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

Boomclaps, good example and anyone can search for local regulated rents to see others as I think I mentioned above. The regulated or state sector rents are held very low. That can often mean the properties are much worse inside although that doesn't seem to be boomclap experience. However to cover the mortgage the landlord needs to charge that £1k a month rent. that is about the rent my son charges on his £325k+ house too which is a yield (4%) before any costs (there have been £4k costs in the year so far). Lots of landlords have a mortgage so it is not very lucrative but they do it for various reasons but they are not sitting raking in money.

So if I were a pension fund with £325k of a nurse's pension money to invest I would be looking for the highest yield. I would not be charging a very low rent. I would go for the market £1k a month rent so the nurse can eat in retirement.

@sst1234 I have, but that wouldn't happen to me. The only property I'm due to inherit is from my parents and their house isn't in negative equity.

Xenia do the people renting that house not deserve to eat in retirement. Even if the landlord has a mortgage they are still getting ownership if a house out of it.

State sector rents are not 'held' very low. The government has actually forced them to raise it. And councils have had to ensure each estates rents cover the costs of the estate. It's the market rates that are perverse not council rents.

once upon a time (when most on here were in the real playground as opposed to the mental one) mortgages were higher than rents. Years of low interest rates have long turned that round.

A BTL is about the best return on money if you a) have enough money and b) don't get a shit tenant. Again, blame low interest rates.

BTW many people buy their BTL by earning money through something called 'work'. Very few get given free houses. And if you use the word 'rentier' then you may want to check the ACTUAL politics of the Socialist worker party or whichever cause you are following this week.

@mencken honestly you’ve got to be a spectacularly high earner or have had help to buy one property let alone a BTL
Your comment BTW many people buy their BTL by earning money through something called 'work'. is down right offensive. Implying that renters simply don’t work.

In the last four years alone DP and I have spent nearly 50k on rent, after we have paid to live, how on earth do we have anything left over to save for a house (we’ve managed about 5k)

People buying up houses for BTL mean there are less properties on the open market and so prices go up.

• @mencken honestly you’ve got to be a spectacularly high earner or have had help to buy one property let alone a BTL *

Honestly DH and I are not spectacularly high earners (less than £80k between us) nor did we ever get any help (no help, no inheritances) but we own our home and have considered getting a BTL in the past (decided against it).

Nearly 80k between you is a lot more than most people!

And mencken its not just low interest rates on mortgages. The government can have policies that dissuade people from buy to let or they can encourage it. It's a political choice.

And fuck off with your playground bullshit.

Yes, no problem with well maintained well priced rental, landlord has to make some profit of course, but total house hogging, and pretending for years that you had sold them to aliens and Chinese multi-billionaires (if it is the couple that look like something from Royston Vasey) is just taking the wee wee.