Selfish bastards on Homes Under The Hammer

[SquishyBones]

Watching this shit show as I was bored and a family bought a house. The woman then proudly explained that they already own 700(!!!) houses in the area already and are hoping to own 1000 by the end of the year. How the fuck is this even allowed?? AIBU to think selfish bastards like this should be stopped and there should be a cap on how many properties a person can own? Even 10 houses per person would be ridiculous but would stop the likes of these people

It’s typical socialist mentality to be against people who have more than you because they took risks. People who see others as greedy are often lazy and fans of mediocrity. They believe in equality, i.e everyone being equally poor.
Why not be neutral about people who take risks and accumulate without being envious and nasty.

fair play on the OP who has come back to this thread, even though (unusually for MN) it hasn't gone the way she wanted.

that rent act history is a bit of a bugger for the anti-landlord brigade, isn't it?

I also await answers on:

• why number of properties held should be limited when other mass holdings are not.
• why it is 'greedy' to market an asset at the highest price the market will bear. Does the OP only take half her wages? Would she sell her house to the lowest bidder to avoid being 'greedy'?
• why it is not acceptable to make profit from housing when it is ok to do so from food, clothing, etc etc.
• why the bile is not directed at mortgage providers.

no anti-landlord type ever answers, maybe the OP will be the first. And will give answers that will demonstrate that this isn't just jealousy.

oink oink, flap flap....

@sst1234

It’s typical socialist mentality to be against people who have more than you because they took risks. People who see others as greedy are often lazy and fans of mediocrity. They believe in equality, i.e everyone being equally poor. Why not be neutral about people who take risks and accumulate without being envious and nasty.

Totally agree

It’s typical socialist mentality to be against people who have more than you because they took risks rubbish!
I’ve owned by own home since I was 20, small mortgage- I’m on the ladder! But I can open my eyes to how hard others have it, how unattainable owning a home has become. And I’ve nothing against enterprise but I fully think a roof over ones head and food on the table is the minimum everyone in society deserves.

I am old enough to remember the Rent Acts - you could rent for life and pass that on to children and the rents were sometimes fixed at £10 a year. It might seem today like a wonderland for tenants but the result was there was just about no property to rent. Even when I came to London in 1982 to work I Had to take a room with shared diry shower down the hall because it could class itself as some kind of hostel to avoid the rent acts; council housing waiting lists were 20 years and people had to sleep on frienfd's floors. They could not get teachers at my husband's school so they had to offer teachers school flats. It really want not better - it was much much worse. Just about the only people letting were landlords happy to break the rules (and break your legs if you didn't pay the rent or didn't leave when you should). The assured shorthold tenancy then came out and suddenly there was property available because with a court order and much delay landlords could not have fixed periods of lettings. Even under shortholds tenants can sign up for even ten years today in 2020 if they and the landlord agree but many tenants are young and mobile and don't want more than a year.

Thank you for posting this. I found it very enlightening.

I also await answers on: - why number of properties held should be limited when other mass holdings are not Well to use a recent example, when people were panic buying toilet roll and pasta why did the supermarkets put a limit on certain items? To allow everyone to access what we, as a society, consider the basics. I consider housing to be a basic necessity.

They paid stamp duty on 700 houses
And they will pay capital gains if they sell them.

I think you are jealous
I think they are lying or boastful or insensitive, or just tedious.

Don't watch the show. Read a book.

But people can still access housing owned by landlords. The landlords aren’t keeping the houses empty for a lark.

Do you mean that owning housing is a basic necessity that should be given to all? That’s quite a can of worms to open.

I have no issues with landlords holding housing so long as I have the ability to build on any land i own without restriction/planning.

Housing is different from other commodities because its supply is deliberately restricted using planning law and NIMBY's who normally own housing. Full liberalisation of this and then i can accept people being able to own as many as they want.

a roof over ones head and food on the table is the minimum everyone in society deserves.

Deserves. Now that is a loaded word.

Also when the government step in to keep house prices high to stop housing crashes like in 2009. You shouldn't allow people to speculate on the market over and above buying a home. If the price of a house was treated the same as buying a large amount of Stock and Shares and was just let fall then i would also be happier to allow landlords to own more. they take the risk and get repossessed if they go under because asset falls/ rent goes down. As it stands the taxpayer sets the minimum rental price using housing benefit, when house prices start to fall the BOE print money and products like HTB distort the market too. The government sets the winners and losers of the property game at least they can exclude those who leverage up on it.

Quarantimespringclean

Most properties that sell at auction are sold that way because they are in such poor condition (for of non standard construction) that high street lenders won’t give normal purchasers a mortgage on them. If developers and landlords didn’t buy them they would remain unoccupied and fall into an even greater state of disrepair or be squatted by desperate homeless people. Neither of these options do much for,the local economy. If a developer buys them they will be refurbed and put back in the housing supply.
Absolutely agree with this. Individuals who buy rundown properties, spend money and time making them habitable, then let them, are not ‘greedy bastards’.

Good for them! They’ve built a successful business and should be applauded for it.

Do people have the same bravo attitude to foreign investors buying property from abroad and not bothering to even rent it out- because profit and enterprise should be commended above all else?

It's an issue as there is a housing shortage! Also these landlords often over charge for poorly maintained and substandard properties!

Not everyone wants to or is in a position to buy every time they move.

Who do you suggest rents properties to those people?

I am a landlord & I work - I purchased properties with the death in service benefits I received when my husband died. I needed monthly income to replace the missing salary to bring up my children (Youngest was 10) if I had left the money in the bank the capital would have been eaten away by the necessity of living, as it is I will have something that will let me help my children in the future
The first property I purchased was fully renovated & in 15 months was totally trashed by the tenant, renovated again & re-let to a tenant on HB who has struggled with Covid finance issues. So they have just paid the amount of housing benefit & we will work it out. They had a fire a couple of weeks ago & thank goodness they are okay. Nothing damaged other than a piece of furniture & a lot of cleaning to do.
I went round to see them offered help & asked them what they needed - went & purchased items requested & a load of cleaning products.... This is just one of the properties.
My parents brought their first house when I was 19 & I brought my first house when I was 23. My children jointly own 50% of our home so they own property at a very young age.

That’s capitalism for you. The examples of attempts at communism are no better though

I provide very well maintained homes for my customers some of of whome don't treat my properties or me without the same amount of respect.
So I would be happy to sell them all if you can tell me where else o can invest the money we worked very hard for.

700? I doubt it unless she owned a few blocks of flats or she could, I suppose, own land on which properties are leased out. I know the Duke of Westminster and Dane of the Highlands own a lot of land.

I'd email the programme and ask if that was true or was she being facetious in some way but you missed the joke.

I would think owning so much property would be one big headache!

A website called, Housepricecrash.co.uk has alot of communists on there. They are very special people.

They are all routing for the biggest crash in history, they also want everything for free, in life..

They m hate anybody who works hard in life and makes a success of themselves and want to steal that from them.

I'd email the programme and ask if that was true or was she being facetious in some way but you missed the joke

If the op had listened and people actually read the thread the woman said they had bought 700 properties. They have about 60 that they currently own. They buy about 30 per month, do them up, put tenants in them and sell them on.

They didn’t say they currently own 700 properties.

@Lovemusic33

Not greedy, it’s their business and they are actually helping out a lot of people that can’t afford to buy by renting out properties. I don’t see the issue?

Renting privately is quite expensive it’s the same as a mortgage that is another problem

There's some really stupid opinions on this thread!

If nobody was allowed to own more than one property then there wouldn't be any private rental market, you wouldn't be able to rent a holiday cottage, you wouldn't be able to find temporary accommodation if your house was flooded or burnt down, there'd be no student houses, no flats for city workers, etc.etc.

How old was the show? Property tax law has changed in the last few years and I'd be shocked if anyone thought it was easy money any more. Unless your a cash buyer and mo where near 40% tax bracket.

With maintainance costs on top you make very little profit. The money is I the risk of property cost rising long term.

We live in a rented house and bought a BTL 17 years ago. We still have it. It's our only property. I would buy a BTL now. Stamp duty alone is crazy. They must make the treasury a fair bit in tax so good for the economy.

But the times of people investing in BTL must be long dead now? Unless your totally minted with hundreds of thousands in cash?