Credit deflation and the reflation cycle to come (part 3)

[MrXxxx]

2 hours ago, AWW said:

They can only do this if you accept it. My current landlord threatened to evict me if I didn't sign a 1-year contract extension (we're not planning on staying for a full year).  I refused and said I'll continue to pay the rent and will give 2 months notice before leaving, take me to court if you want me out; no judge is going to evict a family from a place they've lived in for yonks, always paid the rent, "have nowhere else to go", because the LL wants to lock them into a new contract.

UK renters have a lot more power than most of them realise. It might not be enshrined in your contract, but you could cause your landlord a lot of grief if you were that way inclined.

Yes and No....your landlord didn't 'follow through' as he/she wanted the income HOWEVER despite what a Judge might think their role is not to 'give their opinion' but to 'apply the law'.

The law regarding Assured Shorthold Tenancies allows either:

a) Section 21 notice [not an eviction] where the landlord has to serve two months 'notice to possess', you only have to give one months notice if your initial rental period hasn't been extended an so 'evolved' into Periodic Tenancy. As a 'no fault' possession the landlord doesn't need to state a reason, just give the required notice period. However, the government are discussing a repeal of S21 so that landlords could use an S8 mid tenancy using grounds for possession as a) occupancy by the landlord/his family, or b) sale. If a tenant fails to vacate then the landlord applies for a Section 8 eviction. Note, there are certain requirements to make a S21 valid i.e protected deposit, Gas certificates etc, and until these are met any S21 issued is invalid.

OR

b) Section 8 eviction issue mid-tenancy for breach of tenancy i.e. failure to pay, antisocial behaviour etc, where after showing the measures he/she has taken in helping you to resolve the situation you have failed to address these. If the landlord has followed this procedure correctly [see Housing Act 1988] then a S8 is issued. Following this if the S8 still applies [see note below] the judge has no choice but to order a 'notice to possess'/eviction via court baliffs by a specific date no less than two weeks away. Note, you must be two months in arrears at the time the S8 is served and at the subsequent hearing, IF you pay arrears after this point the order can still be processed.

As you quite rightly point out a Section 8 can be a lot of hassle if the tenant doesn't comply, and could involve further court action by the landlord and take longer than a Section 21. For this reason landlords usually avoid these and/or offer a financial 'encouragement' for difficult tenants to 'give notice'.

[Joxer]

10 minutes ago, MrXxxx said:

Yes and No....your landlord didn't 'follow through' as he/she wanted the income HOWEVER despite what a Judge might think their role is not to 'give their opinion' but to 'apply the law'.

The law regarding Assured Shorthold Tenancies allows either:

a) Section 21 notice [not an eviction] where the landlord has to serve two months 'notice to possess', you only have to give one months notice if your initial rental period hasn't been extended an so 'evolved' into Periodic Tenancy. The grounds for possession would be for a) occupancy by the landlord/his family, or b) sale, and so are not open to appeal. If a tenant fails to vacate then the landlord applies for a Section 8 eviction.

OR

b) Section 8 eviction for breach of tenancy i.e. failure to pay, antisocial behaviour etc, where after showing the measures he/she has taken in helping you to resolve the situation you have failed to address these. If the landlord has followed this procedure correctly [see Housing Act 1988] then a S8 is issued. Following this if the S8 still applies [see note below] the judge has no choice but to order a 'notice to possess'/eviction via court baliffs by a specific date no less than two weeks away. Note, you must be two months in arrears at the time the S8 is served and at the subsequent hearing, IF you pay arrears after this point the order can still be processed.

As you quite rightly point out a Section 8 can be a lot of hassle if the tenant doesn't comply, and could involve further court action by the landlord and take longer than a Section 21. For this reason landlords usually avoid these and/or offer a financial 'encouragement' for difficult tenants to 'give notice'.

Can a landlord only be granted possession with a section 21 if they want to move in themselves or sell? 

I thought a landlord didn't need to give any reasons for possession when using section 21.

[feed]

1 hour ago, macca said:

Zara Sultana 

Corbyn 

Follow them on social media.. There are a few good MPs. Saying ALL of them are the same is a false narrative that does not help. Its something that people say to me just before they vote Tory

I think the many of them are corrupt would sound better.. But not all..

If Corbyn had won the last election it would be the rich being made to pay tax, not the workers.

The NHS would be heading to re nationalisation.. Not Richie Sunak selling it to American corperations.

So saying they are all the same. It's a dangerous narrative to peddle and always leads to the Fucking Tory cunts. 

They have stollen about 1.5 trillion.. We are heading to collapse.. 

You need to get past if Corbyn won.  He didn't, he lost. Twice.  Fielding him against Boris after losing to May was political suicide.  Holding on to corbyn was our savior is preventing the formation of an opposition party that can beat the conservatives.   

 

[MrXxxx]

20 minutes ago, Joxer said:

Can a landlord only be granted possession with a section 21 if they want to move in themselves or sell? 

I thought a landlord didn't need to give any reasons for possession when using section 21.

No sorry, I didn't explain that very clearly. As you say at the moment an S21 is a 'No fault' possession, and so no reason has to be given. That said, the government have been discussing a repeal of the S21, and so to allow a landlord to give notice mid-tenancy by citing these reasons under a S8 eviction.

[Axeman123]

3 hours ago, AWW said:

They can only do this if you accept it.

In practice evictions are taking around 2 years to go through the court system at the moment, so in a sense saying "I will just keep paying the old rent" would give you a huge grace period to move out. Even before "the bug" people were routinely getting 12+ months rent free by just waiting for the system to run it's course. Based on watching bailiff TV shows "Professional bad tennants" willing to poor sand in the gears of the system with vexatious claims of disrepair etc could stretch that even further. There has to be a moral component to one's conduct though, some landlords are regular people. Keeping them honest is fair enough, but some landlords on those TV shows actually had my sympathy (assuming they sold up as soon as they regained posession).

Ironically a landlord seeking eviction via the legal route would be well advised to do all repairs and have safety checks etc up to date, or risk jeopardising their case. For some of them this will be a novel experience!

2 hours ago, spygirl said:

Poland’s inflation surge takes shine off economy

Rising prices threaten to undermine ruling party’s appeal for voters

https://www.ft.com/content/2750a82a-3304-41fa-a1ae-ee5c5c3fbc91#comments-anchor

Can embed the image - must be drawn.

8% inflation.

However, barring an intensification of the pandemic, economists doubt inflation will return to the 2.5 per cent targeted by Poland’s central bank soon. “Core inflation is above 4 per cent and strong, so you have to expect that inflation will remain above 7 per cent next year,” Cichy said. “It is very unlikely that it will return to the central bank’s target in 2023.”

The Polish CB is 3 base rate rises deep, at 1.75%. If that isn't getting inflation under control (which it couldn't possibly), what chance does the BoE think it has with a single 0.15% rise? Of course they don't even expect it to...

[spygirl]

38 minutes ago, Axeman123 said:

In practice evictions are taking around 2 years to go through the court system at the moment, so in a sense saying "I will just keep paying the old rent" would give you a huge grace period to move out. Even before "the bug" people were routinely getting 12+ months rent free by just waiting for the system to run it's course. Based on watching bailiff TV shows "Professional bad tennants" willing to poor sand in the gears of the system with vexatious claims of disrepair etc could stretch that even further. There has to be a moral component to one's conduct though, some landlords are regular people. Keeping them honest is fair enough, but some landlords on those TV shows actually had my sympathy (assuming they sold up as soon as they regained posession).

Ironically a landlord seeking eviction via the legal route would be well advised to do all repairs and have safety checks etc up to date, or risk jeopardising their case. For some of them this will be a novel experience!

The Polish CB is 3 base rate rises deep, at 1.75%. If that isn't getting inflation under control (which it couldn't possibly), what chance does the BoE think it has with a single 0.15% rise? Of course they don't even expect it to...

iirc Polands economy is growing at ~5%.

Taylor rule, only useful macro economics, says IR should be 10%, mainly as they they did not raise early and fast enough.

ECB must be shitting bricks for 2022, when the Fed gets going.

 

 

[JimmyTheBruce]

3 hours ago, macca said:

Zara Sultana 

Corbyn 

Follow them on social media.. There are a few good MPs. Saying ALL of them are the same is a false narrative that does not help. Its something that people say to me just before they vote Tory

I think the many of them are corrupt would sound better.. But not all..

If Corbyn had won the last election it would be the rich being made to pay tax, not the workers.

The NHS would be heading to re nationalisation.. Not Richie Sunak selling it to American corperations.

So saying they are all the same. It's a dangerous narrative to peddle and always leads to the Fucking Tory cunts. 

They have stollen about 1.5 trillion.. We are heading to collapse.. 

Don't really want to derail the thread, but this is Corbyn:

Who then led his party in a cross-party effort to remain part of the corrupt establishment that he so eloquently rubbished.

This will no doubt be put down to something along the lines of "political expediency" but that simply supports my point.  They are all politicians, therefore they are all lying, devious, self-serving arseholes. 

They are all the same.

[Joxer]

3 hours ago, MrXxxx said:

No sorry, I didn't explain that very clearly. As you say at the moment an S21 is a 'No fault' possession, and so no reason has to be given. That said, the government have been discussing a repeal of the S21, and so to allow a landlord to give notice mid-tenancy by citing these reasons under a S8 eviction.

Another question for you. If the landlord has served you section 21 notice after the tenancy has gone monthly periodic does the tenant still need to give a months notice or can they just leave anytime they want (presuming the rent has been paid accordingly)

[MrXxxx]

16 minutes ago, Joxer said:

Another question for you. If the landlord has served you section 21 notice after the tenancy has gone monthly periodic does the tenant still need to give a months notice or can they just leave anytime they want (presuming the rent has been paid accordingly)

OK I am not a lawyer so as always Do Your Own Research, but this is my understanding. You ask an interesting question, and one that I thought about myself.

Scenario ; The tenancy has become monthly periodic as a) the landlord [or his agent] hasn't produced another 6 month [or longer] Assured Shorthold Tenancy, and b) you pay monthly. Unlike prior to the contract period [pre-periodic tenancy], the landlord now has to give you two months notice, whereas you still only have to give him one. We will assume you pay a month in advance, and your payment day is the first of the month.

So, the landlord would usually serve you a S21 one day [or more also see * below] before your final required two month notice period, so say he/she wanted you out on 31st Dec 2021, he/she would have to serve you the S21 on the 31st Oct 2021 or earlier...if he served it on 01 Nov 2021 he would have to wait until the 31st Jan 2022 before you leave. In addition, if he hadn't fulfilled his legal duties properly as a landlord i.e. protected you deposit, given you an up-to-date gas certificate etc the S21 process would be invalid until he addressed these matters, and then he would have to start the whole two month notice again.

Alongside this, if say for example he hadn't protected your deposit you could then claim up to three times the deposit value for each contract where he failed to do this i.e. if he [or the agent] got you to sign two 6 month AST's you could claim up to 3 times each deposit [6x deposit assuming it was same sum] AND get the deposits returned as well; I say UP TO 3 times for each offence as this is up to the judges discretion i.e if he thinks the landlord [or his agent] has been particularly negligent or uncooperative he is likely to give 3 x, whereas likewise if he thinks you have tried to be slightly cunning/awkward/uncooperative he is likely to only rule 1 x; legally he has to give at least 1 times as the offence has been committed so a penalty has to be applied.

Now to what I think was you original question. If the landlord has followed everything correctly you are duty bound to pay up until the end of your periodic tenancy i.e. Dec 31st 2021 even if you vacate before UNLESS the landlord agrees to release you earlier. If you think about it it makes sense, as if you were to offer your one months required notice after he had issued his two months notice you would be required to give notice on 30 Nov 2021 [one day before your new month begins on 01st Dec 2021] to vacate on the 31st Dec 2021.

A really helpful site for this is Shelter [https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/private_renting].

* Some landlords/agents serve the S21 'Notice to quit' at the beginning of your tenancy, that way they are covered if someone forgets to issue it at a later date, and if they want to keep you as a tenant the just need to either a)issue a new 6 month tenancy or b) let it run on thus becoming a Periodic tenancy. This said, the Housing Act 1988 was revised in 2015 and this 'loop hole' may have been addressed.

[MrXxxx]

4 hours ago, Axeman123 said:

In practice evictions are taking around 2 years to go through the court system at the moment, so in a sense saying "I will just keep paying the old rent" would give you a huge grace period to move out. Even before "the bug" people were routinely getting 12+ months rent free by just waiting for the system to run it's course. Based on watching bailiff TV shows "Professional bad tennants" willing to poor sand in the gears of the system with vexatious claims of disrepair etc could stretch that even further. There has to be a moral component to one's conduct though, some landlords are regular people. Keeping them honest is fair enough, but some landlords on those TV shows actually had my sympathy (assuming they sold up as soon as they regained posession).

Ironically a landlord seeking eviction via the legal route would be well advised to do all repairs and have safety checks etc up to date, or risk jeopardising their case. For some of them this will be a novel experience!

...and it makes you wonder why anyone would be a BTL landlord for the current small returns [unless of course you got in years ago, and so should have sold out by now]?...far less hassle and far more liquid in S&S.

[Hancock]

1 hour ago, MrXxxx said:

...and it makes you wonder why anyone would be a BTL landlord for the current small returns [unless of course you got in years ago, and so should have sold out by now]?...far less hassle and far more liquid in S&S.

Because they can leverage £50k and then own a house in 20 years time ... or if a 200k house goes up by 20% then they'll make £40k in a couple of years ... unlikely to get those return from S&S.

Banks don't lend money to people to speculate on the stock market, as it'd create an epic bubble and they'd lose their money. (as should happen with their housing bubble lending)

[spygirl]

3 hours ago, MrXxxx said:

OK I am not a lawyer so as always Do Your Own Research, but this is my understanding. You ask an interesting question, and one that I thought about myself.

Scenario ; The tenancy has become monthly periodic as a) the landlord [or his agent] hasn't produced another 6 month [or longer] Assured Shorthold Tenancy, and b) you pay monthly. Unlike prior to the contract period [pre-periodic tenancy], the landlord now has to give you two months notice, whereas you still only have to give him one. We will assume you pay a month in advance, and your payment day is the first of the month.

So, the landlord would usually serve you a S21 one day [or more also see * below] before your final required two month notice period, so say he/she wanted you out on 31st Dec 2021, he/she would have to serve you the S21 on the 31st Oct 2021 or earlier...if he served it on 01 Nov 2021 he would have to wait until the 31st Jan 2022 before you leave. In addition, if he hadn't fulfilled his legal duties properly as a landlord i.e. protected you deposit, given you an up-to-date gas certificate etc the S21 process would be invalid until he addressed these matters, and then he would have to start the whole two month notice again.

Alongside this, if say for example he hadn't protected your deposit you could then claim up to three times the deposit value for each contract where he failed to do this i.e. if he [or the agent] got you to sign two 6 month AST's you could claim up to 3 times each deposit [6x deposit assuming it was same sum] AND get the deposits returned as well; I say UP TO 3 times for each offence as this is up to the judges discretion i.e if he thinks the landlord [or his agent] has been particularly negligent or uncooperative he is likely to give 3 x, whereas likewise if he thinks you have tried to be slightly cunning/awkward/uncooperative he is likely to only rule 1 x; legally he has to give at least 1 times as the offence has been committed so a penalty has to be applied.

Now to what I think was you original question. If the landlord has followed everything correctly you are duty bound to pay up until the end of your periodic tenancy i.e. Dec 31st 2021 even if you vacate before UNLESS the landlord agrees to release you earlier. If you think about it it makes sense, as if you were to offer your one months required notice after he had issued his two months notice you would be required to give notice on 30 Nov 2021 [one day before your new month begins on 01st Dec 2021] to vacate on the 31st Dec 2021.

A really helpful site for this is Shelter [https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/private_renting].

* Some landlords/agents serve the S21 'Notice to quit' at the beginning of your tenancy, that way they are covered if someone forgets to issue it at a later date, and if they want to keep you as a tenant the just need to either a)issue a new 6 month tenancy or b) let it run on thus becoming a Periodic tenancy. This said, the Housing Act 1988 was revised in 2015 and this 'loop hole' may have been addressed.

Theres a lot of wishful LL thinking on s21.

One, you've got to make sure you've run the tenancy legally. Not a big hurdle but beyond majority of LL.

Ok, you are squeaky legal. You serve a s21. 2 months pass and .... tenant still there.

You are now entering legal and fiscal hell.

This is why you should not be leveraged up snd renting at sub 4% yields.

Do, you go to court, where even serious criminal cases are 2 years behind.

You are not going to get before a judge within 12 months.

 

 

[MrXxxx]

Thought I would post this figure as it gives a nice overview of the markets in the past year/Q4...also help bring the thread 'back on subject' as I was guilty of leading it off line :-)

Source article https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/global-markets-wrapup-1-pix-2021-12-31/

[DurhamBorn]

9 hours ago, MrXxxx said:

Thought I would post this figure as it gives a nice overview of the markets in the past year/Q4...also help bring the thread 'back on subject' as I was guilty of leading it off line :-)

Source article https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/global-markets-wrapup-1-pix-2021-12-31/

Dis-inflation loving under performing,inflation lovely out performing.YEN looks interesting though,or Jap stocks.

[MrXxxx]

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/china-evergrande-shares-halt-trading-2022-01-03/

The Black Swan event for the BK that we have been waiting for?

[WICAO]

59 minutes ago, DurhamBorn said:

Dis-inflation loving under performing,inflation lovely out performing.YEN looks interesting though,or Jap stocks.

I have a Japan ETF that aims to track the FTSE Japan Index.  Top 5 holdings are Toyota, Sony, Keyence, Recruit Holdings and Tokyo Electron.  Share price 31 Dec 2020 was £26.15 and today it's £26.14.  Divi yield is about 1.7%.

[jamtomorrow]

1 hour ago, DurhamBorn said:

Dis-inflation loving under performing,inflation lovely out performing.YEN looks interesting though,or Jap stocks.

Last time I screened for Jap stocks was 18 months ago, and seemed like divi yield was very hard to come by.

Would have to check notes to confirm, but from recollection there were energy producers, miners and industrials to be had in US/UK/EU at or around 6% yields, but nothing like that in Jap stocks.

Track record of paying divis very important to me - I want to be holding companies that already have a divi habit.

Edit to add: I suppose Japan having a 10 year head-start on ZIRP might have something to do with it? But still, hard to predict who will feel like coughing up if/when yield comes back into fashion.

[Starsend]

A happy and prosperous new year to everyone!

I'm starting the New Year with a big old chunk of money to invest, most of it I want to get into high yielding stuff. Difficult time really as the risk of a crash seems high but then again, been hearing that for years and years and I'm investing for the long-term anyway.

I've been watching some interesting stuff recently, what did well in 70s - energy stocks and REITS did particularly well at outpacing inflation.

Already got a lot of dosh in energy but nothing in REITS and there's a lot to choose from.

One I'm very interested in is Omega Healthcare listed on the NYSE. Yields an EXTRA JUICY 9.7%. They own almost a thousand healthcare type properties. Can't see any particular problems with them. Anybody have any thoughts as to how these types of companies are likely to do going forward? I like that their properties are hospitals / care centres etc, seems safer than a residential REIT.

https://www.investing.com/equities/omega-healthcare

 

 

 

 

 

[Starsend]

I own a couple of Russian stocks, Gazprom and Polymetal. Been nice yielders with some nice decent growth from Gazprom. I'm considering selling due to risk. From what I can see when Russia pulled their Crimea stunt in 2014 the shares in Gazprom almost halved over the following year and never really recovered for at least another five.

[DurhamBorn]

Problem on REITs is the debt.They mostly have 40% to 50% LTV so if rates double it could wipe out half their free cash flow.Id want to know exactly how much and also the bond structure.Some have all their debt in one or two bonds,hugely risky.

[Don Coglione]

18 minutes ago, Starsend said:

I own a couple of Russian stocks, Gazprom and Polymetal. Been nice yielders with some nice decent growth from Gazprom. I'm considering selling due to risk. From what I can see when Russia pulled their Crimea stunt in 2014 the shares in Gazprom almost halved over the following year and never really recovered for at least another five.

I can't see Gazprom struggling to sell everything it can pump, the World simply can't afford geopolitical ideology, at least when it comes to energy.

[Starsend]

22 minutes ago, DurhamBorn said:

Problem on REITs is the debt.They mostly have 40% to 50% LTV so if rates double it could wipe out half their free cash flow.Id want to know exactly how much and also the bond structure.Some have all their debt in one or two bonds,hugely risky.

Thanks DB, I think I'll spend a bit of time digging into their debt and see what I can find.

[Starsend]

12 minutes ago, Don Coglione said:

I can't see Gazprom struggling to sell everything it can pump, the World simply can't afford geopolitical ideology, at least when it comes to energy.

My concern isn't so much that their sales will be hit; it's what could happen to London shareholders if things got heated between the West and Russia. Russian Government could just delist from London and tell us all to feck off. No idea how likely a scenario that is to be honest. 

[M S E Refugee]

16 minutes ago, Starsend said:

My concern isn't so much that their sales will be hit; it's what could happen to London shareholders if things got heated between the West and Russia. Russian Government could just delist from London and tell us all to feck off. No idea how likely a scenario that is to be honest. 

The Western Powers are Paper Tigers who can't do a great deal against Putin.

We have the Windmills but Putin's cooking with Gas.

[JMD]

2 hours ago, Starsend said:

A happy and prosperous new year to everyone!

I'm starting the New Year with a big old chunk of money to invest, most of it I want to get into high yielding stuff. Difficult time really as the risk of a crash seems high but then again, been hearing that for years and years and I'm investing for the long-term anyway.

I've been watching some interesting stuff recently, what did well in 70s - energy stocks and REITS did particularly well at outpacing inflation.

Already got a lot of dosh in energy but nothing in REITS and there's a lot to choose from.

One I'm very interested in is Omega Healthcare listed on the NYSE. Yields an EXTRA JUICY 9.7%. They own almost a thousand healthcare type properties. Can't see any particular problems with them. Anybody have any thoughts as to how these types of companies are likely to do going forward? I like that their properties are hospitals / care centres etc, seems safer than a residential REIT.

https://www.investing.com/equities/omega-healthcare

 

 

 

 

 

Omega looks interesting except for its large 5bn debt, though i note Market Watch says the debt is mostly 'long term debt', however this can sometimes just mean 2 years+. So as DB says in his reply to you, the debt structure is pivotal - actual length, rates, etc. The debt structure, is very important to know and mentioned often here on the thread, but I admit that it is the one metric that has always had me stumped. I find the financial sites don't provide near enough detail. Personally I'd gladly pay for a site that did, but guess the only way is to visit each individual company web site?                                                                                                                             Not advice of course, especially as these are only part of my BK watchlist for price falls, but I like the UK Target and Impact H/C reits. Both have low debt, 6% divi.