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 didn't say you haven't. I'm saying I chose to work for the deposit rather than remortgage my house

Do you think your holidays are more important than affordable homes for people?

Well, that makes it alright then. The shop keeper in my village has just moved here from a shop in another town. I'll go and take a load of shopping and not pay him, stupid fool chose to move shops so he shouldn't expect to be paid.....

YABU.
The system we have is broken. Landlords buying BTL properties, taking them out of circulation and driving prices up. Sky-high rents meaning tenants often have to get housing benefit for at least part of it, so essentially the government is paying the landlord's mortgage while the ll has a bare minimum obligation towards their tenants, can evict them without reason, and ends up with a nice nest egg essentially built on human misery. The whole thing is totally unethical.

We all work. The fact that you chose to spend your money on a second home deposit doesn't make you special. It just means you've chosen to exploit someone who can't afford the deposit.

The argumentative state of this thread is no use. Landlords and Tenants need to be collaborative. Yes my tenant is paying rent which means I pay the mortgage on the flat.

But he's not in a position to buy, if he was I'd sell to him. Are some of you suggesting that I evict him and sell my flat so someone else can buy it rather than provide an affordable and well maintained rental for him?

My tenant can easily afford the deposit she earns double what I do

The shop keeper is working for a wage. Landlords are sitting there collecting people's money.

I don’t perceive it as exploitation. It’s just another form of investment. Someone works to build up capital and invests it in property instead of shares or bonds. Yes, it does remove some supply from first time buyers, but it’s also providing housing for those who can’t yet, or never will, afford a deposit.

The alternative is the state owning 100% of rental properties, which is very Soviet. The reality in this country would be corporations owning the lions share (they already do, I think) which just perpetuates the quasi-feudalism that seems to be dogging this place. Aspiration is such a dirty word here.

@RoachTheHorse

He's not in a position to buy maybe because BTL landlords have bid up house prices higher than he can afford ?

@Beezknees do you not think that properties require maintenance works? Or insurance to be arranged?

But part of the reason there are those who can't yet, or never will, afford a deposit, is due to the fact that they are paying a large proportion of their income on rent and won't have the additional income to save for a deposit. The buying-up of smaller, cheaper properties by landlords has also meant that the remaining supply of houses these people could buy have gone up in price due to their high demand, again pushing those people down who are struggling to afford a deposit.

I simply asked where you stayed on holiday

Do you think making a few phone calls to sort insurance and signing some paperwork is equivalent to working a 40 hour week?

Collecting? You mean providing a home to someone.

What about car parks, should we no longer pay to rent a space, after all the owner is just collecting..... or hotels, should they now be free to stay in? After all the owners are just collecting....

What a stupid comparison. Going to stay in a hotel is optional. Needing a roof over your head isn't.

I als8 feel a property crash that many in here pray for would see more homes being bought by btl landlords, as mortgage companies won't be lending on these bargain properties we're all going to be seeing, any reductions will be snapped up by cash buyers

I agree with that. Although I will say, as opposed to other countries I’ve lived in rents were very reasonable here, until the past year. Regulatory balance is important, the diminishing pool of rental properties is a massive problem. More social housing is definitely a good thing to help those struggling the most.

I am not totally against private landlords. Under specific circumstances they provide a service.

But that service shouldn't be at the expense of normal people's ability to buy a house if they wish.

For me an investor should be able to invest in something and get a sensible rate of return on their money. But if that action leads to imbalance in society and monopolisation of essential resources then it is time for the state to step in. Otherwise it is a bit like monopoly - you end up with one person having all the money and everyone else as serfs.

The whole sector has got completely out of balance.

A thousand times this.

No landlord should be borrowing money to fund a house purchase. A destabilised housing market and increase in interest rates shouldn't impact the renting market, they should have always been kept separate from each other. If you can't afford to pay the mortgage on a property without renting it out, you shouldn't be renting it out. Sell it.

At least with a housing association they have governing bodies and committees that you can use to hold them to account, you'll find yourself out on your ear if you start getting aggy with a private landlord.

We put in a lot of effort to afford the property in the first place and then good landlords will continue to work to keep their properties in good condition. My husband and I have one tenant who is not well and has no family, we’ve spent loads of time getting medication for him, liaising with his GP, shopping for him etc, etc.

The whole sector has got completely out of balance

But in which direction? Someone quoted some statistics on a similar thread the other day that showed that the percentage of home ownership has never been higher in the UK, whilst the percentage privately renting has fallen. And ĺandlords are exiting the rental market. So, according to you, it should be happy days for first time buyers and renters alike. But it isn't.

👍🏻