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

YANBU. I understand the need for private rentals as I relied on it and have only just managed to buy a property myself. But no one needs 700 properties. I do not think anyone can be a good landlord with that many properties, how can they possibly keep on top of it all? I think the number of properties that someone is able to own should be limited to say 10. And the amount of rent landlords charge should be capped to stop greedy ones charging a fortune.

I saw that episode and was quite Shocked When they said the number.

No it wasn’t The Wilson couple who had been in the newspapers.

I would be quite interested in seeing the standard of the properties that they rent out.

Yes, there is a need for a rental market.

But it has been exploited in the UK, due to most people who can afford second homes voting Tory.

I would have way less of an issue with private land-lording if tenants has security of tenure lasting decades, not 60 days.

That might also focus the minds of some 'ave a go LLs.

08:08Thisisworsethananticpated

Why is property any worse than another type of business OP ? We live in a capitalist world
Get over it

This, it's a business, they've got off their backsides and created an income for themselves based in demand, no different to any other business out there. See an opportunity, recognise the demand and act on it.

Yes there will be those who do it who are greedy and ie unscrupulous but that goes for any line of work. I'm sure if we all think hard enough we have all worked with people who are not nice. It's not unique to property.

@Miljea

I have enough money to buy a BTL. I don't, because I consider snapping up a first-time buyer priced home in order to thwart that FTB, then not only, via pricing them out of the market, making them pay my mortgage plus a tidy profit for me, on top- is morally reprehensible.

What about those who need a rental while they save a deposit and only want to pay the market rent for a FTB-sized home?

I think people who bought their houses during better times or had help to buy from their parents can sometimes have difficulty sympathizing with those who want to buy a house now and cant.
It's difficult. I have nobody to help "get me on the ladder", my house is owned by the council, but because they let it out under a company that they own that are "private landlords" - I dont have the right to buy.

Of course I'm envious of those who have hundreds of houses! I dont want hundreds, I want one. Just to live in.
Of course #notalllandlords but jeez. I'm allowed to wish I could afford to buy a house.

I've rented loads. I've moved around quite a lot, both in the UK and in other countries. Why would I want to be lumbered with buying places and paying stamp duty every time I move.

DH and I want to buy a second property for retirement on the coast. I'll then rent out my other place for the income. State pension is pretty shit so that's how we plan on supplementing current pensions.

I've seen people totally piss money up the wall on cars, fags, drink, flashy clothes and fancy holidays. I save every spare bit of money I can to buy a 2nd place, but that makes me a selfish c£nt apparently.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

is owning a holiday let bad too? well look at all the Cornwall/ Dorset posts at the beginning of corona to answer that one. I love the idea in theory of having a get away house but you have to recognise these are real areas people live in, and their towns are ghost towns out of season, no decent up keep of the houses and no investment in the area for 9 months a year.

I’m not talking about a “getaway house”, I’m talking about a place for other people to holiday in..... like the ones that me and my family stay in (usually) two or three times a year. Or do we think people shouldn’t be having self catering holidays in the U.K.?

Not everyone has the will or the means to buy property. Th

There is not enough social housing for everyone who needs it.

Private landlords are necessary.

Well the alternative is small scale landlords (nightmare as a renter) or buying (not desirable for people that want to be able to move around easily and not possible for people who are on a low income). Professional landlords are the ideal. They are easier to regulate and less likely to misbehave. If anything we should be encouraging this kind of thing rather than being bitter and envious.

So, if owning a holiday let is immoral- is going on holiday in a holiday let immoral? Everyone on here has booked a 'little cottage' for July or August- where do you think these cottages come from? Aren't you also immorally preventing locals from buying as if you didn't use the cottages, the profit wouldn't be there, the letters would sell up (I have friends with BTL air b and b and holiday lets), or at least many of them would.

You can't argue going to a holiday cottage is essential like renting from a private landlord.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

If it wasn't for landlords DD would have nowhere to live while she is at university. They do provide a service And when your daughter is 30 and trying to buy her first home don’t you worry it will just be too unattainable?

More attainable for someone with a BA and MA than someone without.....

Where SHOULD she live while at university? The family home isn’t actually near any good universities and our nearest one (an hours drive - but she doesn't drive anyway) doesn’t offer the course she is studying....

I see your point ,but without Landlords buying homes and renting ,a lot of people would be in trouble! Many people are simply not in a position to buy a property ,even if they were cheaper .You still have to provide proof of affordability,a secure job and so on.It is unrealistic to assume lots of properties would be on the market at a knock down price ,if only those pesky LL would stop snapping them all up!There is little social housing as well .Our cousin is a LL and it is not all profit !He buys houses and has to do them up to an acceptable level.Including fitting a new boiler .painting /decorating and replacing kitchens/bathrooms and so on .There is always the issue of them not being rented for any period of time as well .ATM who knows what will happen in the Student Market with Covid ?If many Unis decide on on line tutoring ,what is the point of students racking up debts when they could stay at home for free?Then LL are in a sticky spot!I do think 700/1000 properties is excessive though!

Feckers. It should be banned the selfish fucks.

I was talking about the ‘buy-to-leave’ market, mostly centred in London. I was making comment on the industry as a whole.

There are, as my link shows, many empty houses gently decaying out here in NotLondon... where green fields, farm land, infill and other, often totally unsuitable land, is being built on. Large houses, not locally affordable or desirable.

landlords refusing to rent to HA tenants, those with children, those with pets if a house. You will be glad to hear that much of this has already happned or is in the pipeline. Lenders and insurers have for the most part, removed their objections to benefits, it is trickling down to landlords. Pets - not yet passed but, it is seen as being an unfair clause to refuse pets. Arrangements can be made to accommodate them, this is being written up at the moment, part of the big changes in rental in England and Wales.

And when your daughter is 30 and trying to buy her first home don’t you worry it will just be too unattainable? But that is a seprate issue. Not a reason to ban lettings.

making them pay my mortgage plus a tidy profit for me, on top- is morally reprehensible. Only if everyone is in your fortunate, privileged position of being able to by a lair and a spare!

I would have way less of an issue with private land-lording if tenants has security of tenure lasting decades, not 60 days. Then you are about to be happy, as that too is in the pipeline as "no Fault" evictions cease to be!

But it won't make much fdifference to good tenants. It will just make life more difficult for landlords with the bad ones... again see my link above.

Landlords and lettings
Empty houses
Affordable houses
New developments

All need to be rethought, reworked in a joined up fashion rather than the ludicrous piecemeal manner it is currently being done.

Its morally wrong to take more than you need. Thats how we got in a big mess.

I think people who bought their houses during better times or had help to buy from their parents can sometimes have difficulty sympathizing with those who want to buy a house now and cant. And those of us who had no help, saved and bought affordably, recently?

It doesn't help to focus on older people or children of wealthy people. They aren't the majority.

Its morally wrong to take more than you need. Thats how we got in a big mess.

That's all those generous philanthropists told

It is morally wrong, however I have a lot of friends and peers in their early twenties who have no interest/desire to buy the properties they live in.
Most moved post uni to cities they don’t see a future in and just want to rent homes on a temporary basis.

For people like this, landlord are really important and provide a much needed service.

For struggling first time buyers they are the devil!

Its morally wrong to take more than you need

Socialism in a catchy phrase...

Thats how we got in a big mess.

Interesting because I actually think that Tall Poppy Syndrome and peoples lack of ambition and risk aversion have more to do with our countries "big mess" than anything else.

@Hangingwithmygnomies

Wow, I just read the story of that landlord you shared - what a horrible man.

In the rest of Europe renting is very normal it's only the UK that are obsessed with home ownership

Probably a lot to do with tenants in Europe having more rights, and rentals being more affordable and stable if you want somewhere to live long term.

People in the UK generally buy if they can because they don't want to pay a fortune for a badly maintained property that they aren't allowed to decorate as they wish and don't want to be moving on a whim all the time. Plus you've always got all the rip off fees from letting agents.

We bought before we would have done because the mortgage was less than half what the rent would have been on the same property and lots of friends were having to move house every year due to landlord selling up/putting rent up again etc etc.

But I do always find it funny how much MN seems to hate landlords and yet on any thread where the OP posts 'what shall I do with this money (eg a sum of £100-200k) and half the responses will be 'buy a BTL'.

landlords refusing to rent to HA tenants, those with children, those with pets if a house. You will be glad to hear that much of this has already happned or is in the pipeline. Lenders and insurers have for the most part, removed their objections to benefits, it is trickling down to landlords you make some good points, however one of the biggest issues for landlords with tenants on benefits is when they swapped it from paying the landlords directly to paying the tenants directly, so there's a chance of not being paid, and it suddenly became much harder for tenants on benefits or who don't have a substantial deposit to get into tenancies.

I'm guilty of this myself, I'd rather not have a tenant on benefits myself. But with the coming recession, there will be a whole heap of people who aren't your usual benefits tenants who can't pay the mortgage and need to rent, this needs urgently fixing.

Plus you've always got all the rip off fees from letting agents I think letting agents are no longer allowed to charge you fees for arranging a tenancy or renew.