To hate landlords?

[MsPeachh]

Last month, I had to move suddenly. I found the flat I’m in now, it had just been bought by my landlord and I’m the first person in after the former owner moved out. It’s an ex-council house that the owner had purchased under “right to buy” and now I have to pay a third of my salary to a private landlord for what was originally meant to be affordable housing.

I’m a scientist in my late twenties with good qualifications and I feel total despair that I might never be able to afford my own home, and I will be lining someone else’s pockets via rent for the rest of my life. Let alone what anyone in a position less fortunate than mine is supposed to do.

To make matters worse, I looked up my landlord’s info on Companies House and I discovered that they have 22 properties in my area! It’s a village on the outskirts of a town where lots of people move when they are ready to move out of the hustle and bustle and settle to raise kids. And more and more of these properties are being snapped up by this landlord. It makes me sick, honestly. I know a lot of people become landlords accidentally in later life due to remarrying etc and ending up with two houses between one couple, but this landlord sucking up 22 houses in such a small area disgusts me. I feel like I’m completely losing hope for the future of people my age and younger as house prices keep soaring and soaring.

AIBU?

Well I hate tenants. Tbf only had one set but that enough. Lost money and house was a shit hole and garden looked like battle of the Somme. Not professional landlords and living in house ourselves now. Never again.

@ApplePie86

Sorry but YABVVVU

It was entirely your choice to rent the property and pay a third of your salary for the privilege.

If you don't want to rent then save up a modest 5% deposit and buy somewhere with a similar government scheme to previous owner.

Just as you have chosen your job, your landlord has possibly chosen to be a property owner/developer or whatever.

Just because they own multiple properties doesn't mean they haven't worked exceptionally hard to do this.

Very unreasonable to hate your landlord for this reason.

Also, how can anyone who is paying thousands every month to keep a roof over their heads, afford to save 5% of a mortgage?!?

You're coming across as rather deluded

I think it is teenagers who need to make it clear to the older generation: it is much more difficult to get on the housing ladder now than it used to be. Affordable housing, free education, wages, NHS stretched to breaking point, free movement within the EU all gone and the environment trashed... a real mess has been left behind for younger generations

Yet teenagers still do buy places.

People in their 20s still manage to buy.

Over the years I have seen threads on here about people saying they cannot afford to buy.
What they mean is they can’t afford to buy their forever home on a particular road in a particular town and if you suggest they move a couple of miles away then people seem to think that is so rude.

If you really can’t afford to buy then you move to where you can afford or stay in rented.
I couldn’t afford to buy in my home town. London was actually cheaper in the 80s.

Oh gawd. Don't get me started on electrical performance certificates. How to squeeze a beautiful Georgian building into standards designed for a hermetically sealed concrete new build.

And so many tenants can literally do nothing for themselves now, like big giant babies. I've had one this year who insisted I visit on a Saturday evening, following endless phone calls for the preceding 4 hours. Said emergencies were (a) the tenant had pushed the microwave against the switch for the central heating and switched it off and (B) tenant couldn't find the hot water switch labelled "hot water" on the kitchen wall and was making all sorts of accusations about there being "no central heating or hot water in thus house".

Walk round the beautiful houses around St James's, or is it Belgravia? The posh part behind Buckingham Palace. It's all owned by Duke of Westminster, or whatever he's called. Vast swathes of Britain are owned by aristocracy. Much of central London is now owned by Quatar. Is the statistic, 95% of land is owned by 5%? I may have exaggerated that. Getting a tiny foot on that ladder is hard...

I completely agree @AphidTwin
The big difference as well is that people don't have to be landlords whereas many tenants have no choice but to rent.

Well done Scotland for doing criminal record checks on landlords. I didn't know they did that. Scotland has the right idea - aiming for more secure tenancies, etc, but perhaps it needs tweaking (and regulating to prevent the corruption described above).

Secure tenancies and rent control used to be the norm in the UK. If that's not possible to operate without fraud, corruption, and/or unaffordable rents, then we need to look to mass council housing.

Singapore's system appeals too.

I recently came up with an idea that if put into action, I think could really help relieve the housing crisis slightly.

Sounds overly simplistic to begin with, but bare with me....!

So the council/housing associations regularly buy housing stock. Well, I think they could potentially buy 50% more if they had the resources to be able to offer some kind of 50/50 or even 60/40 equity share/investment opportunity to say Landlords or anyone who wishes to invest in property.
In my mind, the Council or Housing Association would still allocate this housing using the standard social housing allocations processes that they currently use, meaning the tenant still gets the tenancy security of social housing. Yet the Council & the Landlord/investor would share the costs (& risks) involved (ie maintenance etc)
My theory is that by sharing the costs and thus lessening the spend for the Council/HA, this would then enable the purchase of more housing stock?

A further presumed benefit would be to those who cannot quite afford to invest in a buy to let in their area but could afford say 40/50%, could invest and create income whilst providing a home for someone who really needs it.

As I said above, given that the Council/HA would still be allocating these homes in the exact same way as they do currently, from the housing waiting list which is based on priority points etc, you can be sure that whilst this is a business investment for someone, it's also helping someone in desperate need of housing (and not just being offered to the wealthiest applicants with millionaire guarantors!)

Yes I'm sure Landlords will snap many up but of course the council/HA could potentially regulate how many properties go to those with a current portfolio.
It won't stop greedy Landlords buying half the houses in a town but it would hopefully dramatically increase social housing stock thus, eventually, reducing the demand for private renting slightly. Hopefully reducing situations whereby low income families are paying most of their income on renting sub-standard properties, being bound by ridiculous rules and having zero tenancy security. Always worrying if they're going to announce they're selling or moving a family member in and having to cut your tenancy short. I rented privately for 20 years, I've seen it ALL.

To those who aren't already aware, there is currently 'shared ownership' offerings with most housing associations. However the big difference is that the tenant themselves buys a percentage and then pays rent on the remaining percentage. This does absolutely nothing to help the issue and in my mind actually makes matters worse as many of these properties are brand new and form part of the '20% Affordable Housing' section which is now required by law on every new development, and are therefore quite literally taking homes which would otherwise be allocated as 100% social housing to those in need.

Please feel free to (nicely) tell me what massive factor I've totally overlooked!

@SheepandCow I have rented in Germany. In Berlin. Tenancy was for life. Had to compete with 20 other couples, there was a saying that it's easier to get a job in Berlin than a rental. When we left Germany to move to London, we passed on the tenancy to a very wealthy law school classmate, her dad was a founding partner of a major law firm and even she had huge problems finding a nice place and she adored our studio flat!

No system is perfect. I do think that in a property obsessed country like the UK, people now have a very fixed idea that they want to own..so we are better off trying to promote the idea of affordable home ownership for the masses (without pushing dangerous lending practices). Right now, middle income people can mitigate the lack of housing supply by moving to the countryside. One day, this solution wouldn't be adequate.

I think the basic premise isn't so bad. The main issue is protecting the housing if the investor pulls out or goes bust. It happened with the NHS. I remember reading about a private company, who ran a chain of GP surgeries, suddenly pulling out - leaving thousands of patients, including elderly and vulnerable mid-treatment, scrambling to find a new GP.

Perhaps there's a way around that? Possibly some form of insurance?

I think that's it isn't it. There's no stigma to renting in Germany.

I think it's worth us looking to their system, and other countries like Singapore (the same goes for our healthcare system).

@hopingforonlychild
Perhaps, if it's as you say - continued obsession with home ownership in the UK - then the way to go is the Singapore system? 90% of people achieve ownership - but, crucially, those who can't afford it (including many disabled people) can access a stable affordable home to rent.

@SheepandCow i think disabled people mainly live with their family in Singapore (like old people). It's a very socially conservative country and it has a long way to go in terms of welfare for the disabled. Asian countries unfortunately don't treat the disabled as well as western countries but there is a reverence for the elderly i.e. young adults care for their parenrs. My aunts have rented out their flats (which they lived in previously for 30 years) and moved in with their kids which provides a pension and means the state doesn't need to support them .

The UK cannot copy the Singaporean system wholesale, it is also subject to a lot of social controls - only married couples and singles over 35 can buy but this is a reflection of the social conservatism. For example, everyone I know in Singapore who buy private condos and houses on the free market are married even when they don't need to be so it's not the state is actually forcing people to get married though we often joke about it!

We can however tweak it. The council can build homes-25% earmarked for affordable rent, 10% for keyworkers, 50% for people who earn around the average wage in the area (London would obviously be much higher),15% for the higher earners but household income below £100k (for London, it can be less in cheaper areas). The housing can be slightly different- people who earn more would naturally expect nicer facilities- private gardens etc but they should expect to pay more and get less subsidy. And of.course, these homes can only be sold to people who meet the eligibility criteria

I wonder if this would be popular in the UK or people would prefer our existing system. Obviously as a home owner, I prefer owning my flat which I can sell to anyone I like. But I also like the option of not having to pay a high price for my accomodation just because there wasn't any other option. I spent £400k on my flat not because I was privileged but because I didn't have any other choice (unless I wanted to (a) rent or (b) buy outside London and pay £8k in rail fares with my DH. I don't think my situation as a 2019 house buyer is that great either and it shows that the current system only benefits people who bought in 1997. Sorry I didn't buy during that time but I was 5 years old.

@SheepandCow oh and forget to add, in my proposed system, other than the properties earmarked for affordable rent, all other properties would be sold at cost price. So the government isn't making a loss.

But I highly doubt that people in the UK would like this system as it would possibly make home ownership more bureaucratic (people in Singapore can wait 3 years for their new build and often ballot for a long time- they do get something eventually).

But the stats speak for itself-90% home ownership in a land starved island country. It's 60% in the UK. For people of my age, think its probably something like 50%. So half of the people my age are moaning about not being on the ladder, a percentage of the other half (like myself) are contemplating their ginormous mortgage. How many people are actually happy with the current system?

@hopingforonlychild nobody forces anybody to rent either.
Our rental properties are our pension. We sacrificed holidays, new cars, restaurants to be able to buy properties to rent.
We don't have a private pension and a state pension isn't going to keep us feed.
We do it because we have to. We love some of our tenants but some have destroyed our properties.
And when the damage is extensive we have to pay. When people don't pay their rent who pays? We do. Very risky to be a landlord precisely because people think we are taking advantage and like some said we are parasites for offering a service.

@AphidTwin would like to make more money for sure. Love to have staff but we don't profit yet from our properties. In a few years we will. Will be simple then.

I just saw this on Facebook and it felt appropriate for this thread

Who needs 22 houses?

@User158340

Who needs 22 houses?

Well the 22 people who can’t afford to, or don’t want to buy need housing.

Unless we have a system whereby there is plenty of social housing for everyone (which isn’t going to happen) then there is always going to be a need for good landlords.

Small I agree that the state interference with the mortgage market which has led to overly cautious rules has meant a lot of people cannot buy. We need to return to a market which has more freedom, where e.g. as in the past, if your sensible building society lender could see you could afford £1k a month rent they accept you might well be able to afford to pay £1k a month mortgage. Or for older people that if you have XYZ equity in the home the fact your earned income might not be very much is still not a risk for the bank as it can seize the house with all that equity in - instead they require both because of the regulators - they want belt and braces not just one or the other.

As for who need 22 houses if you make say only £1k a year profit on each one then that is £22k before tax. It is no different from a nurse's pension fund investing in property rather than in oil.

This reminds me of Basil Fawlty screaming at his guests- You swan in here expecting to be waited on hand and foot! Can't you see that I am trying to run a hotel here!

😆

It's odd that some landlords see themselves as martys & also there's a weird superiority complex. I'm better than you because I worked hard & bought.
Renting isn't a stigma to me (parents are European). I understand why many want to own because that's the system but so many think a BTL is #goals. I don't think that at all & wouldn't have the patience for it & know I would be a shit landlord.

I don't think my situation as a 2019 house buyer is that great either and it shows that the current system only benefits people who bought in 1997.

Absolutely, it's really not good to have so much money tied up in property. The country needs more disposable income. Quite a few of my friends/neighbours have moved outwards because even though they have very good budgets after years of saving, childcare costs, etc they just want a break from ploughing thousands into their home. It's highly unlikely that my generation or younger ones will see massive growth in equity like the past.

How many people are actually happy with the current system?

I own a nice home with a relatively low mortgage for the cost of the property but still think the system is crap.

Our rental properties are our pension.

This seems to be a major factor, how many people of a certain age have a BTL for their pension?

And plenty of us older ones lost not made money on property too - we bought 2 flats in the 1980s and sold them around 1997 at about 50% losses having made losses every year we held them on the rent too!!! I always joke I am London's worst property investor. We also sold our family home in 1997 too at a small loss. It is the risk you take I suppose. Flat in London are not really selling at present either for obvious reasons. My parents suffered the 1970s property crash too BUT we then had 60% of inflation in 3 years (which wiped out people's cash savings of course but did mean house prices and wages rose).

Flat in London are not really selling at present either for obvious reasons.

Yes there was an article in the FT about this. I don't live far from Vauxhall & it's unrecognisable, there are thousands & thousands of new flats & developments.

YANBU.
Especially HMO landlords.

@BlueJag "earn more money"? What planet are you on? I'm in a middle-management level job with an above average salary. A deposit on a modest family home in my area would be upwards of £25,000. Funnily enough, that's not the sort of money I have lying around. Similarly, the extortionate rent we are paying makes saving any meaningful amount of money virtually impossible. Your arguments made in this thread are absolutely proof of every conclusion I have reached about the vast majority of landlords.

I say this as a landlord, but yes, I completely understand the hatred towards landlords. I'm working abroad for 3 years, and have chosen to let out my property during this period, with the intention to move back once my contract here ends. It's not something I'd choose to do long-term. At the same time, the UK has far too many 'accidental landlords' in situations similar to mine who have no clue what they're doing. I can only commend the Scottish Government for putting in a bunch of additional requirements so that at the very least Scottish landlords have to make sure their properties are safe. And I can totally understand if my tenants feel it's unfair that they're paying my mortgage, I don't blame them.

To the pp proclaiming their properties are their pension. Nice. So for whatever reason you've not saved for a private pension and now you're expecting your tenants to not only save for their own pension, but to pay yours as well, all while blaming your tenants for not being able to afford a property of their own.