Rent increases set to double in 1 year

[diy_fun_uk]

You sound a bit jealous buddy....just sayin.

It's funny, many folk are against LLs making money from property, however many of those will quite happily make money from property themselves i.e. benefitting from capital appreciation when selling x years later.

As for those who are against private LLs full stop, what they fail to appreciate is ... believe it or not ... some people prefer to rent in the private market. Or for some, it provides a necessary option e.g. someone moving to an area for 12 months for work.

 

[pete01]

It's funny, many folk are against LLs making money from property, however many of those will quite happily make money from property themselves i.e. benefitting from capital appreciation when selling x years later.

As for those who are against private LLs full stop, what they fail to appreciate is ... believe it or not ... some people prefer to rent in the private market. Or for some, it provides a necessary option e.g. someone moving to an area for 12 months for work.

I used to have two but I worry too much, I sold them both and paid my mortgage off now I have no stress.....sometimes I wish I still had them....but im comfortable these days

 

[aveatry]

You sound a bit jealous buddy....just sayin.

He hates LLs because he sees them as taking money out of his pocket - a tenant in a rented house is not going to be paying him to build an extension - the more owners - the more patios he can lay.

 

[aveatry]

I did the maths recently and realised that I could sell our buy to lets and if I could get 5% in a savings account with the money from the sale we would earn the same as our net from rental. Without all the aggro. Of course the only two problems with this are that reasonable returns on savings and investments may not last and you don't get the appreciation on capital that owning bricks and mortar gives you. However as we get older the no aggro factor become more appealing and the need for the rising value of the property decreases. Luckily half of ours are commercial which while not so lucrative comes with far lower costs, aggro and bureaucracy. Plus that demented hapless idiot in number 11 hasn't got around to targetting commercials with her politics of envy yet.

The attack started way back with the removal of finance cost eligibility for tax reduction

 

[diy_fun_uk]

I used to have two but I worry too much, I sold them both and paid my mortgage off now I have no stress.....sometimes I wish I still had them....but im comfortable these days

Yeah, I think with the one I'm refurbing I've become a bit paranoid re what happens if the next tenant is another wrong 'un. Even credit checks etc don't guarantee a good tenant.

The sad thing is, if there was true parity in the landlord<>tenant relationship, the worry wouldn't be there. But because the pendulum is swinging more in favour of the tenant, the scope to worry increases. And let's face it, tenants are becoming increasingly aware they have the upper hand.

 

[HayMaker]

I can sort of understand why the government are making it harder for rental properties to be profited from. Housing is an essential resource like any other. But they don't seem to be preparing for the drop-out that will might come about when landlords start selling their properties.

I own a house which I rent out, and the tenants are very nice. Because of this, and because they want to stay there long term, I haven't increased the rent and don't intend on doing so. It is approx £200/month less than book-price but it's worth it to me to keep good tenants. But if they were to move out in 5 years time, I'd probably want to sell up. After tax, replacement garage door and white goods etc, boiler service and bookkeeper fees, I reckon I make £650/month. Not to be sniffed at, but it would take another 26 years of renting it to get the same return as if I sold it.

I was very lucky in that the house was left to me, but I still don't think private rental should be allowed, or at least should be limited to 1 per household. I know someone who retired and bought up ex council properties, and they now have 11 rentals. That's 11 more families who can't buy an affordable home. If I inherited the house and was then forced to either live in it, or sell, then I'd have happily sold. But then you get clobbered with 42% IHT (or is it capital gains? I'm not sure) which would need fixing, otherwise there is no incentive to sell, and more incentive to rent whilst you wait 7 years for your parents to remain alive, after which point you don't get taxed as much if you sell.

 

[aveatry]

Something the gov government could do.
Remove capital gains tax for landlords that sell to sitting tenants so long as the saving is passed onto the tenant. But I suppose there would need to be something in place to stop abuse of the system if the tenant then sold straight after.

And something for OAPs who want to sell - so long as they are down sizing.

 

[HayMaker]

Something the gov government could do.
Remove capital gains tax for landlords that sell to sitting tenants so long as the saving is passed onto the tenant. But I suppose there would need to be something in place to stop abuse of the system if the tenant then sold straight after.

And something for OAPs who want to sell - so long as they are down sizing.

That would be too sensible and not make the government enough tax shillings

 

[Doug99]

Yes, they did say the property could be used for emergency housing.

I'm currently redecorating the entire property myself. It needed gutted and complete refurb after the last tenants left it in a state of disrepair ... after not paying rent for 10 months out of 11.

So no, sorry, I won't allow it to be used for what could end up being a high turnover of people. And sorry, I certainly don't want it used to house any small boat folk.

If the Council offers to take on your property to house their own 'tenants', wouldn't the contract ensure that the council is responsible for the maintenance and repair of any damage caused before returning the property to you?

 

[noseall]

He hates LLs because he sees them as taking money out of his pocket

The opposite is actually true. I priced a foreigner for my son, not an hour ago and shall be taking money out of the LL's pocket. Every little helps.

 

[pete01]

The opposite is actually true. I priced a foreigner for my son, not an hour ago and shall be taking money out of the LL's pocket. Every little helps.

Not really he'll just put some rents up to cover your payment eventually the tenants will pay.....how could you

 

[noseall]

how could you

Because I'm highly skilled, trustworthy, value for money and reliable. He's free to be ripped off by a chancer.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

If the Council offers to take on your property to house their own 'tenants', wouldn't the contract ensure that the council is responsible for the maintenance and repair of any damage caused before returning the property to you?

I've deleted the emails so I can't double check, however what I found strange was they said something along these lines

You will retain full control over maintenance and repairs

I found the wording slightly odd, because it read to me that the LL would still be responsible. Unless they meant the LL could choose the tradesperson (e.g. for a repair) and the council would pick up the bill. However that's not how it read.

 

[fillyboy]

I've deleted the emails so I can't double check, however what I found strange was they said something along these lines

You will retain full control over maintenance and repairs

I found the wording slightly odd, because it read to me that the LL would still be responsible. Unless they meant the LL could choose the tradesperson (e.g. for a repair) and the council would pick up the bill. However that's not how it read.

If you go back over 20 years the council would have picked up the bill for all repairs/refurb to bring the property back to its original condition. That's around the time it started to change and the majority of councils have shifted away from that meaning that at the end of a contract the LL is responsible.
There are exceptions, if the LL has a large portfolio he has a bit more bargaining power, or, as happened in Slough the LL is also a councillor.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

If you go back over 20 years the council would have picked up the bill for all repairs/refurb to bring the property back to its original condition. That's around the time it started to change and the majority of councils have shifted away from that meaning that at the end of a contract the LL is responsible.
There are exceptions, if the LL has a large portfolio he has a bit more bargaining power, or, as happened in Slough the LL is also a councillor.

I found the bit I was referring to.

'Landlords receive guaranteed monthly rent with no void periods and council-managed support, while retaining control over property maintenance.'

It's almost as if they're saying it's a positive thing (for the LL to retain control) however it could be the exact opposite depending on the tenant!