To think private rent increases should be limited to inflation only

[Fancymice]

We are currently applying to rent a 2 bedroom house for £785 a month. The same house was up for rent previously 2 years ago for £695.

The seems like a massive increase, and other houses for rent on the area seem to have gone up by the same or even more. We're currently in a 3 bed for £850, but it has a dreadful damp problem. No doubt our landlord will paint it and put it back up for £900/£950.

Aibu to think private landlords should be limited in how much they increase rent? I understand that there is limited supply, so landlords are taking advantage of this to put up prices, but like most people my wages are not increasing on real terms and having a somewhere to live is quickly becoming unaffordable!!

Some of the replies are insane: housing is a human right ffs. BTL has fucked an entire generation of young people.

@HarrietsChariot

Rents shouldn't be based on inflation, no. They should be based on the monthly mortgage repayment the landlord has on the property, up to 90%. That way people who invest in property still benefit from price rises and only have to find a relatively small amount out of their own pocket each month, but they cannot exploit renters. Obviously once the mortgage is payed off, rent would decrease to zero.

You’re joking?

@MsMoody

Some of the replies are insane: housing is a human right ffs. BTL has fucked an entire generation of young people.

So is food and so is water and we pay for those too.

@simitra

If youve been in the property some time and are a good paying tenant you can always attempt to bargain.

When my LL attempted to raise my rent by £50 a month I told her that I couldnt afford that and offered £20 a month. I had done my homework and looked on the land registry to find out how much the original morgage had been and knew it was paid off. I did remind her that the kitchen and bathroom were below standard in decor and little had been spent on the house over all. If I left she would have to spend a lot of money on the house to relet or sell it. I was prepared to throw the information about the mortgage into the pot too, but we settled on £30.

What relevance does an outstanding or redeemed mortgage have to do with what level of rent you pay?

It’s none of your business if your landlord has a mortgage or not.

Not an expert but I remember a landlord tax came into effect in the last few years so it might be accounting for that.

Some of the replies are insane: housing is a human right ffs. BTL has fucked an entire generation of young people
Your human right is not my responsibility. Or are you suggesting that I should make a loss every month to support a stranger who for all I know just can't budget right?

Or I should sell? And then what? As many predicted, landlords selling has had no impact in reducing house costs (surprise surprise) and left with even less option for those who need to rent!

Not an expert but I remember a landlord tax came into effect in the last few years so it might be accounting for that
Of course it dies but tenants are in denial and don't want to hear it!

I'd love to know what proportion of money paid in benefits goes into the pockets of private landlords.

In what other area of economic activity does the taxpayer provide private individuals with an income and the ability to acquire an asset that seems to rise in value inexorably?

Rent controls would benefit both tenants and the public purse.

All businesses pass their running costs on to their clients this basically.

Being fed is also a human right isn’t it? Funny how people love attacking private landlord who are often individuals but never claim that supermarkets are monsters for making a profit when selling us our food. Why is that I wonder?

Insurance on rentals has gone up above inflation rates. Annual boiler inspections doubled in five years. Costs of redecorating, etc have risen enormously plus loss of rent while workmen are in. Estate agents handling fees have risen substantially

In what other area of economic activity does the taxpayer provide private individuals with an income and the ability to acquire an asset that seems to rise in value inexorably?
And here we go! Many landlord don't go to buy a BTL. They become a landlord because they move with a partner. They take ownership of their parent asset. Or they do buy for family member.

Most landlords who own 1 or 2 properties, that is the very majority do NOT get much of an income out if it. Not any longer. Why would they be so desperate to sell if it was such a good and easy money earner?

The tax payer provides an income that pays for they accomodation and go back to society in tax.

Why is that I wonder?
Because food retailers don't have something they wish they had themselves.

Housing is terrible in this country. A whole generation is stuck in very expensive often poorly maintained rental properties with little rights and freedoms seeing all their earnings going to someone else. Whilst the other half profit from soaring house prices. We need more housing schemes for low earners but this will never happen under a conservative government who want the poor to fund the well off.

@vivainsomnia

Some of the replies are insane: housing is a human right ffs. BTL has fucked an entire generation of young people Your human right is not my responsibility. Or are you suggesting that I should make a loss every month to support a stranger who for all I know just can't budget right?

Or I should sell? And then what? As many predicted, landlords selling has had no impact in reducing house costs (surprise surprise) and left with even less option for those who need to rent!

Why do people always jump to the argument that if there were controls on rent landlords would be making no money and would all immediately sell up etc etc.

It's disgustingly disingenuous. I would never expect to live rent free or on a very low rent at the expense of someone else. I am just aware of the reality of the situation that I am essentially purchasing an asset I will never own.

A few years ago my landlord gave us notice as they said they were selling up. Fine, no problem at all.

We'd been there 8 years and only had minimal rent increases over that time, we were paying £900pm when we left.

It was never put up for sale. 6 weeks after we left it was let out again at £1400pm.

that pissed me off a bit!

@Fancymice on the one hand you are saying that you dont object to a fair rent but on the other you dont want to be covering half the costs associated with providing decent housing.

Im a landlord and I do think there is a good case to be made for more regulation of the rental market but, if rental properties are to be kept safe and in good repair, then the cost of those things is going to have to be figured into the rental cost. In the same way, if you should ever be in a position to buy a house you'll find your costs run way beyond your monthly mortgage payments even though you dont actually have to keep it to nearly such a high standard as a rental property.

I have a house that I let. It has no mortgage on it. In the last financial year I made a profit of £5k. That was with no huge outlays eg new boiler, re-decorating etc. Again - this is without a mortgage. I am considering selling or leaving it empty as this level of profit isn't worth the risk of having tenants who might cause a high level of damage.

@Fancymice
I am just aware of the reality of the situation that I am essentially purchasing an asset I will never own.

Yes. You are.
However the alternative if you can't get a mortgage is become homeless.

We spent 40 years paying our mortgage.
We sold our home and downsized.
We rent out our new home presently but expect to live there again in a few years.
In 3 years we haven't raised the rent.
We've bought a new washing machine and dishwasher, new shower screen, paid to have all the electrics checked ( new law) although they are less than 12 years old and we wouldn't have done it for ourselves, the boiler is checked annually, the chimney swept annually, brand new patio doors because the lock broke, guttering cleaned and now the front door has faded so I need to get it painted.
I estimate we spend £1500. a year on the house.
If we had a mortgage we'd be in debt!

The state of housing in the UK is dire.
Until something is done at government level you as a tenant need me more than I need you.
And I don't say that with any satisfaction.
I keep our house how I would want it for myself.
My tenant told me it's like Christmas everyday in our house.

A landlord cannot charge zero rent, because they have to pay for things like the below. Example Do you think that landlord insurance has not increased each year ?

Landlord insurance
Maintenance & repairs
Gas & electrical safety checks
Agency fees or other costs if not managed by an agency
Council tax & utilities for times when the property is vacant
If it is a leasehold property, there can be extra charges
Tax on the income
RISK- know someone who had a "bad tenant" & it cost 20k to put things right

Being a responsible landlord is not easy money & takes time & effort !

Nobody runs a Business at a loss, because it makes zero financial sense

I haven't increased the rent, at my choice for several years

However, as a landlord all my bills have increased

Some people are

Friend of mine is considering selling her BTL flat - she has kept the rent below market value as the tenants were and are lovely - but her increased costs are making it not worth it. Now thinking with other costs year she could be in deficit.

Private LL should behave properly but they aren't a charity - proper contracts / agreements etc should sort this out & if it suits neither party they can pull out ( given proper notices etc etc )

@LakieLady

I'd love to know what proportion of money paid in benefits goes into the pockets of private landlords.

In what other area of economic activity does the taxpayer provide private individuals with an income and the ability to acquire an asset that seems to rise in value inexorably?

Rent controls would benefit both tenants and the public purse.

The taxpayer doesn’t provide private individuals with an income.

The taxpayer pays for people who can’t afford a home for themselves and their families to have a home so that they aren’t living in slums or on the streets.

It’s not the landlords claiming the benefits, the landlords are the ones doing their best to for themselves and their families.

They really can’t win on this one though, landlords are either discriminating evil bastards because they won’t let to someone on benefits, or they’re greedy evil bastards for allowing people with low or no incomes to rent their properties by using benefits.

Other countries manage to have rent controls and better protections for tenants without the entirety of capitalism breaking down and melting into a puddle of communism.

Recently I watched a youtube lecture by a US economist on the subject of rent control.

Apparently, after world war 2 there was a massive shortage of housing. People were living in tents, converting old trams into housing, etc.

This was strange, as there had been no housing shortage before the war, the population had not changed since then, and the housing supply had actually increased by 10%.

What had happened was that during the war, rent controls were brought in. This, unsurprisingly, caused people to consume more housing than they otherwise would. Young adults moved out of their parents homes sooner. Older adults were less inclined to downsize when their children moved out. Lots more people lived alone that had been the case previously.

People who didn't already have housing could not offer to pay more than the regulated rents, so they resorted to bribing people who controlled access to housing to bump them up the waiting list.

The rent controls were abolished, and very shortly afterwards, the shortage of housing vanished.

There are still places in the USA with rent controls, e.g. New York, and to this day these properties are under-occupied compared to ones where a market-rent is required.

It's disgustingly disingenuous
No it's not at all, it's the reality. It might not be one you are familiar with but still reality.

Why do you think so many landlords have sold up and there is now a rental crisis worse than ever?

I'd love to know what proportion of money paid in benefits goes into the pockets of private landlords.

This post is utter nonsense, unfortunately a lot of people do think like this.

People on benefits, in addition to paying for housing, probably also pay utilities, buy food, may own a smartphone?

I've yet to see anyone ask why Asda and Tesco should benefit from the taxpayers money that goes into their pockets.

I've yet to see anyone ask why British Gas, or Thames Water, or BT or Sky should be profiting from taxpayers money.

I've yet to see anyone demand that Samsung or Apple refund the government for taxpayers money that was spent on their products.

In what other area of economic activity does the taxpayer provide private individuals with an income and the ability to acquire an asset that seems to rise in value inexorably?

I have a lot of money invested. None of it is in housing, because the returns aren't high enough. It's true that in the past some people have made fortunes through leverage exposure, but that's not a game I've ever been interested in playing. I certainly wouldn't try it at today's prices.