Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Agreed AP ...but in real terms ...the effect of the Budget proposals will be significantly magnified by the a rise in interest rates ie profit will diminish even more quickly. The inbuilt , "braking distance " you would have as a car driver has been removed by proposals and that shorter gap to crashing leaves little space to exit/stop when interest rates do the inevitable and rise.

Reply to the comment left by "John McKay" at "31/07/2015 - 16:39":

I agree that the Portsmouth & District Private Landlords Association statement on their website posted earlier does indicate that they have little understanding of the budget proposal. By doing so, and misreporting I think they are doing a great disservice to all their members.

As to their ‘The mathematics in this appeal are at best, misleading’ comment, like others have said, perhaps the person who wrote that just didn’t take the time to understand.

Then again, suggest that the actual rental figure 75k and 15k other costs figures are included in Example 3 to avoid further confusion?

BTW I wondered why that P&DPLA statement was so highly rated (currently showing 4.5 stars after 45 votes). I googled the weblink address and it led me back to that other devious forum (the one where they are copying most posts from here on to theirs on an ongoing basis). Turns out they are telling their members to award it 5 stars.

Has anyone contacted the shadow chancellor?

Reply to the comment left by "Connie Cheuk" at "01/08/2015 - 05:20":

Connie I contacted the Shadow Chancellor 7 days ago - no response yet.

Slogan for Today:

Call to Action - Stop Osborne destroying rented sector.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104880

I had previously posted that I'd written to Gill Fielding (whom I have great respect for) and asked what her take is on the tax change. As yet, no reply.

Then I read this today in the Daily Mail online.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/diyinvesting/article-3169981/SPECIAL-INVESTIGATION-Maria-Davis-says-make-buy-let-millionaire-believe-her.html

It just shows that even the brightest investors are not either understanding or wanting to explain the enormous problem of this tax change. It's one thing to debate how ethical our Chancellor has been in conning people to release their pensions and mentioning nothing about his intentions before the election. It's completely another to tempt people to part with their savings to go on courses when you know it could ruin them.

So then, out of the people running courses only Mark Homer and Phil Martin have done something about getting people to sign the petition. It seems Phil has done the most and is true to his word. I know people that have received the communication from him to ask them to sign up.

Has anyone heard anything from Glenn Armstrong, Mark I Anson, Simon Zutshi, Parmdeep Vadesha, Ranjan Bhatacharya (is he still going?), John Lee, Vincent Wong, and all the others?? It's a serious question because these people have great influence. Should we be targeting them more or do you think they'll all turn a blind eye whilst their selling training?

Reply to the comment left by "John McKay" at "01/08/2015 - 07:54":

Interestingly, the video ad embedded in the article from This Is Money still says that you can offset the interest against income, and there was no mention of the tax change. This is misleading and should be reported.

Reply to the comment left by "John McKay" at "01/08/2015 - 08:02":

I've just written to the Mail and asked them to remove the video and report on the tax changes.

A few points:
1. BTL's point about the lack of any consultation is very important, and the way landlords were completely deceived by the pro-business rhetoric of the Conservatives pre-election (whilst not saying anything about landlords) was despicable. And they have set up a consultation on the Wear and Tear issue (after making their decision on it!), but haven't dared do the same for this far bigger issue. That might be another question to pose under the 'Freedom of Information Act'!
This is also another reason why we must get the Parliamentary debate (because there was absolutely no discussion about it with key stakeholders and even the top economists couldn't believe they'd pulled this stupid idea out of the hat).
2. To avoid confusion, I think we all agree that there is only one message coming from us: to get the proposal reversed.
3. This does not mean that we can't show our willingness to agree to a consultation on other measures proposed by other groups. I think Connie's willingness to talk to Shelter is brilliant. Correct me if I'm wrong, that Shelter along with Labour have been very keen on the idea of longer tenancies. I'd have no problem with that, as long as there were some built-in safeguards, and for example, we were able to give notice if the tenants didn't pay the rent, were a nuisance to the neighbours, engaged in criminal activities etc. (aside from the drug farm and fire I had to deal with this year, I've now got another one where we suspect drug use and she's not paying the rent). This may be controversial among landlords.... But one of the messages to Shelter is that this proposal is going to create massive uncertainty and stress for tenants, higher rents and far more notices to quit being given. I don't think Shelter or Labour want that. It would be good if others could think of some key points Connie should make. I'm still hoping spareroom (who worked with Shelter on some issues this year, but told me they did not support Shelter's campaign work) will help publicise our petition, but the director is away a the moment and probably has to give his go-ahead.
This could be a very interesting development; if Shelter would support us and oppose this policy, we could offer them support on things they really want, which would help tenants. Amazingly, some people don't realise that most landlords want to have a good relationship with tenants and look after them. I have a fantastic relationship with many tenants, like to do them favours, will help lug their furniture about, go and let them in at all times when they've locked themselves out and I have never charged a penny for that etc. It would be really good if someone on here could think of just a couple of our good tenants who could become our advocates. When a group is invited up to Parliament to discuss this, an articulate and supportive tenant would be a critical member of the group. If we had a similar member of Shelter, wouldn't that be great!