Taking possession of something you own.

Most private landlords are in it for the capital gain.

The home ownership rate has fallen by 10% overall since the peak in the mid 2000s

Home ownership rates amongst younger people have fallen off a cliff
 
carmanmemoranda said:
There's good and bad landlords and renters.

I'm sure if you weren't making money out of it you wouldn't be a landlord.
Click to expand...
The difference is, and I'm referring to registered landlords in Scotland, the entire system is becoming more and more weighted in favour of the tenant i.e. there is no longer parity. Of course, the legislation and policies don't read that way, however that's the reality.

Landlords can (quite rightly) be swiftly picked up on anything they're not doing in accordance with the tenancy agreement.

Tenants can cease paying rent, play the system to stay put as long as possible, then leave perhaps leaving the property in a state that requires a complete refurb. So the landlord, already working on relatively tight margins depending on a number of variables, has to absorb the thousands they're out of pocket.

Oh but wait. Surely there are processes in place to recoup the lost £££ from the ex tenant?

On paper, yes. In reality ...
 
If sucessive governments hadn't spunked their housing stock up the wall and properly used the rediculasly discounted right to buy to build more social housing ie sell one property use the money to build two then a lot of private landlords would not be in bussiness, as it is people like me provide homes for people , not for nothing but for a lot less than some people think, and have to put up with a lot of sh1t on the way
 
gas112 said:
Go on then give me your thoughts on what you think this overall position is ?
Click to expand...
Money and valuation.

It's either that or you are doing it for the benefit of the poor.

I very much doubt that you are doing it to lose money.
 
algas said:
If sucessive governments hadn't spunked their housing stock up the wall and properly used the rediculasly discounted right to buy to build more social housing ie sell one property use the money to build two then a lot of private landlords would not be in bussiness, as it is people like me provide homes for people , not for nothing but for a lot less than some people think, and have to put up with a lot of sh1t on the way
Click to expand...
Theres a lot of honesty in there.

The only partial disagreement, is that you may not be making lots of money, but your property is increasing in valuation, without you paying for it.
 
carmanmemoranda said:
There is also the valuation increase of the property rented out.

So in effect, as long as the actual cost of the loan, mortgage, interest, or investment made is covered, there is likely to be a healthy profit at the end.
Click to expand...
Have you missed the several property price collapses over the decades that takes years to recover and on a 160k mortgage your going to be paying back roughly 300k at present
 
gas112 said:
Have you missed the several property price collapses over the decades that takes years to recover and on a 160k mortgage your going to be paying back roughly 300k at present
Click to expand...
If your valuation of property isn't increasing and your rental costs aren't covering your expenses then you sound less sensible than you like to appear.

Property is a long term INVESTMENT. If you can't make it work you should sell up. I'm fairly confident I know why you won't.

I'm not attacking you as a landlord,but don't try and pretend it's loss making
 
gas112 said:
no go on give me figures not just you making comments
Click to expand...
Go on then give me your figures and let's see where I'm wrong.

How much you paid out and when? Current valuation? How much income? How much interest are you paying out ?

I repeat,I doubt you are renting houses out at a cost to yourself for the benefit of the poor. Am I wrong?
 
carmanmemoranda said:
I'm not attacking you as a landlord,but don't try and pretend it's loss making
Click to expand...

It's a gamble, just like any investment. I have the money tucked away, I could easily invest in a property to let out, and it was suggested I do that. I didn't because it was too big a risk, far too much potential aggravation.
 
Harry Bloomfield said:
It's a gamble, just like any investment. I have the money tucked away, I could easily invest in a property to let out, and it was suggested I do that. I didn't because it was too big a risk, far too much potential aggravation.
Click to expand...
I'm not for 1 minute saying it's easy.

Not everybody makes money, like any business.

But anybody that is renting out and isn't making money should sell up and put the money elsewhere.

But the people making money (valuation increases, if not direct rent) are trying to pretend otherwise its just wrong.
 
algas said:
If sucessive governments hadn't spunked their housing stock up the wall and properly used the rediculasly discounted right to buy to build more social housing ie sell one property use the money to build two then a lot of private landlords would not be in bussiness, as it is people like me provide homes for people , not for nothing but for a lot less than some people think, and have to put up with a lot of sh1t on the way
Click to expand...
I think the PRS should always have a place. Yes I would say that as a LL however whether I'm in the game or not, I genuinely believe private rentals will always appeal to some.

And I have to laugh when the left wing do-gooders say there should be no PRS whatsoever. Again, how would that work in reality? We have LLs who rent out one bed basic properties all the way up to high end rentals favoured by millionaires. So the rationale is none of this should exist? It's all a disgusting capitalist thing that needs completely ceased?

I'll say again, there are those who prefer to rent from the PRS, it suits them. What do they do if there's no PRS?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top