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)

@justasking111

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

And stiff the farmers? Imagine that will be a popular vote winner in rural constituencies.

It will be popular there's not that many farmers amongst a population of 3.6 million. The Welsh development agency did it years ago the senedd will do it again. Better to build homes for locals than sell it off to TATA industry to plant trees to offset their carbon emissions

We're talking about a few acres of poor land for a few sheep its not arable

The thing is, even if as a landlord of a single property you only break even, or end up having to make a small contribution every year, you still end up with a valuable asset that that has been paid for by another person/people, and some of those will have been disadvantaged as instead of saving or investing their money, they have given it to you.

Yes there are nuances, bad tenants and of course not everyone wants to buy, but the city I live in rental prices are insane, demand hasn’t dropped, people genuinely struggle to find any room, anywhere. And it’s pretty standard for a room in a shared house to be £650 per month. For a room.

The reality is this: there are not enough houses, and there a lot of people who would like to own their own house, and all the security that brings, but can’t because there a) are not enough houses and b) too many of the ones that do exist are owned as investments designed to profit from people.

The thing is, even if as a landlord of a single property you only break even, or end up having to make a small contribution every year, you still end up with a valuable asset that that has been paid for by another person/people, and some of those will have been disadvantaged as instead of saving or investing their money, they have given it to you.

They haven’t paid for it, and they haven’t ‘given’ their money to a landlord; any more than an employer ‘gives’ their employees wages. They’ve paid to use the property.

The thing is, even if as a landlord of a single property you only break even, or end up having to make a small contribution every year, you still end up with a valuable asset that that has been paid for by another person/people, and some of those will have been disadvantaged as instead of saving or investing their money, they have given it to you.

This is spot on!

So many more people live alone these days, divorce, bereavement or economic necessity, these all add to the shortage of property. Ten properties in my cul de sac seven four bedroomed. Three three bedroomed.

3are single occupancy widowed.
4 just couples
2 families
1 holiday let

That's 35 bedrooms and 19 individuals living here

Hasn't the number of rental properties dropped since the government made it so unattractive to be a landlord? This would also explain rising rent if there's less demand.

Tenants now pay no fees to agents/landlords, landlords can only get a small amount of tax relief on finance costs, it's not really a profitable way to make a living.

Less supply, not less demand

Completely agree and we don't rent, we could afford a second property and let it out but doesn't seem right to make our money that way and actually we have enough. We earn £100k a year between us, have savings and can afford our mortgage. If you complain people just say you're bitter or that you don't understand how hard it is to be a landlord. Now it's not always easy to be a landlord but you do make money on the whole either monthly or when you sell, otherwise people wouldn't do it. I wish people would be more honest about their wealth.
In between selling our old place and buying this one we had to rent, we couldn't afford or find a house like our 2 bed house because all the rentals in the area were split into student lets. In the end we paid £1000 a month for a 2 bed tiny bungalow which is more than our new mortgage by a long way for a 3 bed house around the corner. Friends have had to move away because they can't rent anything in this city (not SE) any longer. It's terrible but I don't know what the real solution is, there's no limit to what people think they deserve from others, at a time when there aren't enough homes for people.

We were landlords because we bought a small house and took the bottom floor and turned it into an apartment. Even less room for us, but we created housing for our tenants that was safe, nice, and pretty at a reasonable rate. I fail to see how that is immoral. If you have an income of 100,000 a year, I am going to assume you do more with your savings than stick it in the bank for one percent interest if you have any brains. If you are like most people with disposible income, that means investing in stocks, which if anything dwarf the profits real estate provides without the physical risks. How is investing in giant corporations more moral than providing a service that another person needs (a place to live, the maintenance it requires, and the management of the property)?

If you buy a house today with a 90% mortgage and rent it out I guarantee that in almost all cases the rent will be lower than the borrowing. The person who has purchased the house has saved the deposit possibly making many sacrifices to do so and have the huge responsibility of owing all that money. Landlords didn't create the current issues, the government did so blame them. Being a landlord is a huge responsibility nowadays. A maximum 5 week deposit means the liability rests with the LL. what exactly is that going to cover if someone doesn't look after the house, especially now with materials and labour costs at an all time high. A library book is borrowed. If you don't return it on time there's a fine, if you damage it or lose it there's a fine. The only way to avoid any of that is to own it. The only way to have total control over anything is if you own it - why should a private rental property be any different?

Okay it’s 5am and I can’t sleep. So I will say something.

We should look at the source of the issue rather than pressuring the small insignificant part of the chain - the landlord. Albeit this is all most renters can see due to popular influence. Most if not all renters do not have the voice or power to change anything of significance. However further landlord bashing and frothing resentment will only lead to further increase in rent.
Recent years of “successful” lobbying against the landlord and painting the landlord as capitalist pigs have given politicians the opportunity to make letting more expensive, in the name of giving housing back to the people, but anyone would rudimentary economic understanding can see this only pushes up the rent further causing even more resentment amongst renters. As we have experienced in the past year or two.

Rent level and quantity of rentals is merely a reflection of the deeper dynamics. Rent level merely reflects one aspect of the country’s economy. It is extremely irresponsible to compare Scandinavian or German rent to British rent without any reference to the remainder of the economy.

Therefore, in my opinion, a more efficient approach is not to meddle with supply and demand but increase income of the individuals. This will naturally correct supply and demand as more people have the freedom to buy or choose to rent.
By increase I don’t mean the blunt instrument of merely increasing min wage without increasing the quality of labour. There should be more courses and schools available, financial incentives for people to retrain their skills for the more profitable sectors (finance and IT). As the country’s manufacturing have been dissembled and outsourced, there hadn’t been any successful systematic retraining of the labour force, leaving the people stuck and unable to find high paying jobs and increasing supply of demand for rental.

UC is absolutely essential for people most vulnerable. People who need the most help are single mothers, disabled people and children, orphans and elderly. They should have more help as they are temporarily or permanently unable to change the situation no matter how hard they tried. They should have free housing as part of the care package and UC to cover all reasonable living expense. This does not include foreign holidays twice a year but the ability to comfortably send their children to school and not to worry about food or clothing or heating.

However physically and mentally healthy capable people should not be able to rely on UC indefinitely. There should be a time limit, such as five years, on how long a physically and mentally healthy individual is allowed to stay on UC. This time frame is to help people who have fallen on hard times to stand up on their own two feet again without taking away their incentive to work.

More money should be allocated to retraining the workforce. Offer financial rewards to the best and the brightest and actively help to seek or create apprenticeship opportunities. Since brexit we have lost so many valuable skilled and semi skilled labour and there is unarguably gaps in the market.
Anyhow,
I digress. But affordable housing is such a complex topic it is impossible to have a sensible discussion without touching on “why” and “how” aspect of the issue.

Well OP I hope you don’t have a pension because if you do it will be invested in huge, wealthy property companies.
Individual ll’s are not your problem here.
Government’s lack of investment in housing and big investment companies are the problem.

This is the whole reason we have such inequality. People with assets and wealth deny any stake in the problem. It's always someone else.

We own rental properties with long term tenants in most. They were rented out at 'market rent' when the new tenants moved in many years ago. We've not increased rents ever for them. Our costs to our properties haven't gone up. It doesn't sit well with us to push our tenants for more and more money just because we could.

This is the whole reason we have such inequality. People with assets and wealth deny any stake in the problem. It's always someone else.

Yes, it's quite depressing

I would feel more happy about renting and paying the same price as a mortgage if we at least had long term security. As it is, our landlord could sell up or find new tenants on a whim and we would have two months to find a new house. At the moment I'm studying alongside full time work and that would be a disaster to throw moving home into the mix. It also means we can't have children as some rental properties don't allow them and imagine having to move far from schools with only two months notice. We are at least allowed to hang photos on the wall here 🤣. I wish there were better rules around insulation and condition too. I think properties should have independent inspections to check they are up to standard.

The thing is, even if as a landlord of a single property you only break even, or end up having to make a small contribution every year, you still end up with a valuable asset that that has been paid for by another person/people, and some of those will have been disadvantaged as instead of saving or investing their money, they have given it to you
Or you can look at it that the majority of landlords pay high tax on the business, so for many, almost half of the rent goes right back to the government to help people who are struggling.

40% of the rent I get go to the gov. 40-50% goes into the cost of interests, repairs, maintenance, loss of income etc... About 10-20% of the rent goes into paying my mortgage. The rest is paid by my professional income.

What is most frustrating in this thread is the obvious ignorance of the true costs of being a landlord and that the gov is getting a great benefit from the business.

Take away all landlords and it's another chunk of revenue to the gov that goes.

Any decent landlord will not just sell on a whim, that’s not how it works. The costs to enter and exit the buy to let market are significant.

It’s clear a lot of people have no idea how BTL actually works.

@S2617

Any decent landlord will not just sell on a whim, that’s not how it works. The costs to enter and exit the buy to let market are significant.

It’s clear a lot of people have no idea how BTL actually works.

Strange, I know 2 people that have been forced out of their homes in the last year. The point is, we have no way of knowing if that will be us and can't put down roots. Our house has been advertised for sale before but didnt sell. Who knows when it might be again.

If you want to criticise landlords, you should first do some research and get your facts right. All this LL bashing while showing extreme ignorance of how owning and letting properties works only shows you are ill-informed and could not be bothered to look into the topic before opening your mouth.

@InTheNameOfAllThatIsHonest

If you want to criticise landlords, you should first do some research and get your facts right. All this LL bashing while showing extreme ignorance of how owning and letting properties works only shows you are ill-informed and could not be bothered to look into the topic before opening your mouth.

I agree. Thank you.

@Capferret

Well OP I hope you don’t have a pension because if you do it will be invested in huge, wealthy property companies. Individual ll’s are not your problem here. Government’s lack of investment in housing and big investment companies are the problem.

This.

I also think people find it easier to demonise individual LL’s over multi corporations that make millions out of the private rental sector. A well known private company near where I live has just built a load of houses and are charging double the amount of rent than the normal going rate pushing prices up in the area.

Joe Bloggs working full time with one BTL and paying 40% tax is not cause of the housing crisis I assure you.

Property is a business, the same as any other. I agree some landlords are venal but there are lots of companies who rent properties as a business.
You wouldn’t expect a coffee shop to only charge the cost of the coffee.