More Blow-In Fodder..

[ernesto]

without wishing to paraphrase cromwells loltastic adventures in Ireland , speculative landlords should be offered a binary choice to make good the damage they are responsible for

lolz

[ernesto]

and im outta here

[Loz]

The point is that many more people want to come to London than it can hold. Landlords have no carte blanche to set rents - the market does that.

Either we build more in London, or try and get more jobs in the other UK cities. Preferably both. Only that will get rents down. Anything else is doomed to failure.

[StraferJack]

"Landlords have no carte blanche to set rents - the market does that. "

But that isn't that simple

Landlords are buying to let, with expectation of rents rising on the market. That is why they are doing it. Rents MUST rise according to landlords, otherwise they wouldn't be buying. You can argue it's a gamble, but come on... how risky has it been?

[StraferJack]

"Remeber squarts everywhere? hard to let council flats given to students etc etc? Did these things not happen? "

you say this like it's a bad thing???

I jest partially - but the London pop trends is interesting for a number of reasons

When squat/student culture was so widespread in 70s/80s were these people all likely to appear on official census figures - ie, maybe the dip in population wasn't an actuality?

- prior to that when London was running for decades at population levels not dissimilar to now, how affordable was housing then? If it was affordable then, what are the differences now?

And you can argue about shifting demographics, more people living alone etc - but a lot of those people will be living in denser accomodation (flats) than the 4 to a room families of (say) the 30s

[steveo]

'Remeber squarts"

Is that infectious?

[StraferJack]

I was just about to correct "my" typo when I realised it was in (s)quids's original post...

[Loz]

Landlords are buying to let, with expectation of rents rising on the market. That is why they are doing it. Rents MUST rise according to landlords, otherwise they wouldn't be buying. You can argue it's a gamble, but come on... how risky has it been?

Past performance is no indicator, etc, etc.

Rents, at least in ED, aren't rising. They've been pretty stagnant for about three years. The big jump in house sale prices over the last few years have not been followed by a commensurate rental increase. Gross yields in ED are currently quite low - around 3% to 3.5%, which is not anything as good as it sounds, as your costs need to come out of that. In fact, with a mortgage underpinning the let, your ROI will only be about 1%.

Other parts of London are a much more attractive investment at the moment. The numbers just don't add up in ED. You would have to make some pretty brave assumptions about rents and house prices to make it work. Especially if interest rates rise, as they will eventually.

Mind you, if you could pick this place up for 700-750k it would be a good investment, but that would be a cheap price for a 1 bed and a 2 bed flat in ED. But, unless it needs massive structural repairs, I can see it going for a much higher price.

[StraferJack]

"Rents, at least in ED, aren't rising. They've been pretty stagnant for about three years. The big jump in house sale prices over the last few years have not been followed by a commensurate rental increase."

doesn't matter a jot - the investor gets the property at end of mortgage anyway. It's a no lose situation. Or as close as is possible to one. It's why peolpe say "oh if you move out of London don't sell as you won't get back in"

[Loz]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> doesn't matter a jot - the investor gets the property at end of mortgage anyway. It's a no lose

Most BTL mortgages are interest-only, so none of those figures in my last post factor in any repayment of the capital amount. Few, if any, rental yield calculations would work if you tried to factor in capital repayments.

But anyway, it still comes down to more people wanting to be in London than houses exist. If all landlords sold up tomorrow, prices would return to current levels in a short period of time. Except rents, which would shoot through the roof.

[ernesto]

BTL are IO , usually only to 75% value

the only escape route for a BTL landlord on this property , given IR future direction (up) is capital appreciation on the underlying asset itself. Given he has has to stump up say 200K in cash, he will need to cover the loss of income on this slab( lets not get into leverage, just to keep it simple)

thus we are stuck in the mindset of requiring a permanet rising housing market to justify the risk- what do you think this will do to the availability of property on the market in the future - will ???s lovely transparent market eventually democratise house ownership and availability, or will it further consolidate it in the hands of the few ?

factor in average wages and shizzle blates innit

bludz

[ernesto]

lorra lorra assumtions though

[maxxi]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Rents, at least in ED, aren't rising. They've

> been pretty stagnant for about three years.

Utter, utter bollocks.

[Otta]

???? Wrote:

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

> oh the state/LA were such great landlords back in

> the day.........oh yes. On the plus side, you

> didn't have to actually pay your rent but you got

> F*all done/mended/sorted etc

And private landlords are all quick to mend things and get things done? When did you last rent?

[Jeremy]

ernesto Wrote:

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

> BTL are IO

Not necessarily. Repayment BTL mortgages are not all that rare.

But yeah... if you can make it work so that the income repays the capital in 20yrs or whatever, then you're laughing... its why it was such an attractive prospect for such a long time. But not sure how anyone who's got into the game recently could make it work.

[KidKruger]

"yup. but 25 years ago people generally didn't want to live in London, (or even the UK especially)"

no - everyone I knew had just arribved in London, couldn't wait to get to London (apart from those who'd already moved here).

never has an issue finding accomodation, mainly flat shares, Bow, Chhelsea, Wandsworth, Vauxhall loadsa flats.

[Loz]

maxxi Wrote:

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

> Loz Wrote:

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

> > Rents, at least in ED, aren't rising. They've been pretty stagnant for about three years.

>

> Utter, utter bollocks.

Unfortunately, admin seems to clear the residential section out after about a year, but three years ago 2 bed houses were going in ED for generally 1400 to 1600 pcm and they still are today.

If you have anything that says otherwise (but for ED only) then I'd like to see it.

[maxxi]

It's based purely on a dozen or so people/groups of people I know Loz not on something written down or on what rents were asked and are asked on this forum -just what was paid then and is paid now by them. If anything it's got worse over the last few years.

5 years ago there were plenty of places for 1100 or so even though advwertised rents may have been 1300 upwards - a lot of these are now 14+ and the lowwer rents have disappeared.

[ernesto]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> ernesto Wrote:

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

> -----

> > BTL are IO

>

> Not necessarily. Repayment BTL mortgages are not

> all that rare.

>

> But yeah... if you can make it work so that the

> income repays the capital in 20yrs or whatever,

> then you're laughing... its why it was such an

> attractive prospect for such a long time. But not

> sure how anyone who's got into the game recently

> could make it work.

rtoo much

[????]

ernesto Wrote:

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

> BTL are IO , usually only to 75% value

>

> the only escape route for a BTL landlord on this

> property , given IR future direction (up) is

> capital appreciation on the underlying asset

> itself. Given he has has to stump up say 200K in

> cash, he will need to cover the loss of income on

> this slab( lets not get into leverage, just to

> keep it simple)

>

> thus we are stuck in the mindset of requiring a

> permanet rising housing market to justify the

> risk- what do you think this will do to the

> availability of property on the market in the

> future - will ???s lovely transparent market

> eventually democratise house ownership and

> availability, or will it further consolidate it in

> the hands of the few ?

>

> factor in average wages and shizzle blates innit

>

> bludz

But snorks we don't have a free market by any maens cos we have the most restictive planning laws in Europe. If we want to make housing more affordable and thus also bring rents down* you have to build a lot more houses (whoever builds them but the state is bust innit)...you don't have to be a Neo-Liberal, fascist, Milton Freedman worshipper to accept this, do you?

Fook rent control, fook taxing foreigh owners (not opposed but won't solve the isse) just build more fooking homes

*potentially busting many BTL scummers too as a bonus for you

[Parkdrive]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> "We live in a free market economy so we have to

> accept things like will happen, as hard as it may

> be to accept, we have no choice"

>

> what do you mean we have no choice PD?

>

> Are you saying that there are no regulations in

> place across a wide spread of trading activities

> in all kinds of markets?

>

> We live in a market economy and long may that

> continue, but it should never be unregulated and

> without restraint

Private landlords can pretty much ask what they think they can get, and it's been that way for many years.

[ernesto]

it is interesting that pretty much all markets are regulated with regards to pricing and racketeering (some more than others blates), yet housing is totes outside the remit. I pay say ?200 a month for leccy & gas and it is regulated, yet I would pay ?1500 for a gaff, but outside basic landlord safety requirements, its a free for all

Is Housing the last bastion of rapacious gerrmandery capitalism left in blates broken brittan?

discuss/ argue amongst yerselves/ rely in a typically condescending manner to show how clever you is

[StraferJack]

"whoever builds them but the state is bust innit)..."

Not like back in the day when the big council house building programme happened?

[DaveR]

"Private landlords can pretty much ask what they think they can get, and it's been that way for many years."

Like people selling bread, or shoes, or massages. Bastards.

[ernesto]

bread was subject to some of the earliest set of selling regulations innit