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)

Except that's not what is happening.

In the town I live, there are quite a few flats available but not one house. If I were to sell, the family current renting would need to move to a flat or move away. They can't afford to buy yet. Should those renting never allowed to live in a house with a garden?

Because it’s still not unattractive to most LLs so they’re not selling in enough numbers. It’s happening in drips and drabs.

We have two houses both with gardens, one is enjoyed the other is a toilet for two dogs 🙄

With house prices zooming up it is sensible for btl investors to hold on to asset of house to get capital gain on property. When they sell they will pay Capital Gains tax. Btl investors pay 3 percent more in Stamp Duty and pay CGT when selling so that levels out playing field.

@MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry Ironically the taxes on landlords have pushed them to buy houses- as the ability to extend and convert allows them to convert 'family homes' to HMOs. It was viewed by many london landlords as the only way to increase yield and revenue when house prices are so high.

I bought from an ex landlord but I own a 1930s 2 bed flat. I find it is properties like this which cannot be converted to a HMO which landlords tend to be more willing to sell. And which I am happy to buy but DH and I are a young couple hoping to have an only child so i guess we are more flexible about the kind of home we want to live in. I can see landlords continuing to buy up family homes irrespective of rent caps because they can still extend and convert and pack more people in (converting a 5 bed house into lots of micro flats for example).

We need way more council houses. Affordable rent and secure tenancies would solve so many problems in society

And I say this as a home owner.

Well house with garden isn't really a human right, but shelter is
You missed the point. I either rent the place or sell it. If I sell, a family will be able to enjoy a nice house with a garden. Maybe after being in a flat.

That will mean the current family renting will be displaced, either needing to live in a flat or far away so kids have to change schools.

Are you saying the family who can afford to buy has more rights to a nice house with garden than the family who can't yet afford to buy it but can afford to rent it?

By the way, I'd love it if they were to ask me if I intend to sell and could they buy it. It would be theirs.

@Cheerychirpy

Rents have risen as landlords have sold up due to a tax rise on landlord profits 5 or so years ago. This tax rise was considered a popular move by renters at the time - punish the greedy landlords, they’ll be more properties on the market for first time buyers - but economics is rarely as simple as people think. If a cap on rents is introduced, do you think this will increase or reduce the chances of being able to find a property to rent?

Indeed - and many have switched to FHL instead leaving even fewer homes to rent.

More good social housing is the only answer that will actually stabalise the market but still keep enough private stock for those who want the freedom of letting.

@vivainsomnia well this is precisely why I was absolutely certain why I would rather live in a flat that I own rather than a house with garden (which I probably could afford to rent in many places in the country given that I pay £2k in mortgage every month including overpayments) because I don't want my personal living situation to be determined by whether my landlord is going to sell. And to be given only 2 months to find a new place to live.

Your tenant is in a precarious situation because her personal living situation is dependent on your whims and fancies not because you are the only BTL house in town (I somehow doubt this). You could sell for a whole myriad of reasons, including reasons that may not be within your control- death, financial problems etc. Which would be fine if your tenant was rich because money can solve a lot of inconveniences. But sadly your tenant isn't rich so being at someone's mercy is probably not ideal for her.

The basic market law of supply and demand does apply, but it is what forces house prices up. Landlords increase demand: they mean that there are far more people who want to buy the same number of houses. Empirically, house prices went up directly in line with demand for buy-to-lets. I know of whole estates of two-up-two-downs now that are nearly all buy-to-let - imagine if all of those were returned to private owner-occupiers. 1 buyer, 1 house, reduces demand and not just by a little - prices would HAVE to fall to what the individual buyer can afford.

This strong rental growth has been fuelled by a lack of stock. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, 300,000 fewer rental properties have come onto the market. This is almost a third less than during the 12 months prior.

www.buyassociation.co.uk/2021/03/17/uk-rental-market-rents-on-the-rise-as-demand-remains-high/

And yet house prices haven't fallen to enable people to buy them (rather they have actually risen). Instead, they are struggling to find somewhere they can afford to rent. It is not as simple as landlords sell, prices go down, renters can afford to buy.

I do agree that there should be vastly more social housing available so that everyone on a low income can find a secure home. Private rentals need to be available for those, who for whatever reason, find it suits them to rent rather than buy. Having a home to live in is a right but owning that home isn't necessarily.

[quote caringcarer]@TinselTitsAndGlitteryBits, it depends if you are prepared to move to afford to buy. My son moved to Hull where property is cheap, taking a huge pay cut, but can buy a 2 or 3 bedroom terraced there cheaper than he can rent for.

@Tabitha005, how exactly do you rig an independent energy rating? I would love to know.[/quote]
My friend's had her own EPC done and the property only made an 'F' rating - which means it doesn't meet the legal requirement to be let as there is no exemption in place.

I'd say that, most likely, this particular volume landlord has a deal with a less-than-honest EPC provider to fudge his certificates.

It never surprises me what some landlords will do - having worked in the residential rental sector for some time, I've seen plenty more nefarious behaviour from agents and landlords (especially in the student letting market) than I ever saw from tenants.

With all said and done on here, one thing will stay the same. Some have some, some have none.

Really? Another landlord bashing thread? I provide an essential commodity. I'm sure there are unscrupulous landlords, just as their are bad doctors, lawyers and teachers. But I'm sick of the greed accusation.
Not everyone wants to buy. I rent to students, professionals and in the past people on housing benefit. I charge a market rent and I do not let out property that I wouldn't be happy to live in myself, and I make sure everything is in good working order and address issues immediately. I live off the income - my investment is in buildings rather than stocks, but one doesn't say people earning from other investments don't deserve it.
There are different price points for rent as there are for most things - you don't bash Ferrari because you can't afford to buy their cars. And during the pandemic three tenants requested a rent reduction ( one didn't request, he just stopped paying), which I agreed with, and two are still not back to paying the amount they leased for. Who suffers? Me as it's my income - I still have to pay maintenance and service charges and, yes, a mortgage. As someone said on another thread about renting, you don't go food shopping and ask the store to only charge you half, but somehow rent is considered a negotiable expense.
And mortgages and their costs have nothing to do with how rents are worked out. It is supply and demand and the value of the property too.
If you have a problem with your own landlord take it up with them.

@maofteens

Really? Another landlord bashing thread? I provide an essential commodity. I'm sure there are unscrupulous landlords, just as their are bad doctors, lawyers and teachers. But I'm sick of the greed accusation. Not everyone wants to buy. I rent to students, professionals and in the past people on housing benefit. I charge a market rent and I do not let out property that I wouldn't be happy to live in myself, and I make sure everything is in good working order and address issues immediately. I live off the income - my investment is in buildings rather than stocks, but one doesn't say people earning from other investments don't deserve it. There are different price points for rent as there are for most things - you don't bash Ferrari because you can't afford to buy their cars. And during the pandemic three tenants requested a rent reduction ( one didn't request, he just stopped paying), which I agreed with, and two are still not back to paying the amount they leased for. Who suffers? Me as it's my income - I still have to pay maintenance and service charges and, yes, a mortgage. As someone said on another thread about renting, you don't go food shopping and ask the store to only charge you half, but somehow rent is considered a negotiable expense. And mortgages and their costs have nothing to do with how rents are worked out. It is supply and demand and the value of the property too. If you have a problem with your own landlord take it up with them.

Absolutely.

@saveourtrees

I don't understand why, instead of building more social housing, why doesn't the council buy back housing? surely developers could buy old property and do it up for council tenants?

Because councils have been hit so hard by austerity that they're struggling to provide the most basic level of statutory services. And I think they still have to get approval from central government to borrow for capital projects. Which is the same reason that they don't build council houses.

It's very short sighted, because in the medium-long term, council housing is self-financing. They borrow money to build houses and the rental income pays back the borrowing. Once the money spent on those houses has been repaid, they can use the income from those houses to build more.

My MIL has lived in her council house for 60 years. Imagine how many times the original cost of building it she has paid in rent in that time?

Of course I don’t bash Ferrari because I can’t afford to buy their cars. Their cars are not a necessity I need to live. A home for my family is. The vast majority of renters as not renting through choice. Those that are renting are stuck in the system paying off someone else’s investment to get diddly squat at the end of it. It was just about tolerable before but with rises in rental prices it’s quite unbearable.
As it happens I’m fortunate that my landlord admits to saying ‘I’m not a greedy landlord’ and charges a fair rent considering what he could get and for that I’m truly grateful even if the place is falling apart.
Why should it be allowed some people are making livings off of others misfortunes?
It’s not a bash at landlords directly, it’s a bash at the government for allowing this to happen.
Interestingly my aibu stands at 60% yabu and 40% yanbu which correlates with the statistics of homeowners v renters. People don’t care about others injustice unless they’re experiencing it themselves and if I want to vent on an anonymous form about my disappointment then I will!

The stupid comparison with mortgages leads to resentment. Mortgages are calculated using lots of things. They are also variable and if you have one and stop paying it you lose your home.

But add in, new white goods, boiler services, broken showers, buildings insurance, void period, agents fees, new carpets and redecoration every few years, gas safety certificates, tax, stamp duty, capital gains tax, solicitor's fees, service charges, ground rent, major maintenance (gutters/damp/new kitchen/ roof/ new windows - all have to be done at some point) and payment for the hours and responsibility as part of the rental job. And risk of course.
Rent doesn't simply equate to a mortgage payment OP.

It's like those people who say "The price of a teabag is 0.1p so why are they ripping me off charging £3 in a cafe?"

@S2617, what makes you think that social housing is free? Social housing tenants pay rent, and it has to be self-financing, so isn't subsidised.

If they're on a low income, they may get help towards that rent, but that's no different to a private tenant.

And when private tenants are on a low income, they also get help towards paying their rent.

In a lot of cases the taxpayer is actually subsidising the private landlord's mortgage repayments and giving them an income, while their capital asset continues to appreciate.

Overall, it would cost less to the public purse if everyone was in social housing as the cost of enabling tenants to meet their rental obligations would be lower.

@HereLiveIAmNotACat the thing is - what would you feel is an acceptable home for you and your family? in my home country, singapore, 92% own their own home but the vast majority of those people own government flats , they are 3 bedroom and 1000 square feet but no garden and pretty basic (there are more luxe ones with swimming pools and spas and tennis courts meant for higher income families but thats not the majority).

If they built housing that is smaller/not in such a good location (but still within the city's boundaries)/didn't have a private garden, would you mind? Or would you still wait to purchase properties on the private market which would probably be in better locations/have nice period features/be more desirable as the people living there would be more affluent. Mass home ownership often means that a large proportion of people often live in smaller homes i.e. if you compare 1930s homes to Victorian homes, you would find that the square footage is much smaller as there was a huge home ownership boom in the 1930s, the middle classes could now afford to buy their own property.

Your tenant is in a precarious situation because her personal living situation is dependent on your whims and fancies not because you are the only BTL house in town (I somehow doubt this)
I totally agree. My point is that me selling my property is not forcibly helping and tenants should has much right to enjoy a garden for their family than home owner.

This was to the poster who was accusing me of keeping the property away from those who want to be home owners.

Firstly, Councils should have real and well funded enforcement powers (including seizing of property) for properties that aren't up to standard. Strict time limits and inspections would reduce the amount of bad landlords.
Secondly, Housing benefit should be reduced over a period of 5 years incrementally to a national maximum (eg £200 for 1 bedroom to £600 per month for a 4 bed house) This would release some housing stock for sale and reduce the profits and therefore attractiveness of BTL as an investment opportunity.
Finally full council tax for any property left empty for more than 1 month in a year (with reasonable exceptions) which would release a good amount of empty properties that have only been built as an investment.

The real issue is that house prices (and therefore rents) have increased far faster than wages. The minimum wage needs to be increased and the pay in many sectors brought more in line with modern living costs.
You're blaming the wrong people really. Most landlords are just normal people wanting to improve their financial situation and plan for the future (for many people their BTL is their pension).
Employers need to pay decent wages, that way people will be able to afford to rent and also to own, if they wish.

Government need to grasp the nettles in Wales. Here if there is poor farmland a developer has an option applies for planning the value goes up local farmer received £1000000 for land like this. So now we're talking about very expensive plots. What should happen is this barren land should be purchased at agricultural prices by a government body then turned over to a developer to build on . Enough for the developer to make a good profit but building affordable homes, association homes as well as private homes

Really? Another landlord bashing thread? I provide an essential commodity.

Yes, because it is important. People's homes and people's livelihoods and people's ability to make a reasonable living from their work is an essential, perhaps the central concept of creating a society that lasts without us all attacking each other for resources.

You take an essential commodity that could and has been supplied by other means and stick a middleman in there sucking profit out. You are not doing it for the altruism, you are doing it because it makes you money for little / no work. It's one of the few ways of making good money in a world where work has become profitless.