to think those who demonised BTL landlords are (partially) responsible for rental crisis

[LargeDeviation]

Many small landlords are selling because:

• mortgate interest is now only partially deductible for tax
• S21 evictions are being stopped, meaning it will be impossible to kick out bad tenants; the courts are too backed up to actually enforce any evictions even when it's allowed anyway
• Onerous EPC rules coming in which will cost huge sums to rectify
• More and more registers, inspections and paperwork

At the same time, landlords have spent the last few years being jeered as being unethical - and many MNers haven't been shy to raise their voices about that.

The tiny minority of renters fortunate enough to be able to afford a deposit and mortgage might be happy; they will have a bit more choice and a slightly lower price. For other renters they are having real problems.

Shelter and other housing charities should be campaigning for more landlord friendly policies such as easier tenant evictions and restoring full mortgage interest deductions for tax if they want to improve housing availability on a large scale, but they won't because PR-wise it will be a nightmare as their changes will be seen to disadvantage individual tenants.

Yes, there are other factors too - large scale immigration; planning system broken; not enough housebuilding; more singletons/split families and fewer intergenerational families - but landlords selling up because of government policies and societal ostracism is a major cause.

I am not a landlord but have been in the past - there is no way I would become a new landlord in the current environment.

Those who called landlords rent-seeking scum or similar should feel ashamed.

I agree LLs are overly demonised, but I don't think that's responsible for the housing problem. That lies with the government for not building anything like enough social housing, leaving private LLs to pick up the slack and then not changing anything about affordable housing supply while making things harder for LLs.

I have also been an LL in my time - IMO, it was a bad idea to let the housing system become so reliant on 1 or 2-property LLs; such LLs will, of necessity, sell the properties when they need to release the cash, meaning an unstable environment for tenants. I'm always at pains to say such LLs will generally not be doing so to buy a Ferrari, or go on holiday to Bermuda etc - it will be because of a life change like divorce, upsizing, retirement, giving their kids a deposit - no comfort to their tenants, I know, but just to say small-scale LLs will not be selling up for arbitrary reasons and will usually genuinely have a need for the proceeds for their own household, and it's not realistic to expect them to put tenants ahead of their own family's needs. Which is why it's not a good solution to housing people en masse.

Also it doesn't help that you are generally not required to get any kind of education or even be sent info reliably on what your responsibilities are as LLs - too many don't do certifications they need or give notice properly, leading to complaints - and it's usually ignorance, not malice or penny pinching.

The majority of those will be people with disability or other illneses, not quite the lazy layabout narrative you are trying to push.

I work in this sector and housing associations are often responsible for the very worst conditions

Well new build private renters and buyers will presumably be experiencing the same issue ?
If they are complaining will get you nowhere, they need to speak to the housing association.

We Rent out our home as we had to relocate with my DH's job. For various reasons the rent we charge does not cover our mortgage payments. We make 0 profit and have to top up every month to cover all the fees. It's not great but at the moment we can afford to do this. Our tenant is paying less than market rate as rents where our house is are going up fast. She's a good tenant and as a previous renter, I have little interest in raking money in on a BTL.

So not all LL are greedy scum.

But what I do have a huge issue with is people buying second homes in holiday locations and pricing locals out of the market. It's incredibly selfish and is nearly always the very comfortably off making themselves even wealthier and getting holiday makers to pay their mortgage, so they're not even adding the house to available rental stock. The government definitely need to crack down on this.

You’re imagining a narrative that I am not peddling. I just provided data to correct some lies posted by another poster up above.

I have not rtft but I live in Scotland where they have just brought in a rent freeze. How thick can you get??? Rent is high as there isn’t enough housing / flats on the rental market, so bringing in a rent freeze that will cause landlords to withdraw from the market will … force medium to long term rents even higher! SNP. Thick as mince!

Teenyliving · Today 20:42
@cawfeee ah - so you don’t give a crap about social housing tenants. It wasn’t a sensationalist report at all. It was a well researched report raising a massive sofial
issue for social housing tenants.
the housing ombudsman has identified it as a significant structural problem in the sector. It is a shocking situation that is only going to get worse as the housing stock ages.
private tenants are typically in an even worse situation as the don’t currently have an ombudsman to go to. They can go to the councils environmental health team but that’s not likely to be successful.
the point is that social housing is not the answer to the housing problems.
for example I think it’s shocking the condition that council properties are often rented out in - with no flooring!!!
my personal view is that that a realistic answer taking into account the current structure of the uk rental market is for people who for one reason or another need support to be provided with government funded and run housing for the duration of their time of need.
and for the private market to be well regulated with minimum standards that are enforced.

I'm not sure how you have extrapolated from my last comment that I don't give a crap about social housing tenants, aside from anything, I also happen to be one ?
Considering that social housing is fairly self selective. i.e. people with big incomes don't want it. Why should only the most desperate people, in your view, be the only ones to have access to it ?
People want social housing because they want the security of a long term tenancy, affordable rent and the ability to make the home their own, with decor of their choosing. What is the point of trying to legislate and reinvent the wheel in the private sector, being mindful of the fact that the op is already whinging, where are you going to find all these private investors.
Oh I know... huge investor comes along buys up lots of housing stock, but without the recourse you have with a housing association, imagine being a private renter and raising an issue with 'big housing investor'. Well you wouldn't because you'd be blacklisted and homeless before the ink had dried on your complaint letter.
I don't get the hatred of social housing on mumsnet, you have a tried and tested housing model that mostly works well, why can't we invest social housing instead of lining the pockets of private investors.

You didn't you said people working would be in the minority, the very figures you later dug up in an attempt to substantiate your dubious claims, illustrated nearly half where in work.

@Booklover3 repairs and maintenance are part of the costs of running their business. Profit is what is left after all costs of running a business are deducted.

No I didn’t, I said that most would be receiving benefits. It’s still up there if you need to check.

Why are you being so dishonest?

I didn’t, I said that most would be receiving benefits. It’s still up there if you need to check.
Why are you being so dishonest?
Erm...Not working and receiving benefits, meaning the same thing.

Weirdly enough, every single working person over 25 trapped in private rentals that I have met in real life, here and on the continent, has wanted to buy. Because buying one’s own translates one’s own work into an asset for oneself and family. Whereas having to pay private rent translates one’s own work into assets for other people and their own family, which are often then passed down by inheritance, all for no work at all. This is common knowledge in real life. It is only in the circles of the idle rich landlords that all these lying justifications are put forward as endless excuses. Oddly enough, many of those are sitting in the Houses of Parliament controlling the laws of ownership and weighting them in their favour, because money brings possessions and control of resources, which bring power. Who do you think you are fooling? None of us working tenants have been fooled over the years. We’ve just been disenfranchised and enraged.

No, don’t be so stupid. Many people who work also receive benefits.

Which was pointed out to you in several posts after you made your ill informed comment.
Good to see you have taken it in board. Well done.

“@Beezknees you appear to be shockingly ignorant of how awful some housing association properties are

I live in one, so I'm pretty sure I'm not.”

Bless! Beezknees has a point though. I have a hole in my arse and a Spanish guitar and everyone else with a hole in their arse has a Spanish guitar. FACT!

There should be quicker recourse and remedy for tenants whose landlords fail to maintain their properties or effect repairs in a timely fashion. There should be quicker recourse and remedy for landlords with non-paying or destructive tenants.

I've never been a landlord and I’d hate it but I know people who are in a very small way. It goes nowhere near making enough money to live on so they can “just sit and collect” The four lots I know, both partners of the couple have full time paid work: teacher & workplace trainer, builder & hairdresser, pension company somethingorother & events organiser, teacher & pharmacist. In all but one case one of them is pretty handy and covers most of the repairs and decoration themselves. They all also live very close to the property or properties they own.

I also know people who rent privately and used to know loads when I was younger. Social housing wouldn’t have been the right option for them as they need/ needed the flexibility of private rental and I doubt they’d have been eligible as single people. I think the EPC regulation is going to be a disaster. Where I lived in the U.K. the majority of the rental stock is single brick, single glazed sash window Victorian or Edwardian terraced houses with air bricks and voids under the floorboards, just like my last house there. It’s really difficult to do much more than lag pipes and boiler and insulate the roof space. Double glazed sash units are £££, probably minimum £40,000 for the full house and I’m not sure that would secure a C rating with the single brick. They are beautiful houses, I loved mine, but they are bastards to keep warm it’s true. Taking them out of the rental market will have a massive impact, far more on the would-be renters than the landlords. Landlords can sell, but the renters will be homeless because there is nowhere near enough social housing.

The area where I lived had a high proportion of non-British nationals who come over to work in the city and it still does, despite Brexit. These people are not going to be top of the list for social housing, so what are they going to do? Possibly go back to their country of origin when we desperately need their skills and labour. Our city is also a resettlement destination for refugees identified by the U.N. as being particularly vulnerable in refugee camps. They are also housed in private rentals (free to them) or were when I last lived there and worked with them. It really is going to be a disaster.

Quite a lot will be working and receive housing benefit as well.

I don't think any individual should be able to make any sort of profit on a basic need like housing, no matter how small.

Why not though@Beezknees?
People make a profit supplying other basic needs such as food, clothing, heating fuel etc.
I agree the rental market should be very well regulated and tenants treated fairly, and I also support more social housing being built. But I also think there's a place for landlords. It will always suit some people to rent, at least for a while. (I definitely didn't want to buy a property when I was just starting my first job and didn't have a clue how things would go, for example.)

As has been said, remortgaging your own home (which may be worth more than mine) can give you a deposit for a rental home. Also saving money from your wages over 5 years (you may well earn more than I do). Some people may decide to invest a modest inheritance (I've never had one, but you might) if they don't get ripped off by a cocklodger. There are ways that ordinary people can find themselves landlords. And others who prefer to spend £30,000 on a flash case and a holiday instead.

People make a profit supplying other basic needs such as food, clothing, heating fuel etc.

Do you really think the profits made out of heating fuel at this moment in time are a particularly good justification?

The centralised growing of food has gone too far too - the conglomerate farmers are saying they can’t afford to make it work economically either!

When people were originally pushed off the land and food production capability was taken away, there were compensations. That was the ready availability of new products, easy and off the shelf, that had not existed before. In addition proviso was made to grow some limited food of one’s own. You clearly know nothing of the trade offs involved in living in societies, and the need to offer something back for the surrendering of powers and rights. The foundation of capitalism is that people can offer their work for centralised powers in return for the ability to build some wealth of their own. What are people now being offered? Fuck all beyond a life of slavery, and it is simply unacceptable.

As I said it is simply a question of power. If working tenants had the same power as the rich landlords, buy to let would never have happened and would have been overturned the minute it started trapping people over the age of 25. That is the simple fact. Landlording as an economic relation in society is not fair, it has no legitimacy, it is not wanted, and all the lying justifications advanced in favour of maintaining the increased power of favoured groups and classes are pathetically transparent.

Landlording as an economic relation in society is not fair, it has no legitimacy, it is not wanted, and all the lying justifications advanced in favour of maintaining the increased power of favoured groups and classes are pathetically transparent.

So there's no demand for rental properties? Everyone wants to buy and no one wants or needs the flexibility of a rental property. And it's the evil landlords pushing up property prices?

Except that analysis is flawed. Looking at the industry stats, it's estimated that half of landlords have sold up in the last three years. Yet property prices have soared so clearly they're not the primary force behind rising prices.

We've been looking at buying a flat in central London to rent out before we move into it ourselves and the rental market has gone mad according to the estate agents. They usually have an average of 80 properties available to rent on their books and they have two. As a result, rental prices have rocketed as there's high demand and insufficient supply.

Certainly in today's market at current property prices, buy to let is unattractive. I ran the numbers when the base rate was 0.25% and the rental income barely covered the mortgage interest (even with a 25% deposit) and service charge.

That's before you factor in other costs such as insurance, repairs etc,. Even with full occupancy for the whole time, we'd have been making a loss and the loss would now be higher given that the base rate has increased by 2% and is forecast to hit 5% by Q2 next year.

Renting provides a service to people that don't necessarily want to own their own home, including students, people wanting to rent a cheap single room in a house, people on temporary work placements etc. Buying a home incurs high transaction costs whereas renters have a low-cost option if they only want to live somewhere for a year or two.

No sympathy for landlords I'm afraid and i own my own home. Used to rent.

Well said.

Lol, won’t someone please think of the BTL landlords! 😭

Oh, and greedy HMO landlords converting houses into hellholes for six or more adults to live in are the worst of the lot. It is dreadful exploitation and should be banned.