So, who votes for a government that improves the lives of Bankers, and ensures the excessive profits of energy companies, but needs all the "levelling up" money to pay for the holes in Brexit?

I agree Prentice. Landlords are described as ‘greedy’ because they can afford to buy a property and let it at the going rate, What some posters would do without landlords I can’t imagine. As so often, it’s envy, pure and simple. I could afford to buy properties and let them, but no way would I consider it when I see the abuse hurled at landlords. So that’s a few more homeless families I guess. With attitudes like these, why would anyone bother?

Germanshepherdsmum

*Daisy*, if there were rent controls again - you may not remember them but I do - people would not let. There would be a dearth of rental properties available. Some might sell, others sit tight. It would not induce lenders to change lending criteria. Some may be able to buy, others not. Developers buy land at prices based on expected sale prices. They would not start building to sell at lower prices. They would sit on the land. I’m afraid you’re not living in the real world of property development which I inhabited for decades.

I do remember them GSM. I also remember when estate agents sold houses, not the financial services gamblers who bought the estate agents out under Thatcher's rule. Before that, the house prices went up and down roughly in time with income. After the financial services buyouts, people who had known their area and their clients were instructed that, whatever the state of the economy, they had to make 10% on 10% each year. They did, but it was still not enough for the wide boys, the spinners of the roulette wheel in the black market called the city.

I also knew people who rented out houses at that time. They knew their income was constant and were happy with that. I knew people who rented homes for years and never thought of them as anything other than their home.

God knows what our memories will be of this load of ERG Conservatives. Wilde, describing a cynic as someone who "knows the price of everything and the value of nothing", could well have been talking about this shower. They have no values, so how could they understand them?

Germanshepherdsmum

I agree Prentice. Landlords are described as ‘greedy’ because they can afford to buy a property and let it at the going rate, What some posters would do without landlords I can’t imagine. As so often, it’s envy, pure and simple. I could afford to buy properties and let them, but no way would I consider it when I see the abuse hurled at landlords. So that’s a few more homeless families I guess. With attitudes like these, why would anyone bother?

But "Landlords" generally only purchase if the rent will pay their mortgage. How can that be described as being able to afford the property? The person renting, without wealth in another house, in shares or left to them by mum and dad, could afford to pay the mortgage; they are paying it for the landlord.

What they cannot do is play the black-market financial services game. With the rules now so much in favour of unearned wealth, they will never be able to.

They, nor the people commenting on here, are not envious. I imagine they are contemptuous of the harm these evil people do. I would suggest those you put on a glorious and saintly plinth take themselves down quickly. You know what happens, to the effigies of those who held themselves in high esteem, these days.

Germanshepherdsmum

I agree Prentice. Landlords are described as ‘greedy’ because they can afford to buy a property and let it at the going rate, What some posters would do without landlords I can’t imagine. As so often, it’s envy, pure and simple. I could afford to buy properties and let them, but no way would I consider it when I see the abuse hurled at landlords. So that’s a few more homeless families I guess. With attitudes like these, why would anyone bother?

No, that's a few more families who can buy their own homes.

Nobody hurls abuse at decent landlords.

They can’t buy because they don’t meet lenders’ criteria growstuff and Daisy. Next, we’ll hear how unfair the criteria are, designed to ensure people can afford to pay their mortgages even with rate rises.
If you were suggesting I could only afford to buy if I took out a mortgage Daisy, you are incorrect. Many rental properties are purchased with cash, not mortgages.

Germanshepherdsmum

They can’t buy because they don’t meet lenders’ criteria growstuff and Daisy. Next, we’ll hear how unfair the criteria are, designed to ensure people can afford to pay their mortgages even with rate rises.
If you were suggesting I could only afford to buy if I took out a mortgage Daisy, you are incorrect. Many rental properties are purchased with cash, not mortgages.

If that is true, why the outcry from landlords when they reduced the tax relief on buy to let properties in 2020.?

In one year alone 2021, 234,000 buy to let mortgages were given with a total value of £36 billion.

Someone on this thread knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing

Germanshepherdsmum

They can’t buy because they don’t meet lenders’ criteria growstuff and Daisy. Next, we’ll hear how unfair the criteria are, designed to ensure people can afford to pay their mortgages even with rate rises.
If you were suggesting I could only afford to buy if I took out a mortgage Daisy, you are incorrect. Many rental properties are purchased with cash, not mortgages.

You are privileged GSM; that privilege has pushed prices higher. If they were not so high, the people renting would be able to save what would be a lower deposit. The "criteria" are not conscious; how can they be unfair? The people "playing" the property market have done that.

You may be able to buy outright, but those buying on buy-to-let mortgages have influenced the market and pushed up house rents which those buying outright will usually charge, or very close to that figure.

Quite a few of the threads on here the last few days remind me of this
9gag.com/gag/aPD9x7K

Obviously enough DaisyAnn!

DaisyAnne, "But "Landlords" generally only purchase if the rent will pay their mortgage. How can that be described as being able to afford the property? The person renting, without wealth in another house, in shares or left to them by mum and dad, could afford to pay the mortgage; they are paying it for the landlord.

Please explain your thought more precisely to me.

If ownership is an end goal and the person can afford the mortgage, what is saving them from saving the deposit? People do save, it may take a while, delayed gratification.

Yes, renters pay part of the landlords expenses. Generally not all the expenses are covered by the rental amount (or not that I am aware), the deductions from income by expenses makes for a negative balance, part of which is a tax deduction. Overall, I think landlords hold property for appreciation over years held, wealth building. What is wrong with that?

I agree that capital growth is the main aim, but no one sets out to make a loss over the years of renting.

I think the issue is that you and I disagree Norah, not a lack of clarity. I believe this is a basically fraudulent market, whereas you believe it is a place to make money whatever it does to housing. Or at least that is how it reads to me.

Are you serious, Norah?

What is stopping someone paying rent from saving a deposit is that they are paying rent! This is so glaringly obvious that I have checked and double checked that I am not missing the point, but it doesn't seem that I am (apologies if so).

It's not about deferred gratification if you spend so much on the rent that pays someone else's mortgage that you have nothing left to save towards a deposit - it's about gratifying someone else's desire to make money out of the fact that the UK has sold off its social housing and has not got enough housing to go round. It's supply and demand, which always works in the favour of the better off. As often as not their labour or brainpower doesn't contribute to the supply - they simply buy it up and sell it to those who are providing that labour in the first place.

Doodledog

Are you serious, Norah?

What is stopping someone paying rent from saving a deposit is that they are paying rent! This is so glaringly obvious that I have checked and double checked that I am not missing the point, but it doesn't seem that I am (apologies if so).

It's not about deferred gratification if you spend so much on the rent that pays someone else's mortgage that you have nothing left to save towards a deposit - it's about gratifying someone else's desire to make money out of the fact that the UK has sold off its social housing and has not got enough housing to go round. It's supply and demand, which always works in the favour of the better off. As often as not their labour or brainpower doesn't contribute to the supply - they simply buy it up and sell it to those who are providing that labour in the first place.

Yes, I'm serious.

If you spend so much on rent (that partially pays the owners mortgage and expenses) that you have nothing left to save to a deposit - you get a side job, spend less on unnecessary things, or move to cheaper accommodations.

And I believe the minimum wage is too low.

DaisyAnne

I agree that capital growth is the main aim, but no one sets out to make a loss over the years of renting.

I think the issue is that you and I disagree Norah, not a lack of clarity. I believe this is a basically fraudulent market, whereas you believe it is a place to make money whatever it does to housing. Or at least that is how it reads to me.

Correct, I don't believe rental homes to be a fraudulent market. I believe rental homes are a very long term investment. Inflation, not under my control, has raised rental rates and the costs of purchase of rental homes.

Everything I have has been worked for DaisyAnne. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth, neither was my husband. And I have never owned more than one property at a time. I have no intention of owning more than one property. I have owned four properties over the course of my life, the current one a downsize which a competing purchaser wanted as a second home. Not exactly driving up prices I think.

I may be comfortably off, but not privileged. Working very long hours, often seven days a week, for nigh on five decades for what you have, only to be told you know the cost of everything but the value of nothing (thanks Jane, it was obviously aimed at me) isn’t privilege.

Incidentally, of the 234,000 buy to let mortgages granted in the last year, only 65,000 were for the purchase of property. The remainder were remortgages. That puts a slightly different slant on the numbers of BTL mortgages I think.

JaneJudge

Quite a few of the threads on here the last few days remind me of this
9gag.com/gag/aPD9x7K

That is excellent Jane but sadly, very true.

Not true of me. Working class family (father blind). State education. Didn’t go to university. Didn’t go to law school. Worked full time solidly since leaving school until I retired. What I achieved (which I won’t ram down your throats yet again) I achieved entirely by myself and on merit. I studied by myself. I sat exams (for each of which I was graciously given two days’ paid leave) in which I obtained distinctions alongside Hooray Henrys doing resits. Care to reconsider?

The point is that homes should not be financial investments and the only reason they have become such things is because of the lack of provision of council housing or social housing. Should council housing ever be built again on the scale it was in the early 20th century the bottom would fall out of the property market. The resulting fall in house prices would cause private landlords to drop out. There would also be a substantial increase in the incomes of local councils which would mean they could provide better local services. Of course it would also mean they were more independent and free from reliance on government funding, which might not suit Westminster.

DaisyAnne

JaneJudge

Quite a few of the threads on here the last few days remind me of this
9gag.com/gag/aPD9x7K

That is excellent Jane but sadly, very true.

Nothing there pertains to me. My husband worked very very hard, sometimes two jobs. We save. Neither of us have any education or special connection. We pay our taxes. I'm content with our life, our family, our savings, our giving.

JaneJudge

volver

Just wondering what kind of person would vote for a government that has ruined the country. But then I read this thread, and all is revealed.

I know it's awful but if I don't turn off the computer my husband may divorce me and things might be even worse

I don't remember anyone saying their vote.

There will still be private landlords even if the provision of social housing is dramatically increased. Many tenants do not wish to live in social housing. Professional people for example, renting short term, of which there are many.

Germanshepherdsmum

Not true of me. Working class family (father blind). State education. Didn’t go to university. Didn’t go to law school. Worked full time solidly since leaving school until I retired. What I achieved (which I won’t ram down your throats yet again) I achieved entirely by myself and on merit. I studied by myself. I sat exams (for each of which I was graciously given two days’ paid leave) in which I obtained distinctions alongside Hooray Henrys doing resits. Care to reconsider?

No one can stop you from feeling that GSM. What a shame though, that you cannot count the blessings in your life; that you cannot even see those who have helped you along the way, because they will have been there.

I find that very sad. I feel very sorry for you that you see it that way.

Norah

DaisyAnne

JaneJudge

Quite a few of the threads on here the last few days remind me of this
9gag.com/gag/aPD9x7K

That is excellent Jane but sadly, very true.

Nothing there pertains to me. My husband worked very very hard, sometimes two jobs. We save. Neither of us have any education or special connection. We pay our taxes. I'm content with our life, our family, our savings, our giving.

That's nice Norah. I hope nothing ever happens to shake those beliefs.