I am PIG SICK of amateur property developers cum landlords

[Pantone363]

Out bid by another fucking amateur property developer who will never even live in the property but plans to 'do it up' and flog it on (out of our budget). This is the third time in six months.

We viewed it at 5.45. Walked out of the property at 6.10. Called at 7 to make an offer and it was sold. Vendor not taking any more offers as its a cash buyer (agent told us he had shown them around an hr earlier, retired couple who do houses up as a fucking HOBBY)

I give up. And if one more person says:

Oh you should just buy a little house that needs some work

Can't you borrow anymore money?

Have you thought about buying some land ? I will SCREAM

Some small changes in the budget today that hopefully will start the move towards leveling the playing field when it comes to having to bid against BTL.

Changes still needed to capital gains tax though to deal with the flippers.

The budget BTL changes are BIG.

Limits on tax relief and removal of wear+tear.

So wear and tear will now come out of tenants' deposits. Great.

Current deposit schemes do not allow deductions for wear & tear.

Along with limitations on mortgage interest tax relief, this will be another cost borne by LL and rightly so.

Sorry to prick your bubble here but surely if they put mortgage rate relief down to 20% for landlords then some of them will just hike the rent up to cover the difference?

Wear and tear is open to interpretation. Who is going to decide what is and isnt? Do the deposit schemes do that? And yes, i can forsee rent hikes. Because there is still more demand than supply and people will pay it.

Yes, the arbitrator decides in the end, but there are written guidelines as well.

time for some boring old facts.

the 10% wear and tear allowance could be claimed by landlords renting out fully furnished properties only. The idea was to avoid individual itemising of repairs/fixes. Fully furnished means not just white goods but beds, sofas, chairs, dining table etc. I do agree that the concept was open to abuse and needed abolishing.

deposit schemes do NOT allow deductions for wear and tear, only damage. So carpets wearing from being walked on, paintwork gradually getting tired etc do not merit deductions, that's what happens when houses are lived in. Scribbled on walls, kicked doors, animal chewing/excretion are damage and do merit deductions. BUT in proportion to the age of the wrecked item. So an iron burn in the middle of a five year old carpet (from a tenant too stupid to use an ironing board, and yes this is a real example) gets the landlord about £20 even though the whole carpet now needs replacing despite having plenty of life left in it.

as for 'homes should not be financial investments' (someone else) - I think every homeowner in the country might have something to say on that.

LL are profit maximising - if they could have put the rents up they would have put the rents up.

Most BTL LL's I know struggle to get 10 months out of 12 months rent. That's not a sign of a tight rental market.

On deductions, everything is written off after ~7 years.
i.e. you will have to prove that an item is less than 7 years old if you want to deduct from a tenants deposit.

Most LLs I know have fixtures + furnishing from the mid-80s.

The loss of 10% wear and tear is a biggie. I rent property in London and elsewhere. Almost all properties in London are furnished, almost all properties elsewhere don't seem to be. The reason is by furnishing you deduct 10% off gross rent, and gross rents in London are high. Certainly worth the faff of renting a van and a trip to IKEA. I actually will be quite relieved that I am not longer responsible for sorting out furniture at the start of each tenancy and then maintaining it. I assume tenants won't be so thrilled that they have to.

I can cope. Not least because I ignored standard advice to take out interest only mortages and went for repayment, so my gearing is relatively low. The mortgage tax relief changes will hit those who have pushed their borrowing to the max, and people have. I am not surprised Osbourne is phasing in these changes. A drop in rental demand and increased interest rates without the cushion of full tax relief could land some people in trouble. If this then leads to forced sales and nervy mortgage lenders, there could be a real problem. Plenty of nice people will suffer if the supply of rental property dries up.

I'm not sure that there will be that much money to be made in letting property. The abnormally low interest rates of the past few years have made things a lot easier, and capital gains have been extraordinary. However if the government is minded (and it appears they are) to discourage people from using property as a form of speculation and to keep a lid on house price inflation, I'm not sure it will be the road to riches that people suggest. Its hard work (I have done my share of cleaning flats through the night, when tenants let me down), you do have to be very careful about costs, and though I like the flexibility, boilers have a way of going when I am on holiday.

When I read this, it makes me wonder why more people don't look beyond Southern England to settle. Admittedly, some people feel tied to an area (I lived all over as a child so feel able to live anywhere). But, there are places where property is much, much cheaper and more readily available and there are good jobs, infrastructure etc.

(My neighbours are selling 6 bed, 3 bath huge garden with sea views for £330k, for example).

I've lived in the Scottish Borders, and although I bought a nine bedroom house for under 75k, NEVER AGAIN. The social isolation, being 50 miles from a train station, the commuting to work, the lack of opportunities, THE WEATHER.

homes should not be financial investments

You are possibly misquoting something i have said recently on other similar threads. If so, what i actually said was other people's homes should not be an investment/pension fund/get rich quick scheme.

Tbh, I'm happy for my home not to be an investment , I just want to be able to live in it and know that when it needs fixing I can do that, and that one day I will no longer pay a mortgage on it, so I can work slightly less when I am old.

surlycue wasn't you I was quoting, someone else said exactly what I quoted. Didn't see your post on the subject.

and yes, there are places with cheaper property, decent weather, work, transport etc etc etc. All these factors determine where I live, which isn't London, Scotland, various damp bits in the middle or the south coast.

Ah apologies special, i am just conscious of having said that about a zillion times over the last week or so in these threads.

Fwiw i feel very fucking lucky to live where i do with cheap rent in a fantastic area with great schools, lots going on for tourists, shopping, children etc. the only bit i'd change is my non-existent LL, but not if it means giving up my house.

Yes, it's completely shit that property is seen as a commodity instead of a home.

was there ever a time this wasn't so? or are you looking forward to a happier time in the future?

Rose yes it would be lovely to live in a cheaper area unfortunately the cost of travel and time it would take to get to and from work dictates where we live. We have lived all over the uk however each time dh moved jobs we had to move areas, it is only where we live in the SE now, when dh has changed jobs we have been able to stay put. It is false economy to live any where else as the amount it takes to sell and rebuy a home certainly makes anywhere outside the SE expensive.

It's hard, but keep going. We missed out on a few, but now we have a lovely home. It's going to be OK.