Greed of ‘buy to let’

[LittleLottieChaos]

When did people start to think that they should profit from housing? It all feels incredibly Dickensian. Pees me off when I see housing being listed as buy to let investments rather than ‘here’s a house for a nice young family to live in’. Especially with the market so horribly skewed right now.

It is shocking that people seem to think they have a right to profiteer from those less fortunate by whacking on high rents, that more than cover their mortgages. Legit: you need one house, one house only. Or maybe I’m missing something... or these are genuinely just bad people.

Interested to hear how people justify it? Do you just think, fuck ‘em I want to be rich? Do you not think about the morality?

(I rent but am saving to buy an appropriate house to live in... not to profiteer from)

@catwomanhatwoman

To those who say that there are those who can't afford to buy their own home so buy to let's are doing them a favour I think you need a strong reality check. If the market wasn't flooded by people with second homes then prices wouldn't be so huge and more people would be able to afford to buy one!

I say this as someone who could afford a second home but don't because I have a conscience.

@catwomanhatwoman Around 10% of the population own a 2nd home. That's hardly 'flooding the market' is it?

Most landlords own 1 or 2 BTLs. Very few own multiple. The choice for some is either to secure your own future and rely less on the state in old age by using the BTL as an investment, or use taxpayers money to fund care in old age. I’d rather people sort themselves out tbh and taxpayers used on other things.

Don’t hate the player, hate the game. The government does everything possible to keep house prices high. Inflation is at its lowest and they print money like its water. Blame the government not the landlord

I’ve seen the comment about why should people make profit from housing but owners do that as well if they sell the house on at great profit to themselves - that’s happened a lot over recent years
Why is that ok? But not ok to make a bit of money from being a landlord ?

@catwomanhatwoman

To those who say that there are those who can't afford to buy their own home so buy to let's are doing them a favour I think you need a strong reality check. If the market wasn't flooded by people with second homes then prices wouldn't be so huge and more people would be able to afford to buy one!

I say this as someone who could afford a second home but don't because I have a conscience.

You always need a deposit though, and if you haven't got a decent income it is very hard to save. You also need a good credit score to get a mortgage. I gave some examples of my previous tenants in the previous page. Even if house prices were the same as they were in 1999 when I bought my house they still couldn't get a mortgage because their credit ratings are low. Or they don't want a mortgage for various reasons as I outlined.

I don't have a private pension as I'm self employed and have been on a relatively low income for a lot of my adult life. Pensions invest in all sorts of things that maybe your conscience wouldn't like. Arms, animal testing, Amazon, Facebook are some my conscience wouldn't want to make money out of.

I agree with you OP. I knew the skew would be different on MN but it's not right. I live in an expensive SE town and there are tons of 3 bed houses on the rental market marked "professional singles only". For a 3 bedroom property!

There are places in the UK where this is fine but the insane housing costs in London and the SE are disgusting. I don't know why it isn't a basic right to have an affordable secure property to live in.

If new rental laws do finally come into pace to make renting more secure I will calm down. But it still doesn't solve the problem of what renters will do come retirement. Landlords don't give a shit as a rule, have a look at landlord forums.

I don't have a pension because I've had a patchy employment record due to various health issues. When I inherited some money I used it for a deposit on a BTL house, which is basically my pension. I charge a reasonable rent for the area and have never increased the rent for existing tenants. I get any problems sorted quickly and do regular maintenance. I try to treat my tenants as I'd like to be treated in that position.

I do appreciate that house prices are ridiculously high, and I'd prefer to have a better-regulated rental sector with more publicly-owned housing, and high taxes on empty investment properties. But, given that I can't do much about that apart from how I vote, I don't think I'm greedy to decide that this is the best way to plan for my future, as long as I do it in a way that respects my tenants.

And yes I do hate the game more than the players, I know that's not very clear from my post but there are many who support it for their own gain.

Landlord here, I provide a very nice two bed flat to a single mother and her child, have not increased the rent for 3 years and have put in a new shower and a new boiler.
If she was in a position to buy I am sure she would, in the meantime she rents privately in a reasonable nice area and doesn't have to pay any maintenance costs.
I pay my taxes, keep the property in good repair and it may or may not make a capital profit in the long run.

It intrigues me when someone is so incensed about an issue they start a thread but don't pause to think about the topic for longer than the time it takes to type a goady opener.
Two minutes of thinking would have made you realise there are people who want and need to rent; that the UK traditionally had a strong rental market and it was Thatcher that promoted 'the dream goal' of home ownership over renting; that there isn't enough public housing (LAs or HAs) to meet the current demand and not everyone can or wants to buy so there is a housing gap that needs to be filled because LAs and HAs have not built or purchased enough housing for the population; that house builders profit from housing - it's literally their reason d'etre; . It's a common logic gap from people who are deeply wedded to the notion that private house ownership is fundamental that they don't consider why other countries don't have that model; why the UK model changed; and why they are ok with large corporates making massive profits from housing but object to individuals. It's often posited by Conservatives. They much prefer large conglomerates monopolising the housing market than small businesses or individuals and they refuse to prioritise building new public sector housing.

But not ok to make a bit of money from being a landlord?
This is a gross simplification of the problem, the problem is not that landlords make a profit, the problem is that the housing market has not been properly regulated and it is dysfunctional.
Amongst other things this raises the question of whether this is possible to have a functional housing market?

Out of interest, whyis it so much worse to make money out of housing than out of food, or energy, or water or medical supplies? Should they all ne provided on a not for profit basis also?

It's all about the context of the situation though isn't it. If there were plenty of social housing options for people who needed it and affordable housing, then nobody would bat an eyelid at private landlords owning property for profit. The point is it's at the expense of the many who can't afford to buy.

@ImInStealthMode

I had the same rant elsewhere just recently. I live in a place where the average family house price is over £500k and rents on a 2 bedroom flat can exceed £2000 a month. It's madness, and yet we have 'professional landlords' snapping up new builds left and right, reducing the available property, forcing up prices and THEN charging rents that make it impossible to save a deposit.

Often those same landlords ban pets and children from their properties because they don't want the hassle, yet they are a large part of the reason that families with kids have to rent!

Someone in the discussion compared it to hoarding any other basic human need (access to clean water for example) and then profiteering by selling it on at big mark ups to those who can't afford to buy the access themselves. That wouldn't be acceptable, so why is it when it comes to shelter?

Appreciate that there are also bad tenants that landlords need protection against, by the way, but for everyone there is an unscrupulous landlord creaming profits off the hardship of others.

Agree totally.

I don't know why it isn't a basic right to have an affordable secure property to live in
One might argue (with very good grounds) that it ought to be a basic right, it ought to be in the same category as healthcare and education - in order to properly function in modern society we all need access to these basic things!

There are many varied reasons that people buy to let, some out of greed but not all

Not on MN there aren't; here, nuance on the subject is intolerable to some and BTL LLs are apparently b**tards one and all

Strange, really, that sweeping generalisations are usually howled down ... except when they're about a preferred hate figure in which case they're okay

TheGlassBlowersDaughter It's a common logic gap from people who are deeply wedded to the notion that private house ownership is fundamental that they don't consider why other countries don't have that model; why the UK model changed; and why they are ok with large corporates making massive profits from housing but object to individuals. It's often posited by Conservatives. They much prefer large conglomerates monopolising the housing market than small businesses or individuals and they refuse to prioritise building new public sector housing.

This. There are actually so many players making money out of rental housing now, particularly local authorities bringing in yet more licensing conditions, the companies that provide it and the government which put taxes up on landlords which inevitably increases rent. Its a regime set up to benefit large corporations and the market is sluggish, monopolised and uncompetitive as a result.

Imagine if you allowed other markets to be run in that way. I know theres not much competition in some markets, but it does at least exist, but the property market is mostly exempt from competition law. And then gave all sorts of incentives and favouritism to certain large corporate players on that market. Its consumers who suffer.

Stirring up hatred of individual landlords and small players deflects attention away from the way in which the government runs the property market in this country, to make money for other players.

Self build is much more encouraged in other European countries, here even extending your own home often means you have to pay quite a few thousand to the local authority in "planning gain".

One might argue (with very good grounds) that it ought to be a basic right, it ought to be in the same category as healthcare and education - in order to properly function in modern society we all need access to these basic things!

Yes that’s the fundamental problem.

There was a single mother of one posting yesterday, who earns £31k pa (so well above NMW) and still has to claim benefit top ups because her middling rent is so expensive.

When you look across the channel at French housing costs, you realise they’re doing something much better than we are.

@LittleLottieChaos not all landlords own more than one property though?? I own a property in another city. My job moved and I didn't want to sell. So now I rent out my apartment and I myself rent an apartment in the city I now live in. I'm not profiteering at all!! I'm at a slight loss actually

@jacketdrama

I don't have a pension because I've had a patchy employment record due to various health issues. When I inherited some money I used it for a deposit on a BTL house, which is basically my pension. I charge a reasonable rent for the area and have never increased the rent for existing tenants. I get any problems sorted quickly and do regular maintenance. I try to treat my tenants as I'd like to be treated in that position.

I do appreciate that house prices are ridiculously high, and I'd prefer to have a better-regulated rental sector with more publicly-owned housing, and high taxes on empty investment properties. But, given that I can't do much about that apart from how I vote, I don't think I'm greedy to decide that this is the best way to plan for my future, as long as I do it in a way that respects my tenants.

I agree, JacketDrama, and think you have been very sensible with your inheritance. I'm sure your tenant is happy with your arrangement.

Just as a beginning we should discourage and abolish the term "landlord." Its the 21st century and no one is a Lord over anyone else. There is nothing wrong with the term "owner" or "property owner".

Then we need to rid ourselves of the idea that the relationship between the owner and the tenant is an asymmetrical social one of the "Im the Lord your the tenant" type and I am your superior because you can't afford to buy.

Its a business relationship in which both parties have rights and responsibilities. So lets keep the emotion out of it.

The current reality is that its going to take any owner upto 2 years to evict a tenant so plenty of room for tenants to push back against unsatisfactory owners.

I find it bizarre on these kind of threads when people turn up and defend their owning of multiple properties by saying its their pension, their nest egg etc. Surely you understand that one day when you sell that property, your tenants over the years will have effectively paid for it, and paid for your security whilst not being able to afford any for themselves? Even if rent doesn't yield a constant profit, a btl mortgage by its very nature requires a tenant to service it.

I don't think landlords are bad people, I think it's the system that allows it which is bad, but I find it frustrating that people refuse to recognise the system for what it is, and convince themselves that they are altruistically providing a service.

I think about 1066? Maybe earlier....

@NeedATan

+++++

Porcupineintherough
Out of interest, whyis it so much worse to make money out of housing than out of food, or energy, or water or medical supplies? Should they all ne provided on a not for profit basis also?
I'd love to see some answers to the above.

+++

Please see my earlier post for an answer.

I hate programs like Homes under the Hammer which really pushes this as a good idea. It is greed and in a finite market, prices a lot of younger people out of the market.

@Babygotblueyes

I hate programs like Homes under the Hammer which really pushes this as a good idea. It is greed and in a finite market, prices a lot of younger people out of the market.

What, renovating an uninhabitable house, spending your own money and time doing it up and putting it back into the housing market?

Theres nothing to stop younger people buying the same house, as they're often cheap, other than this country doesn't encourage that by lending on that sort of property, or even encouraging self build

But why blame landlords?

@Babygotblueyes

I hate programs like Homes under the Hammer which really pushes this as a good idea. It is greed and in a finite market, prices a lot of younger people out of the market.

One of these episodes made me so angry. House bought and cheaply renovated. Estate agent looked round “Well it’s not renovated to a good enough standard to sell, but you could rent it as a family home”