How does Buy to Let END!

[sleepwello'nights]

29 minutes ago, spygirl said:

You won't get 'large companies' buying up 2 / 3br houses here there n everywhere.

 

 

I agree. This wasn't the main point of the post you responded to.

[Wight Flight]

45 minutes ago, spygirl said:

You won't get 'large companies' buying up 2 / 3br houses here there n everywhere.

This comes up all the time.

Large private orgs are interested in large,built to order blocks.

As rates normalise the attraction of leveraging up n buying property will wane.

Theres still a space for for corp LLing as a major life hedge, for annuities.

This has popped up-

https://www.property118.com/lha-is-not-enough-to-pay-rocketing-rents/

Low-income renters in England who rely on benefits are finding it increasingly difficult to secure housing due to skyrocketing private rents that far exceed local housing allowance rates (LHA).

These rates, which determine the maximum amount of financial help tenants can receive through universal credit or legacy housing benefits, have remained stagnant since 2020.

Originally, LHA was designed to cover the lowest 30% of market rents.

However, recent findings from the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) and Shelter reveal that this is no longer the case for a typical two-bedroom rental property in England.

In fact, less than 20% of private rentals fall within LHA rates, leaving renters to grapple with an average deficit of £151 per month.

Because people on benefits were never in the prs ffs.

Its only  the btl fuckwits have poured into the smaller cheaper housing, outborrowing ftb.  This is an issue. Or was.

The problem with btl is theyve leveraged up to out bid ftbs for 20y. This has been supported by zirp n the tax system

No more.

 

Agreed. And as ever they are pleading to have LHA rates increased.

Which will have the effect of increasing all rents, and make work pay for even fewer people.

i just hope they aren't that stupid.

[spygirl]

7 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

Agreed. And as ever they are pleading to have LHA rates increased.

Which will have the effect of increasing all rents, and make work pay for even fewer people.

i just hope they aren't that stupid.

They could pay for increasing LHA by taxing LLs more.....

Nice, circular solution.

Again, until 2000ish tne PRS was mainly student lets, professional HMOs corporate short term  lets.

Letting a bunch of potless, innumerate  fuckwits house the low paid n singleparents was never going to work.

And its better they start killing/resolving  io btl now, before all the io btl mortgages reach end of term.

There's enough upcoming  io fuckwittery in the OO sector.

 

[Wight Flight]

3 minutes ago, spygirl said:

They could pay for increasing LHA by taxing LLs more.....

Nice, circular solution.

Absolutely not.

Who is going to pay the rent increases that will be charged to those not on benefits?

Or will we go back to the position where the benefit bunnies can afford better houses than those that pay their own way?

[sancho panza]

16 hours ago, With a crooked smile said:

I currently dont as 1 i have enough going on and 2 i get a warm fuzzy feeling inside knowing its rented via an employer i like to two people who work locally.

Gives me plenty of time prepare for whatever a product transfer looks like in 3 years time.

If they didn't know what I say is truth there wouldn't be so much bile and "the sector is fucked" on here.

I thinkit's great you have a viable business and as a renter I am glad my LL is still in business.

On both our parts I think it's importnant to recognise we're relatively untypical of our repsective marekts.

There will always be LL's who are cash owned and wholly viable.

The issue here is whetehr the body of LL's that own 5+ properties and are leveraged 50%+ are viable in a 6% IR envrionement and whetehr that will force sales or whetehr it won't.

My reading of Natwest/Leeds BS etc is that surprisingly it's the hsitoric legacy loans  that are the real problem ones.

The issue that follows from that is whetehr Natiownwides balance sheet is viable with 6% IR.s.I dont think it is,if I could find a mechanism to short through to march 24 I would do.By a similar consideration,Im not loking to short LL's like yoursefl.Youve made a lot of sensible well financed decisions.There's no moeny in it,even if Im right on the Mother Ship

 

[JoeDavola]

12 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

Or will we go back to the position where the benefit bunnies can afford better houses than those that pay their own way?

Is this not already true in many cases?

[Wight Flight]

48 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

Is this not already true in many cases?

Good point. I have no idea.

[JoeDavola]

2 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

Good point. I have no idea.

I really just mean the scenario where someone gets one of the better council houses out there for free.

In many parts of the UK it would be better accomodation that what a min wage 40 hours a week would get you.

[Wight Flight]

5 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

I really just mean the scenario where someone gets one of the better council houses out there for free.

In many parts of the UK it would be better accomodation that what a min wage 40 hours a week would get you.

Ah.

I haven't ever lived in an area with available council housing so don't know about that.

The only thing i understand is nobody ever surrenders one. If they want to move they swap amongst themselves. That seems to be quite common.

[spygirl]

14 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

Absolutely not.

Who is going to pay the rent increases that will be charged to those not on benefits?

Or will we go back to the position where the benefit bunnies can afford better houses than those that pay their own way?

 

1 hour ago, JoeDavola said:

Is this not already true in many cases?

 

38 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

Good point. I have no idea.

Its more than benefit bunnies 99% single mums - get access to council housing.

Then the LHA/bennies cover the pain of the cost.

The poitns are so skewed to having kids efefctively LHA is singel parents only now, even if the singel parent is not from the area.

They need to change to have a localilty wieghting and employed points.

They also need to taker back palces as soon as the youngest hits 18.

 

[MithrilVest]

On 18/06/2023 at 07:47, JoeDavola said:

So just to clarify, someone on £30K job with a £1200/mo BTL rental will be getting taxed at 20% of that full 1200 i.e. giving the gov £240 a month of it?

Partially true, maybe.

Tax details here - https://www.gov.uk/renting-out-a-property/paying-tax - for England at least.

Probably the biggest question to ask is whether the property is owned by an individual or whether it's owned by a limited company.

Most 'smaller' landlords will likely personally own them rather than having incorporated. In those cases then they will have a £1,000 per year property income allowance but after than whatever rent they receive (minus allowable expenses which crucially no longer includes the full mortgage payment - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/income-tax-when-you-rent-out-a-property-working-out-your-rental-income#allow-expense) is taxed at whatever their marginal rate is.

So in your example, assuming the Landlord has no other income other than one rental and one job income they would pay tax at 20% on £13,400 ((12 x £1,200) - £1000)) or ~£223/month minus whatever expenses they can muster.....

 

 

 

[HousePriceMania]

Someone sent me this...

[spygirl]

For the lollz

https://www.property118.com/mis-sold-rent-2-rent-now-an-investment-loss/

Hello fellow landlords. A year ago I was sold a ‘fully hands off’ rent-to-rent 5 year lease on a property to run as serviced accommodation, the ‘sourcing fee’ was paid to an investment arm of the letting agent which would be also acting as the Landlord in the agreement and charge a management commission fee.

The whole thing is negotiated, packaged and checked then presented with conversative but lucrative financial forecasts.

A year on and among other issues, the return is not there. Basically there is none. The property has made a loss nearly every month but the owner and agent always make a profit.

[Chewing Grass]

2 minutes ago, spygirl said:

For the lollz

https://www.property118.com/mis-sold-rent-2-rent-now-an-investment-loss/

Hello fellow landlords. A year ago I was sold a ‘fully hands off’ rent-to-rent 5 year lease on a property to run as serviced accommodation, the ‘sourcing fee’ was paid to an investment arm of the letting agent which would be also acting as the Landlord in the agreement and charge a management commission fee.

The whole thing is negotiated, packaged and checked then presented with conversative but lucrative financial forecasts.

A year on and among other issues, the return is not there. Basically there is none. The property has made a loss nearly every month but the owner and agent always make a profit.

WTF, Rent-to-Rent, thats almost as bad as buying barrels of whisky and paying 'storage fees'.

The Whisky one always turns up as a scheme just before everyone goes bust.

[spygirl]

8 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

WTF, Rent-to-Rent, thats almost as bad as buying barrels of whisky and paying 'storage fees'.

The Whisky one always turns up as a scheme just before everyone goes bust.

Even worse. At least you own the whisky and - sometimes it almost made a return.

Uk properdee investment is retards, fuckwits, content n bedwetters.

 

[leonardratso]

22 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

WTF, Rent-to-Rent, thats almost as bad as buying barrels of whisky and paying 'storage fees'.

The Whisky one always turns up as a scheme just before everyone goes bust.

Bit like bullionvault? or the chinese version burrionvaurt.

[Animal Spirits]

‘My modest buy-to-let has become a money pit – I need to get out’

Tenant trashed the place then did a runner and of course, they were accidental landlords.

https://archive.is/dUIoI

Edited June 19, 2023 by Animal Spirits

[Bear Hug]

25 minutes ago, Animal Spirits said:

‘My modest buy-to-let has become a money pit – I need to get out’

Tenant trashed the place then did a runner and of course, they were accidental landlords.

https://archive.is/dUIoI

Can always tell whose side the article will be on, when they squeeze 'nest egg' in the first sentence. What about tenant's 'nest egg'? The one that keeps on being spent on rent? 

[Wight Flight]

1 minute ago, Bear Hug said:

Can always tell whose side the article will be on, when they squeeze 'nest egg' in the first sentence. What about tenant's 'nest egg'? The one that keeps on being spent on rent? 

And the word 'modest' is a big flag as well.

[GTM]

3 hours ago, spygirl said:

For the lollz

https://www.property118.com/mis-sold-rent-2-rent-now-an-investment-loss/

Its always nice when these brilliant entrepreneurs who know the property market inside out suddenly discover that the rules preventing consumers having their faces ripped off by financial sharks don't apply. 

[InLikeFlynn]

1 hour ago, Wight Flight said:

And the word 'modest' is a big flag as well.

Yes, as is the claim that they are "accidental landlords", when in fact they "were in a position to hang on to the house and buy themselves a larger home in Standish, Wigan. “We thought it would be a good opportunity to have a nest egg for the kids,”"

No sympathy, investments can go up as well as down and you may not receive back the sum invested.

 

 

[Wight Flight]

1 minute ago, InLikeFlynn said:

Yes, as is the claim that they are "accidental landlords", when in fact they "were in a position to hang on to the house and buy themselves a larger home in Standish, Wigan. “We thought it would be a good opportunity to have a nest egg for the kids,”"

No sympathy, investments can go up as well as down and you may not receive back the sum invested.

 

 

It's not an investment. As they keep telling us, it is a business. 

Businesses can fail, and you can lose everything.

It's harsh, but that's life.

[Chewing Grass]

45 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

It's not an investment. As they keep telling us, it is a business. 

Businesses can fail, and you can lose everything.

It's harsh, but that's life.

One of HMRC's 'Business' Tests is Risk - if there is 'No Risk' its not a real business.

[spygirl]

10 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

And the word 'modest' is a big flag as well.

Id prob use the use word 'slum'

 

[JoeDavola]

9 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

It's not an investment. As they keep telling us, it is a business. 

Businesses can fail, and you can lose everything.

It's harsh, but that's life.

THe attraction with housing was that you can "never fail".

And to be fair for all his fucking whinging, the value of his house has pretty much doubled since he bought it.

So he'll probably be fine and the call for sympathy is a bit ridiculous.