Extortionate rents

[LondonMix]

See point 6 though point 5 is rather shocking as well Otta.

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2012/may/02/tenants-housing-benefit-private-landlords

Otta Wrote:

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

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I am sure it?s not much consolation but a lot

> of

> > the times it?s not the landlords but rather the

> > banks. I have friends who have buy to let

> > mortgages and it?s an explicit provision within

> > their mortgage docs that they cannot let to

> DSS-

> > which surprised them. I'm not sure how the

> banks

> > can legally do this (seems discriminatory).

> >

> > GinaG3 Wrote:

> >

> > > Sick of finding a flat, just within our

> > > price range or slightly above but works for

> us

> > and

> > > then the bottom of the ad displays NO DSS.

> > >

> > >

>

>

> How odd. I've always thought it was stupid to deny

> DSS applicants. Surely you know you're going to

> get your rent money paid.

[Alex K]

@bawdynan: I like the way you think, and that you bring data to the discussion (whereas I had only an anecdote to offer).

Help me understand, please, your comment on my earlier post: "Perhaps this just illustrates that small scale private financial speculation in a giddy and bubbling market isn't the best or most cost effective way to provide housing?"

Two caveats. 1) It wasn't a giddy and bubbling market in early 2008. It was torpid. Almost Norwegian blue ex-parrot. But let that go. 2) Our intention wasn't so overarching as "to provide housing". Our aim was instead "to shift wealth into asset likely to hold value in post-crash financial tumult". We didn't, we don't, work cost-effectively. If we did we'd be trying to pry ?1.7K / month out of our tenants (a house the twin of the property that we rent is now on offer for something over that). The house that we rent is in our street, the folks who live there are our neighbours. We want to offer them no cause for complaint. Such considerations are, from a ruthless perspective, admittedly inefficient.

Those set out, time for exegesis: Walk me, please, through what you meant.

[bawdy-nan]

Hi Alex K

I didn't intend my comment to be a criticism of you personally. I can see that you are doing your best to be decent and I respect you for that.

What I meant was precisely what you identify: that your motivation in buying to let was finding a good return for an investment. You aren't in it to provide housing. And why should you be.

(But by your example,that is, that your rent is the level it is because you need to get a certain return, my landlord, who has a tiny mortgage because he bought years and years ago (and whose repayments haven't increased with rising rents and rising house prices should be charging me a fraction above what his mortgage payments are in order not to be exploiting me. I don't really believe this of course.)

I suppose I'm coming at it from the other side. If you (I don't mean you Alex) wanted to deliver decent housing for a city's population where housing needs to be stable and affordable maybe relying on the personal investment decisions and speculations of many small investors and the market (which is now and has been from time to time over the past 20 years bubbly and unpredictable) isn't the best way to acheive that goal. I don't have the exact figures but I can't imagine that LHA / housing benefit bill to Southwark council tax payers is being helped by these rises.

I think housing is too important to be merely the by-product of an investment.

I can see that there was an argument for the freeing up of some of the rules around rentals in order to encourage more landlords to offer accommodation but I think there must be better way.

[Alex K]

Thanks, best regards, and please let me extend an open invitation to head out for a pint. PM me.

They say that all the microdecisions -- like ours -- provide a Brownian-motion jiggle this way and that to the market, with things being moved this way or that way for the best, always for the best. CANDIDE. And there you are with the jigglejogglings and the Lisbon earthquake.

We guessed, we got, lucky. But... count no man happy till you know the hour of his death. Our decisions look OK from today's perspective. From tomorrow's, who knows?

[bawdy-nan]

@alex - you had me at candide

[Mick Mac]

Get a room you two.

An expensive one.

[Baggs]

In the best of all possible hotels.

[KidKruger]

On the most exotic of all desert islands.