There should be an upper limit on rental prices

[HereLiveIAmNotACat]

Am I the only one that thinks the property investment industry is horrendous and shows how awful, greedy and selfish mankind can be? Surely there should be laws around this? Or caps on the maximum profit a homeowner can make per month relative to any mortgage on the property?
How can it be right that rental prices are ludicrously above mortgage prices purely for the homeowners to benefit from someone else paying off their mortgage and make a pretty penny on top.. then moving on to their third, fourth houses etc..meanwhile renters are stuck forking up more than they can afford with little chance of ever making it onto the property ladder due to the impossibility of saving up whilst paying rent.
Unless you were fortunate enough to have a property in the 80s before inflation/money from family you’re screwed really.
Just means less and less rental properties being available. The rich getting richer the poor getting poorer. And it’s always ‘oh it’s brilliant we’ve paid that mortgage off and are making such and such per month renting out..we’re now moving to a much larger house in a much nicer area’ as if that’s something to be proud of?!

(Yes- bitter renter here)

Oh and for anyone who needs it pointed out, this^ is the problem
That landlords treat renting their property as a business. So the alternative is for them to act as social landlords, get all the fried for no benefit for the goodwill of society?

I don’t understand all the people who say it’s so stressful being a landlord, they make no money, they’re on call 24/7. Why are you doing it? There’s a benefit to you somewhere or you simply wouldn’t
As already said a number of times, more and more landlords are selling and opting out.

I haven't yet because I'm still making a very slight profit and have very good tenants so no trouble. I am paying most of the mortgage out of my salary.The intention is indeed for rent to become my pension but if I get to the point if making no profit at all and getting grief I expect I too will sell and invest elsewhere.

I've got more sympathy for accidental landlords and landlords with one or two properties than the idle rich who own tens, hundreds or even thousands personally. Contrary to a common statement on here I've also tended to find them easier to deal with, less arrogant or self-justifying and less exploitative.

A fucked system gives none of us good choices.

I completely agree OP. And its not just about people not being able to afford to rent or about people making money unfairly. Extortionate rents in an area push up the local market rates so huge amounts need to be paid to benefit claimants for housing costs, meaning landlords are often getting rich courtesy of tax payers. I'd have thought even those without sufficient social conscience to agree with you on the points you've raised might have a problem with that.

I think it’s important not to tar all LL’s under the same brush. I’ve rented my old house out because I couldn’t sell it at the time and needed to move so I had no other option. Luckily I have a good relationship with my tenant and always fix any repairs promptly and charge well below market rate- completely different to other LL’s in the country who charge obscene amounts of rent and don’t care about their tenants. I will look to sell one day though (so don’t worry, there will be one less ‘evil landlord’ in the world!) but I know my tenant will be devastated when it happens as she loves living there.

Does OP seriously think that this:

Surely there should be laws around this? Or caps on the maximum profit a homeowner can make per month relative to any mortgage on the property?

Would help with this:

Just means less and less rental properties being available.

Surely rental caps would only decrease rental stock? Where I live, its very very difficult to find a rental as each one coming to market gets 10+ viewings booked as soon as its advertised with some candidates offering 6 months rent upfront.

The only solution is for government to allow LAs to invest significantly in social housing but that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

I don't understand this logic. When you buy from Marks & Spencer's the cost of their goods builds in the costs of the store, keeping the lights on, distribution costs etc etc

Do you think there aren’t products in M&S that make a loss?

Why would you expect to pay rent that does not take into account the costs of actually providing that space for you to live in??

I would expect to pay rent that reflected the market rental rates for similar properties in that area. Most importantly I would expect to pay the exact figure Stated in my tenancy agreement. I don’t care if the landlords actual costs are more than they have agreed to charge in rent for the property. Those costs are their responsibility to cover. If I pay £700 a month in rent and one month the boiler goes and has to be replaced at a cost of £2k I don’t expect to have to pay £2k that month to cover the boiler. The landlord wouldn’t expect that either. They know they have to find the money either from having saved whatever was left from the rent after costs or from their own personal finances or from a loan.

@BashfulClam

We are 40 and own our home. We did not have any help at all from our parents, we certainly didn’t buy in the 80’s as we were at primary school. Landlords have more costs than just the mortgage. If you own your home all maintenance and repairs fall to you. The landlord is expected to cover repairs, maintenance, insurance, safety certificates and pay extra tax so of course they charge more than the mortgage costs to cover. It all.

These are business expenses for landlords which are tax deductible.

My heart bleeds. Those poor landlords striving to help us all out to their own detriment.

That landlords treat renting their property as a business. So the alternative is for them to act as social landlords, get all the fried for no benefit for the goodwill of society?

No, that providing a home can be a business.

I agree, OP. It is parasitic behaviour for many.

@saleorbouy

Renting is a business and like all businesses it would not be done if there was no financial gain or profit. The landlord needs to return a profit after, paying for the property loan, buildings insurance, tenant insurance, letting agent fees, maintenance and upkeep costs, and also to cover for period of vacancy during tenants and tax on the whole amount of rent before deductions. You cannot simply compare just the cost of a mortgage against your rent this does not taking into account many other expenses incurred as a landlord.

They don't have to be a landlord. That's their choice. If it's so expensive perhaps they should just sell the property and give someone else a chance to own a property.

@FateHasRedesignedMost

We worked and saved hard to buy our house a couple of years ago. It’s a detached 5 bed in a nice area. Before that we rented flats and moved around the country so DH could keep getting promoted; so saying it’s impossible for people these days to buy isn’t true. Wise decisions re career, savings and planning ahead go a long way towards getting on the property ladder, it’s not pure luck. Most of our friends own their houses and bought recently. We also had DC later so we’d be settled by the time DC started school.

Also many landlords rent their properties as a career, for some it’s their only source of income. So what if they made savvy decisions in the 80s and now have a profile of rentals? Like any business, some people take a risk and get successful, others don’t. They should be free to price their properties at competitive rates, especially if they’ve put a lot of time and hard work into making them lovely homes, eg fitting new kitchens and bathrooms, new flooring, modern perks.

"So what?" People are forever unable to get on the property ladder due to parasitic investors. Prices are driven up so many people have no chance. Lovely for you that you and all your friends are unaffected. But that's not the case for thousands who are mistreated in a degrading housing market and are unable to build a secure family life because of some parasitic scroungers.

You do know that housing associations rental agreement s include rental rises annually??

@MrsHookey

My heart bleeds. Those poor landlords striving to help us all out to their own detriment.

More jealously.

We live in a capitalist society. This is how capitalism functions, I'm afraid. There is no Utopia and never will be.

We rented for 10 years. We bought a 2nd house this year (no mortgage on it) and rent it out. Why would we give away for free (or peanuts) something that we have worked so incredibly hard for?

Some of the replies here are hilarious. “Mistreated” and “Entitled” words used totally out of context.

Your sense of entitlement is what is more obscene than anything.

@peaceanddove

We live in a capitalist society. This is how capitalism functions, I'm afraid. There is no Utopia and never will be.

We rented for 10 years. We bought a 2nd house this year (no mortgage on it) and rent it out. Why would we give away for free (or peanuts) something that we have worked so incredibly hard for?

You shouldn’t and good on you.

Do you think there aren’t products in M&S that make a loss?

Presumably you understand that M&S and other retailers sell more than one product? Some products are deliberate loss leaders; others just haven’t sold as well as hoped and get reduced. No one is going to make a property a loss leader, but if the market drops, then yes, they’ll have to drop the rent to limit their losses. However, why would you expect landlords to charge below market rate so that they merely break even? If you continue with your retail analogy, M&S have a lot more products that make a profit than a loss - that’s how they have a business.

@MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry Housing is a right and also a business. Food is also a right but Tesco is a business. We aren't expecting Tesco to make healthy food affordable right? There are so many in food poverty and Tesco isn't pressured to lower the food prices. However, there is a lot of anger at the government for cutting free school meals during the pandemic, removing UC uplift so families have to choose between heat or eat etc.

So it is the responsibility of the government to ensure the vulnerable are housing. However this is extremely expensive when the governnment no longer owns the housing. What we should be focusing is not on rent caps but how the state can reacquire lower end properties and then it can house those who can't afford to buy.

No I don't think rent should be capped. But I think favourable tax rates for landlords should end. Which they have to a certain extent. Also council house tenancies should not be for life. That is a huge part of the problem.

I worked for an LA years ago, within their private sector housing advice unit. When private renting really began to be a thing and staff were dubious we were assured that private rents would be capped and it wouldn't be a free-for-all for private landlords.

Of course, this was a lie.

There are way too many landlords taking advantage of vulnerable people and those in desperate housing need. The lack of affordable social housing provision is a win-win for them.

I mean it's fine to rent out and make a reasonable profit, why not? but don't pretend it's about anything more than money, and if youre taking on tenants yet still moaning about it then obviously the loads of money to be made is worth that risk.

Define “loads of money”?

@DeeCeeCherry if the rental was a Kensington apartment and the rent was at least 30% above market rent and the renters were investment bankers, no one would care if the renter was being fleeced. Maybe not even the renter.

The problem is that vulnerable and poor people are in private rentals and they have no decent pension either. Thats why I think that landlords shouldn't be able to buy those properties- if you want to be a landlord, go and buy a lovely apartment in Knightsbridge, Bishops Avenue, South Kensington or Hampstead
.All the properties that are below the average value of the city should only be sold to owners occupiers only. Or at the very least, if the landlord wants to buy a property that is below the average price, he should pay an additional tax for it.

I am all in favour of people becoming landlords; but they should only be landlords if they can truly afford expensive properties. I mean, I think its ridiculous that as a 29 year old with a london flat that my equity in my flat can easily buy a terrace up north for cash. This is because I am a Londoner not because I am rich or worked many hours. Its just because property values are so much higher in London that you can refinance and be able to buy up so much more up north. people in the north should be protected by this. If it was the law that I could only buy £300k plus properties up north as BTL (or at least would be charged a hefty tax for doing so), I would not be able to afford it and for good reason too.

I have never pretended that renting out a 2nd property is about anything other than the money. Of course it is. Neither of us have private pensions. So, renting properties (buying another in the New Year) are our pensions.

It's supply and demand. If you put people off being landlords then there will be less supply so with rent caps you'd have cheaper rent but lots of people unable to find anywhere to rent! Instead of slating landlords as greedy bastards and trying to discourage people from becoming landlords, perhaps look at them as providing an essential service (much as we view people who sell food, water, gas, electricity etc.). The more houses that are available to rent the more competition. Landlords would have to provide better value for money and if they weren't up to scratch it would be easy to move on to somewhere new.