Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All


I know this might be a contentious topic but I'm looking for some advice regarding a property move from locals.


We are currently in a 2 bed flat in E Dulwich and have been here for a while - thinking about selling the flat but have recently been informed that we could also have the option of remortgaging the flat and still be able to make the move to a property that we have found that we would like to buy.


It would be interesting to get peoples views on what they recommend based on the E Dulwich market at the moment plus Cameron's new restrictions on BTL etc...


Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/84736-btl-in-east-dulwich/
Share on other sites

As long as you will be letting the property you already have, and moving to live in the new property, then I don't believe the increased stamp duty would be triggered - it only comes in from 1st April 2016 anyway - so not an issue if your transactions are completed by then. There are no other BTL penalties in this Autumn Statement.


Edited to add:- of course it has already been announced (I believe) that you will not be able to charge mortgage interest costs as an allowable expense on buy-to-let rentals - you will need to check the details on this.

Any property that you are buying in addition to your existing (for rental purposes) will be subject to the increase in SDLT from April 16.

You can offset mortgage costs but the current allowance for full tax relief is being phased out over 4 years and will ultimately be limited to only 20%.

If you are trading "up" then you should definitely calculate the financial benefit of selling the flat instead and putting down a much bigger deposit on the place you are buying (or buying a bigger/better place). Given a BTL mortgage has higher rates applied be aware your yield in ED wont be too high so youll be mainly banking on capital gains, in which case I suggest at least a 5 year hold and therefore you should be prepared and comfortable to see no major financial benefit of this move until you sell it.

Oh so what are you wanting to achieve? If you remortgage interest only you won't be paying off any of the capital anymore so are you relying on house price appreciation to build up equity?


Secondly have you done your sums in terms of expenses? Have only recently stopped renting in East Dulwich I would say if it is a decent flat in a good location you would probably get around ?1,300 a month in rent. Out of that you have to pay the mortgage, agents fees, put aside money for essential repairs and maintenance and to guard against void periods and tax. Do your sums and see if you come out with much at the end of that. If you don't I can't see what you are trying to gain. The income stream probably won't be much and going interest only means you won't be paying off the mortgage. Are you simply holding on to it in the hope that value will rise and you will make more money selling it in several years time than now? That's a risky strategy and a lot of work for potentially modest equity gains. If I were you I'd sell and give yourself less work yo do and a better cushion of equity in your next home.

And this is what Louisa means


maxxi Wrote:

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

> theboycj Wrote:

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

> -----

> > We are currently in a 2 bed flat in E Dulwich

> and

> > have been here for a while

>

> 26 July 2014 - "HI guys me and my wife are fairly

> new to the area,"

>

> F*ck me you don't hang about do you?

As cyclemonkey says, you won't make a whole lot out of rents, but you can make a decent amount out of capital gain.


It is not a risk-free investment. Your entire strategy is reliant on house prices rising a decent amount some time in the next few years and interest rates not rising so much that your mortgage starts to swallow up all your rental income. You need to be *really* picky about your tenants - one bad tenant can cost you a lot of money. Always look to keep good tenants - they are so valuable and make your life much easier.


So long as you complete before April 2016, the new stamp duty rules won't affect you. But, if you are a 40% or above taxpayer you really need to consider the changes coming on interest relief - they will have a big impact on your calculations.


If you live reasonably close, I would recommend you manage it yourself - letting agents really aren't worth the sort of money they charge unless you need a local presence. The forum is an excellent place to find tenants and tradespeople. Contracts and forms for inventories, etc can be found online, especially if you join an association (worth it for the first year).


I'll see if I can put together a PM in the next day or so with a few more thoughts, things to consider and things to watch out for.

A typical one bed flat round here now seems to be about ?400k. After costs you might get ?12k in rent per year, at most. So that's a 3% return at best. And that's ignoring the stamp duty/buying costs you have at the beginning. You'll be paying at least 3% in mortgage costs - I think the best current APR's are around 4%. So for this to be an investment, you are entirely dependent on capital growth - on which you will pay CGT which ignores inflation. And while property prices are forecast to go up (I remember the same view in 2007), as soon as there's a stock market scare or rising interest rates or a big incident in London they will go down, maybe dramatically.


So as a pure investment, I'd say BTL in London now looks like a mugs game even before the ?12k stamp duty extra you would pay on a ?400k flat after next April.


And that's before we get into any moral issues people may have about BTL as an investment.


(If the purpose of the investment is partly emotional - to keep a foothold in East Dulwich, or to give you options for where to live in future years, then it might be worth doing, but then you would need to buy somewhere that you could imagine you or relatives wanting to live, rather than something that is ideal for tenants.)

Angelina Wrote:

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

> surely, if you have a repayment mortgage then you

> will end up owning the property.

>

> Interest only, really - why?


A few reasons.


1) You can rarely make repayment mortgages work with BTL. Rents usually barely cover the interest payments. E.g. 400k at 3.5% is ?1200 interest only or about ?2000 repayment. You are not going to get ?2000 rent for a property valued at circa 550k.


2) Tax reasons. You can do other things with that money that are more tax efficient.


3) If you are only in it for the short term (like the OP stated) paying off the mortgage for about five years won't get you very far, anyway.

Agree with everything Loz has said on the thread.


All things being equal, I do think houses in ED will be worth more in 5 years than today. However, all things are never equal and only a 5 year timeline is short for a relatively highly levered, illiquid investment like BTL.


Why only 5 years? Also, when doing your sums take into account the better interest rate you'd get on your primary residence if you put the extra equity there instead as well as the alternative investments you could make with your equity that might be safer / more liquid, and less hassle.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...