Buy To Let-The scourge of Britain..

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by dooper786

Take a look at this picture...

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/dooper786/BTL.jpg

This street is in North Manchester,only about three or four miles north of the busy City centre. It is just a small snapshot of this general area. There are rows and rows of similar streets in this area just like it. Good quality terraced housing,all shuttered up and all awaiting demolition.

This scenario is repeated all over Manchester and probably in other parts of the country also.

I can recall,in the Thatcher years that all these properties were owner occupied,all proudly maintained by their occupants,streets relatively clean,some sense of community and relatively little crime compared to today. Slowly the occupants got old,moved away or died. The era of the buy to let landlord was about to be born, fuelled by a housing benefits system that was overly generous and open to abuse.

People had greater expectations of life and many didnt see why they had to work for what they wanted-nor accept their position in life.

Many would rent such homes,areas became degraded and the rest of the owner occupiers would either flee as their property prices fell,or else be driven out by the worst excesses of their new neighbours.

The overly generous housing benefit system fuelled this market for a number of years until Government seized control and limited the amount that could be paid in benefits to landlords. Suddenly the rich pickings were not so rich,rent prices dropped,houses were abandoned or not maintained. By this time such houses had very little value as bricks and mortar. They were just a vehicle by which landlords could obtain payments from the state for housing benefit claimants. Soon,as pictured, the houses became empty,were vandalised,burned out,squatted or used as drug dens.

Well meaning councils compulsory purchased great blocks of them and earmarked them for demolition. They had a plan. They could sell vast tracts of land which they had obtained cheaply under compulsory purchase, and sell it for huge profits for private big building PLC's to landbank for development. Part of the deal of course was that such developers had to produce a proportion of the new homes for social housing. (New houses for dolehoppers)

So then everyone is happy. Landlords get rid of useless houses and get some money from councils,councils buy old houses and land cheaply and sell the land for big profits,developers get precious land for development and so increase share price and profits, councils get a pat on the back for producing social housing, lazy feckless ner to wells get a brand spanking new house for nothing-everyones a winner.

Or are they?

Well there are two clear losers. One knows he is a loser and the other will eventually know he is a loser.

The first loser is the original owner occupier who's home value was develued as a result of BTL landlords and over generous housing benefits schemes.

The second loser is the poor soul who flogs his/her guts out to buy a new home,only to find when they move in ,that a proportion of their neighbours are social housing tenants who are getting the same,but for free.

The cycle is now being repeated. Houses such as these are now being let out to asylum seekers. They are the new comers to be exploited.

Of course there was a time when housing benefit claimants knew their place and were glad of a home on a council estate. Not now though. They have greater expectations.

Not long ago,.i was in a terraced house occupied by a young teenage mother and her bullet headed boyfriend. The house was a tip and the girl was mouthing off about the effing P**i landlord,etc etc,racist ignorant rantings. Her mother,obviously concerned at what she had spawned,dared to suggest that her daughter go to the local council to see if she could get help there. Her response,along the lines of..." I'm not living in no effing council house, I've seen a nice semi. and i have seen the landlord. The social will pay most of the rent and we'll make the rest up out of our (your!) money"

So then, The modern day buy to let landlord has distorted the market. Dolehopping wastes of space can now aspire to apartments and semis near to where you, the hard workers and achievers live.

BTL landlords are happy to inflict misery on YOU whilst they take profits and live somewhere nice,away from all that nastiness.

BTL landlords are blighting previously nice places to live. Ordinary hard working people are having to take flight from the worst excesses of their tenants.

Who are the mugs in this game?

With regards to BTL and housing benefit you know why how that problem arised. Selling of council houses and not replacing them and the people who would normally live in these council houses still need somewhere to live, usually unemployed, low income workers and asylum seekers this of course creates demand for the buy to let market. The government has probably decided its more cost effective to pay housing benefit rent at private rates then to build more council housing.

---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Giving the massive debts incurred by people having the buy houses, and then forever paying for it. Surely buy-to-let makes sense. You safer from unexpected interest rate raises and crippling debt.

In thoery, I just had a 13% rise in my rent, landlord blamed it on inflation, RPI inflation is a 5th of that he of course means interest rate inflation.

[rogerdraig]

[quote=Wicked_and_Crazy;34332586]How can you say "No" i know many people that own 2 and 3 bedroom houses to rent out. If they didnt own those houses they would be avaialble as starter homes and therefore if everyone who owned these sort of houses sold up the market would be flooded with starter homes and therefore prices would drop.

I agree more people living alone, people leaving the nest earlier and people living longer all have an impact, but not as much as people buying to let

-----------------------

the houses i and those i know who let buy are those house that dont sell it would be madness to try and out bid people for houses because we do intend to at least try break even on house and we do hope we can make a profit this means the best house for me is one that is at a low price and mostly these properties here are not even in bad condition they just need decorating

but most buyers seem to want a property in mint condition with no work to do

i have to hunt for a family to rent them mostly as most of those applying are single but they tend to move on frequently which adds to the cost of re-decorating etc

as to increase in rents this year we have had rafts of legislation and costs added to renting out ( i agree with the changes though some don't seem well thought out ) which will help get rid of some of the rouge landlords but will consequently mean costs will be passed on to tenants

if young people want a house they need to set thier sights lower there are often very cheap properties put out to auction but they will need to get thier hands dirty doing it up

often here and i have seen in many other places properties going at a quarter of the local value yes you might not get the first second third or even tenth one but if you persist and do the leg work you will get one

even the old barrier of mortgage not being available for this method has gone again if you ask around can show your income many high street lenders will give you a loan

or you can go down the self build route my niece did it that way and now has a house worth nearly 3 times what they spent out, which they loaned of a building society

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

i you cant sell it what are you going to do? A house only has value if someone want to buy it or rent off of you.

You sell it at a loss?