BTL landlords should share capital gains profit with tenants – call

The utter hypocrisy of the people who label themselves "left-wing" or "socialist" never ceases to amaze me.
Mr Bird - when the tenants wish to share the responsibilities of owning a property - maintenance, repairs, GSC, not to mention the delights of a fluctuating mortgage market - then they are probably responsible enough to become home owners. Otherwise they sit on the sofa and let the landlord take all the risks. So they remain tenants. You cannot win in this life if you take zero risks and put zero effort.

Mr Bird - The homeless helped you get your fat salary by selling BIg Issue, why don't you give them part of their share?

Birds figures do not take inflation into account.
The gains are not inflation free, so he should use real gains.

As pointed out by another commentator, the tenant should also share in losses too.

What are the practicalities of revaluing a high turnover rental?

Should hotels share profits with guests?

I think he's on to something, if he thinks the tenant should share in the profits the the tenant should speak to the landlord to buy a stake in the property. If the deal suits both parties then it will be done.

What Bird is failing to recognise is that capital is important in the housing market. He only sees rent and interest. But try buying a house without capital?

Time to show Mr Bird, the bird hand gesture!

fThey always quote London. I spent £15000 each updating my flats, I took the risk of my money and a mortgage , 2 flats are now only worth 50% of what I paid. Not all flats go Up. Should they make up the loss in value I will make when I sell? My tenant s have a higher income than me. One could buy but doesn't want to. What about the cost of repairs, registration, insurance, etc and their lack of interest in keeping the property and communal area in good condition and God forbid clean!!!! Easy to spend other people's money.

Reply to the comment left by Markella Mikkelsen at 05/07/2023 - 09:43You forgot to mention all the taxes! You know - aside from the income tax & S24 robbery - the CGT after we’ve carried out property improvements (at our own financial risk and our own time and effort), that significant chunk of cash taken by HMRC just for inflation!
No “thanks for providing ‘Jim’ a safe and decent home for 20 years, and not putting up the rent every year, and the being on call 24 hours etc. Just put your feet up mate whilst I sort out everything for you.” Nope, nothing.
I had previously admired John Bird, but no more. I wonder how wealthy he’s become on the back of the homeless?

Then Jim ought to have done what what the Landlord did, struggled, did 16 hour days, went without while Jim bought new shirts & went on holidays, worked Sundays while Jim went out with kids.
Then Jim could have also bought his own house. It's called taking a chance, a calculated risk.
It's called inflation. It's called using your brain & struggling in earlier years so u can have it in later years.
Does Jim want to pay the losses that Landlord would have incurred in the earlier years?
Who saved up for & paid the deposit? Who did the work on the house?
All my tenants had flat screen TV's & Sky before me.
I drove a van for 20 years & didn't go on holiday for 5 years.

Jim hasn't increased the value. Inflation has. And taking a chance & risk & gamble has. Landlord didn't have to buy it. Jim could have done.
Tell u what Mr Big Issue Bird (of which I buy every time I see one), u can come & buy most of my houses RIGHT NOW, I'll knock u off 10% & u can then charge the tenants 70% of market rent like I do & u can pay Selective Licensing £890 & deal with UC & then tell me if you can make it pay or would u be better off with your money invested elsewhere without the threat of going prison when tenant takes battery out smoke alarm.

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 05/07/2023 - 07:52
Birdbrained stupidity at its worst! The tenant had taken no risks. He had ALL the use of the property too. If the value fell would he contribute? No!
Let’s say that the landlord earned enough so that he could afford to marry? Should the tenant join him in the matrimonial bed ? Why not? It’s all part of the landlord’s gain!
Why stop there? If I worked for a company should I be given shares AFTER I was being well paid during the lean years too?
There is a new idea of the blessed parasite going around BTL. If it fruited there would be no more PRS! Then the state could build and build and build.

So with that manipulation, that also means we pay the bank'sters' income by means of interest from their money lending and mountain of their fees, all landlords should share a percentage of all the bankers billions of shared profits, their annual bonus and we are talking some hedge funds managers taking billions of pounds per manager per year making them billionairs. And that theory should also trickle down the rest of society for example since we buy the bread from the local bakers making them profits, we should get a share of their profits too and on it goes. How manipulated and twisted are the heads of some of those idiots.

So Jim has just told us how business works.
This should apply to every sector then.
What really amazes me about these narrow minded people is that they don't mind a big bank like Lloyds doing BTL and making huge profits - they just took on 500 new properties. But if a landlord does the same on a smaller scale we are the scum of the earth, greedy money grabbing, it really defies logic how these people think.
They truly want big business to run the BTL market where you are just a number with no personal service and higher rents, who are they going to complain to then - you reap what you sow.

Yes I agree!
I also shop in Asda, Tesco so I'm contributing to their profit so I think I should get a share of that, also I bought a BMW so should get my share of the profits from BMW and all the fuel I put in, surely I should get something from Shell!
What a load of tripe!