book thrown at me.

AndnoneforGretchenWeinersBye Market rent is market rent - if your LL is charging you the going rate that is four times his mortgage, he has invested well, hasn't he? Sometimes we have to compromise - I can't afford to invest in London, so I have bought property elsewhere.

Dog WOW so in two years work from 16-18 you saved 37.5k? What were you doing? Can I apply? And you say you were low paid?

Or you are just speaking crap.

I think the current generation often have different priorities to those of their parents/grandparents. My grandparents never travelled abroad, or had expensive gadgets (like a black and white TV which was the iPhone of its day) but instead scrimped to buy a house. Our family never went abroad until I was a teenager - but again my parents saved to buy a home.

Yes prices of houses have risen and it is difficult to obtain a deposit - I am not disputing that at all. However - there is a definite proportion of those who complain about not being able to buy who spend significant amounts of money on luxuries like holidays/fancy cars/gadgets. Not by any stretch of the imagination everyone - but definitely some people - I know them.

AndnoneforGretchenWeinersBye
How much the LL's mortgage is is non of the tenant's business. What if the mortgage is paid off? Should the rent be zero?
The tenant pays for a service, price should be dependent on the service he is getting (size of the house, location...). Making it dependent on the LL's mortgage means similar flats priced completely differently.

I have some money I want to buy a house with. I looked at a house recently - tenant in situ and it needed so much modernisation it was unreal (the tenant was happy to stay though), It was a nice house - fab location but was circa 1980 in wiring, décor, fixings woodchip etc.

I really felt for the tenants as they had small child and prob can't afford anything better (not being judgy). Can't bring myself to buy it and then have to put in all that work as I couldn't let a property I don't want to live in.

I hope that when I secure a rental property it's something people enjoy living in.

someone working in a good job should be able to afford a house

Says who? In a lot of the world renting is the norm, and home ownership isn't something most people have.

Yes, so selfish to provide rental accommodation to people who want/need to rent.

FFS.

What a fucking idiotic thing to say.

I hope that when I secure a rental property it's something people enjoy living in.

My last landlord had that attitude. I loved living in his flat. Super flat in a great location with a very unobtrusive but also responsive and flexible land lord. I was there for 5 years until I moved out to my own house.

We live in the South East, have one child and rent a one bed flat and warm £50k between us before tax- currently when we have paid our tax, rent, childcare, commuting costs, bills and food we have about £150 leftover a month. We soon will need to move to a two bed as our child shares our bedroom which will eat that £150 up completely. For us the issue isn't that we can't afford a mortgage in our area as such, we have good credit scores and decent enough earnings that we should qualify, house prices are expensive but not totally outrageous in our area but the cost of living is just too high to even get near saving for a deposit. Everytime we have managed to get something resembling the beginnings of a decent amount of savings something comes up- car needs new tyres, we've had to move house and come up with a new rental deposit etc. Buy to Let isn't the problem it's the cost of living being so high

I became an accidental LL when I moved for a job.

My last tenant was a pita: got puppies in breach of the lease; stopped paying rent when she fancied it; phoned up the plumbers I used pretending to be me to get them out to unblock drains she'd blocked by flushing nappies (who the fuck flushes nappies?!) and then refused to pay them. Twice. Wouldn't permit contractor in to do repair work that she wanted doing and left the place filthy.

It took me 6mths and cost over 10k in lost rent and legal fee to get her out.

Going forward my house will sit empty, but for occasional use by me.

Does that make us selfish cunts OP? I couldn't care less if it does.

May I ask, how far are you willing to go with this? What are your limits?

Agree with AHedgehog - someone working in a good job should be able to afford a house

Says who? In a lot of the world renting is the norm, and home ownership isn't something most people have.

In this country, it's only really the baby boomer generation who expected to own a property, my grandparents on one side where middle class (above average income) with one side from 'older money' - they expected to own a property, my other side were working class, but while in skilled, well paid jobs, expected and did rent long term.

Rental rights need improving, policies need to allow for people not being 'housing costs free' by mid-50s (when many have paid off mortgages) - but reducing the rental property options isn't the solution. There's already starting to appear handwringing articles about people still paying off mortgages in their 60s as they've released equity and now need to pay it back - the idea that you still have to pay for the roof over your head monthly into pensionable age will need to filter through.

Dog WOW so in two years work from 16-18 you saved 37.5k? What were you doing? Can I apply? And you say you were low paid?

Um, I don't know what maths you are doing but if my house was 150k then I saved 15k deposit. However I mentioned that i paid 50% and my partner the other 50% so that makes 7.5k AND I said I had been working since I was 13, so I already had some of this saved but yes the majority was saved in the 2 years.

What are her limits, makeourfuture?? The limits of her bank balance, presumably, like the rest of us. Property is not theft.

Going forward my house will sit empty, but for occasional use by me.

I have thought about a second just for us or occasional holiday let (I don't need to finance a mortgage just hoping for capital gain over years) Maybe I will think again.

Although that will completely deny another property to be rented by someone.

Our children are our responsibility and concern. I'm not interested in anyone else from 'the next generation' and their ability to afford their own home. Does that make us selfish cunts OP? I couldn't care less if it does.

Are there limits to this sort of reasoning? How far would you go?

What are her limits, makeourfuture?? The limits of her bank balance, presumably, like the rest of us. Property is not theft.

But at some point we can't excuse all actions with these sorts of ideas. Isn't paying tax....under your model...taking away from your children's future wealth?

But at some point we can't excuse all actions with these sorts of ideas. Isn't paying tax....under your model...taking away from your children's future wealth?

IHT relief on inheritance tax has distorted the agricultural land market in this country because investment buyers (Dyson?) see it as an effective tax break, included myself and DH (we are farmers) and half of my clients - is it exploiting the system or are we just making tax effective choices?

If these provisions exist you're just an idiot if you have the capital and don't make sound investments. Our future generations will benefit from our investments, it provides us with a livelihood (DH farms, I work as a surveyor in the land agency industry) and if that makes me a selfish cunt I'm fine with that - Capitalism won't draw a line because one person takes the moral high ground.

Frillyhorseyknickers A rental market without any problems? Easy to say as a homeowner and landlord (and what sounds like an inheritance, too).

When you have been a good tenant, paid your rent on time, taken regular time off work to let a stranger in to inspect the way you're living, stared at four magnolia walls that you daren't stick a nail in to hang a picture and still get booted out twelve months later because the landlord wants to sell up, you too would be obsessed with the idea of home ownership just to attempt to get some security of tenure.

Not you that said this but I must stop buying those phones, eating out and having lavish foreign holidays, according to other posters that'll normally do the trick.

Capitalism won't draw a line because one person takes the moral high ground.

It certainly doesn't. We are in agreement there.

I just worry that as we reach our limits, if we are to ask the poor to suffer, won't other parties contribute as well?

Are they willing to help at all?

I agree with Doglikeafox, I was in a similar situation insofar as I just made buying a house my priority and I devoted 3 years to saving and not spending money, saved a 30k deposit and bought my flat on my own in London.

I was on an NHS salary so not exactly destitute but not earning megabucks (and I had other debts to pay too from training).

I think when you have kids it's a different kettle of fish. You can't make savings by living in a shared house etc. But when you are in your early 20s and single you absolutely can save money; what I have seen for years and years (and heard from people!) is that basically they don't want to. They NEED a 'good car' (£250 a month for a mini on finance when a fiesta is £150, etc) they NEED holidays, they NEED new clothes every month and takeaways at £20 a pop and they need an Uber home instead of the night bus. No you don't need it. You want it and that's different.

That being said, it is demonstrably more difficult to buy a house nowadays but the days of 'mortgage 3x one's salary' are long gone.

A lot of the people I know and have seen on here have really unrealistic expectations of what they can get as a first purchase property, or they've started the process too late and are bewildered that on thinking about buying a home in their early 30s with no savings, that they've got used to a level of lifestyle that means they can't save the required deposit for a few years. Or they now have children which makes saving on a low salary nigh on impossible! I don't blame those people TBH- I think education around money management is woeful and people aren't encouraged to think of the future enough when they are young enough to start it as a habit. This is obviously 'in general' and there are lots of reasons why that might not be possible but for a lot of people it is, it's just not nice to hear and accept that you've made choices in your 20s that mean things are more difficult in your 30s.