Landlords response to Labour proposal

[Stellaris22]

Surely it’s becoming increasingly difficult to defend landlords.

In response to proposals to make renting fairer and better for tenants landlords have responded with typical ‘we’ll increase rents’.

Yes there are good and bad tenants just as there are good and bad landlords. LLs need to stop the saviour attitude of thinking they’re helping people who can’t afford to buy. They can’t afford to buy because of their high rents!

Good to see Labour (hopefully) tackling the private rental sector.

arent they supposed to give a rental contract and pay taxes on the rental income other than what is exempt under the rent a room scheme. her rental income is way more than 9k per year

@Elphame yrs I heard that
coming to the UK soon as in Scotland massive shit show that works out badly for everyone esp renters

No, I'm being factually correct.

There is no such thing as an accidental landlord.

As per your description, you suggest becoming a landlord to support a lifestyle you otherwise couldn't afford. You absolutely have a choice to go down that route. It is not an accident. But guess what, lots of people want lifestyles they can't afford. They just don't have the landlord mechanism as an option and they don't have a choice.

Someone becoming a landlord because they cannot afford to do otherwise is a risky venture. As other posters have clearly pointed out. People can become liable for large bills as a result of various events that lead to the whole process being a lot less lucrative than they thought. And if there is no financial buffer this can lead to serious consequences. No doubt if this happens to someone, they point out they are an "accidental landlord" and expect some sort of sympathy, as if they had no choice in the decision. But they absolutely did have. They took a risk and that has consequences.

I'll save my sympathy for people who actually have events happen to them completely out of their control. I'm not really interested in people who undertake risky ventures to support a lifestyle they can't afford, then complain to the whole world that the process that occurred was an accident and wasn't something that happened by their choice, when it absolutely did.

I do think there are situations where some people come very close to be able to claim they are a landlord by accident. See one of the examples above. But there is still a choice involved, even if that choice might lead to some large financial loss. My guess is if someone inherited a situation where they became an "accidental landlord" and the numbers did not stack up in terms of the value of the inheritance they could simply refuse the inheritance as is their right.

I am a landlord of 1 small flat, we increased the rent last year, first time in 4 years. It is still 20% cheaper than we would get on the open market. The tenant has been there for 5 years and we will continue to offer her the same.
We do everything on time, replace anything broken and ensure everything is in working order.
As long as we breakeven we are OK with it.

But that’s one less rental on the market, which pushes up prices for those rentals that ARE on the market.

I don't see why. One less rental property on the rental market sure, but also one less family needing to rent. Overall the number of houses and the number of people remain the same.

Why would you be OK with it ?

It sounds like you are banking all on capital appreciation, the hope that the property market will continue to go up indefinitely.

On the other side there is the risk you may incur some large unexpected expense that is not insurance covered, or the fact that the value of the property may actually go down over the timescale of your lifetime.

Doesn't sound like a great business venture to me, with or without additional onerous changes in landlord legislation.

The buy to let property boom is a busted flush if you ask me. Yes there are people who made lots of money out of it over the past 20 years, mostly out of capital appreciation but I think there is a strong chance that time has past.

Old habits die hard though.

@GasPanic

Lifestyle?? Yeah I'm just itching to go & support my Mum when she needs it. In a country I don't want to be in, to give up my life here. Cant wait. Yes, I have a choice not to go & support her, but I'd hardly call it a lifestyle. FFS.

It's not going to be lucrative, it's would be good for the house to be occupied. It would maintain a home for me here, you know, where I live & in the meantime provide a house to a family that needs one. But 'lucrative NOPE'

so what would you do in my situation? Leave your mum to rot or choose to become homeless?

You can tell that the get-rich-quick landlord schemes are no longer as lucrative as they were, you can see it in the number of former GRQ landlords now selling their "you too can become a landlord without using any of your own money" schemes on social media - when times are good they're to busy doing it and don't want the competition.

I can't help thinking that a minimum capital and minimum liquidity threshold would shake out many of the part-time amateur landlords and professionalise the sector.

You need life insurance to get a mortgage ( or at least i did when i bought 10 years ago)

Yes. Lifestyle choices. Whether you like it or not.

Plenty of people live apart from their older parents and a long way away. Plenty of people do not own a house and rent into old age and until they die.

These are choices you make. You don't have to do them and they are not occurring by accident.

End of story.

SNP did this in Scotland, all it means is that private rented accommodation is in ridiculously short supply for people who want to rent not buy like students and short term workers.

@MidnightMeltdown
i see your point but that pre supposes there are people who have saved deposits, and if you look upthread, you’ll see that it’s easier said than done.

I understand that it’s really hard.

If you assume that every LL sells up, what exactly will people rent? (And what’s to stop another LL buying the property… and so the loop continues)

I'm seeing workshop adverts on Facebook for learning how to turn rentals into Airbnb. Your rental supply is getting smaller.

I was always intending to sell mine at 55 to clear most of my own mortgage- I’ve got about 8 years max left. But I may bring it forward to the end of my current fixed term (3 years). The tax and interest makes it not worth it now.

It’s a lovely well maintained home (I used to live in it, wasn’t purchased to rent) and my tenant is lovely and long term but she may find herself out in 3. There’s no incentive for me to keep it rented. It would almost be cheaper to have it empty.

I don’t see how tenants are going to benefit here. Most can’t buy, that’s why they rent.

No they don't because rented property is more densely occupied

Due to income inequality in this country properties sold by landlords may well end up largely providing extra bedrooms and additional space for better off people.

There is nothing at all to say they will end up housing those people that are currently renting. Some for sure but a lot will struggle.

I once had to sell a flat I was renting out. I offered it to the tenant first but he couldn't buy it because he was past the age limit for a mortgage.

LLs want to make it easier to make people homeless. They are not good.

So many people aren't able to see past their own situation of "I can't afford to buy a home so there shouldn't be any landlords". London is packed with people who don't want to buy a home - a lot working here from overseas, young sharers who don't want to make London their 'forever home' etc. What's needed are decent regulations to control prices and standards, and a way for accidental or small-investment landlords to exit after a long period. I thought the Tory idea of allowing long-term tenants to buy their homes with half the potential CGT tax bill going to them as a deposit and half coming off the landlord's bill was progressive and could have done some good.

Verbal contracts are ok for lodgers by law, I think, but this sounds like it crosses the line for sure.

@GasPanic

no it's not 'end of story'

you still haven't answered my question.

would you let your elderly widowed mum rot alone or would you try to find a way to help her & not make yourself homeless?

it would not be lucrative.

no, some people don't own a house, they rent into old age. But fuck knows how. I'd have to move well away from my support network to try to find a rental (which there will be fewer of) & rely on benefits to help me. & take another rental out of the market. If I can even get one.

Do explain why you think this is so much better than renting out my home while I am overseas, to a family that needs a home?!

It sucks, believe me, we ended up buying a house just before the 2008 crash, it more than halved in value and we ended up having to sell at a loss in 2019. It was incredibly stressful, not helped by the bank giving completely wrong information meaning we lost a buyer.

But on the other hand, house prices overall are stupid and a readjustment is needed, even if it's painful for some.

Section 8 is more complicated than s21 and needs a court hearing

Quite right, @mumda, and that's why I said - now that no fault evictions are going - it could be made unworkable to evict non-payers too

Not so sure that Section 21 will be replaced by "whatever other section labour invent or alter" though; with their taste for political spite I rather doubt they've thought much further than the headline appeal of banning the no-faults, or care about leaving the fallout to others

I have been a tenant and a 'landlady' {Had students live with me & DS when husband left} - one of the students is still a friend years later. {and himself a home owner}

Landlords just want people who pay their rent and are quiet and who look after the place.

They only want to get rid of troublesome tenants - good tenants are not a problem.

Landlords rightfully want to be freed of troublesome tenants.

Would YOU want a non payer living in your house? Of course you wouldn't.

Why should a landlord have a non payer, or someone who trashes the place in his or her house?

Yes it is end of story.

No matter how much you try to dress it up in emotive terms you have agency.

Plenty of people do have to live apart from their parents. This is not "leaving your parents to rot". Plenty of people live in rented accommodation in old age. This is not "making yourself homeless".

I don't have to make that choice. So no point in asking what I might choose.It would depend on a number of factors. And what someone may or may not choose in a particular situation has no bearing on whether they have a choice or not.

The very fact that you say "would you let" indicates choice. Accidents come about via events that are out of peoples control. Not by choice.

There is no such thing as an accidental landlord.

Becoming a landlord was a business decision. If it becomes less profitable and you have to sell that is one of the risks.

As others have pointed out a rented house that has to be sold is still a house someone will be living in. If it's sold to someone who is currently renting their rental is now available for someone else.

Obviously we need more houses anyway to avoid having to play musical chairs and yes the immigrant thing means we will never catch up and actually fall further behind (with more homeless), but that is a whole other issue.

There is also a concern that house prices might fall, but that is a good thing.

Obviously that's a shocking idea if you make your money not by producing anything, but by buying and selling property at over-inflated prices, but that was also the risk you took.

I absolutely agree with this post, couldn't have put it better!