Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "Douglas Barley" at "08/01/2016 - 10:07":

I warm to the thought of bringing this government down (more specifically GO) but unfortunately the government (more specifically GO) will bring down landlords first and in the process make a large number of families homeless.

The reason why this should be considered a good thing eludes me.

Reply to the comment left by "David Price" at "08/01/2016 - 11:06":

The alternative being a government led by that nice Mr Corbyn and containing all the new MPs selected by his newly-emboldened constituency parties.

Beware of letting go of Nurse, for fear of finding something worse.

It's a pity we didn't get David Davies as leader of the Conservative party, with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight.

Hi NW Landlord, i'm hoping you are 'Steo' from the Telegraph posting. I'm 'Staff' - short for Stafford.
Once you've confirmed i've contacted the correct person i'd love to swap contact details, given the areas that you operate we may be able to do some business together.

Reply to the comment left by "Douglas Barley" at "08/01/2016 - 10:07":

Hi Doug, George here,

You said:
"If we act as one then the likes of Osborne will have to sit up and take notice. My only concern is that we are hurting the people who often cannot afford to pay more – I am a landlord with a conscious but firstly have to look after myself and family – I will stand to loose about £35k a year. There will without question be a lot of extra homeless people and those who want to buy a house will never be able to save enough for deposit."

Just call me George old boy!

I don't give a toss about your tenants being homeless - they were never going to be Tory Voters.

But think of all those grateful ex-tenants now first time buyers that WILL vote for me!

I know just who I am screwing. So Tough!

Regards, George.

Yes you have the right man didn't want to swap details on that forum with all those landlord haters on there what a pack of wolves they are

My email is steo40@hotmail.com if you want to email me your details and I'll give u a bell

I commented last about 300 pages ago....shot down for a contra view that more changes were on the way. It was, and not least stamp duty. Basel III pending and I can see all interest only loans requiring plans in place to be repaid over a 25 year period or before planned retirement - to protect individuals and the banks.

BTL expansion was too much, the purpose of these changes is not to stop BTL but to stem its growth. Not enough houses, prices rising, therefore stem the flow of buyers.

Those who have held dozens of houses but not incorporated are running huge businesses but using a tax regime originally designed to facilitate a simple taxation method for individuals who own one or two investments. Government has seen this expansion and stopped it.

Those with modest claims need to review their plan. Those tied in with 40 plus properties and debts running into millions (not incorporated) need to get to the back of a very very long line of businesses and individuals who feel badly done to with regulatory, legal, taxation changes.

Carry on with the calls for rent increases and make comparisons to other businesses - I am sure the government may listen. If they do the best to expect is that rental income will be taxed like a sole trader. And the lending limits will be assessed accordingly ie £500pcm is £6000pa allows 3 times that = £18K borrowing over 10 years, repayment basis, just like other businesses.

One sold last year, one on the market this month, then one more and I should be mortgage free. Been doing this for 16 years I would expect anyone in business to be able to do the same, otherwise what have they been doing with their profits and gains over that period?

So I have been impacted too, I just think my view is in a country where many can't afford one house I am not going to defend my position of owning 10.

Reply to the comment left by "adam prospect" at "08/01/2016 - 22:08":

Some will have used their profits to pay down their mortgages sooner rather than later . Some though will have used their profits to expand and invest in more property with a view to selling eventually as their exit strategy .

Both equally valid investment models. Buying BTL property is facilitated by a bona fide well recognised and fit for purpose BTL mortgage industry .This model though has now been suddenly attacked without warning with an unprecedented tax hike putting 25 year business plans in jeopardy. Cash buyers have not faced the same kind of cull.
Thats unfair and unjust .

I don`t think the comparison between having to defend owning 10 houses where many cannot afford even one is comparing like with like. Its not a moral issue. If it was 10 residential houses dotted around the country lying empty except when i choose one for my own use then maybe yes that would be harder to defend.

But 10 houses bought as part of business is different. A car dealer may own 10 cars on his forecourt where many people have only maybe one but he doesnt not have to defend that. People understand why. Because thats his business. Like houses they are just a tool of his business but would never attract such a moral battering as landlords do when they use houses as a tool of their business. I personally dont feel the need to morally defend owning dozens of properties
..
.

Some VERY interesting comments following this (9 month old) article, from both sides of the fence.
https://competitionandmarkets.blog.gov.uk/2015/03/13/private-rented-housing-problems-for-tenants-on-a-low-income/

Basically I would conclude if the PRS Housing Providers are not given more assistance with the lower end of the market, they will be forced to exit almost completely.

"Over a fifth of the poorest 10% of households now rent privately. In England, households living in the private rented sector on average spend more of their monthly expenditure on housing (35%) than those who are social renters (29%) or owner occupiers (18%)."

Ironically if PRS standards and rents increase (as the myriad of legislation make inevitable) the 35% figure will fall - as the PRS would not be housing the poorest 10%. Odd.

Reply to the comment left by "Jonathan Clarke" at "08/01/2016 - 23:07":

Thanks, appreciate the reply and made me reflect. Morals implies I am suggesting BTL as a deliberate act was wrong but I was not saying that. I was saying I am not fighting to retain my status quo when I know others are struggling. I am saying the record has changed and so has my dance. If you try dance to the previous record you will be out of step.

A fleet of cars is not purchased on interest only debt. The supply of vehicles is not a current political resource issue. There is not a generation of younger people unable to buy cars.

There are 2 BTL models and the expansion leveraged one always carried more risk. It carries little sympathy with others. To expect anyone not in our position to support us is at best naive.

Some of the figures on this thread are frightening. Maybe not frightening enough for some - but common sense always pointed to some small tweak and model tumbles. Tax change is a warning and the thin end of the wedge.

Reply to the comment left by "adam prospect" at "09/01/2016 - 06:26":

I see where you are coming from and yes like you there are competing forces in my mind as to where does my personal wealth goals fit in with the countries wealth goals

. I have a business to run and I guess I don`t see it as my job to solve the wider political / social problems of the country. I will do my bit for the homeless and I do . I empathise hugely with their predicament. But I can make money and provide them with a safe warm bed for the night at the same time.

So I tend to kick up if I feel disproportionally disadvantaged when compared to other businesses. The car dealer may not have interest loans on the cars themselves but may take out a huge commercial business loan to buy the premises to hold them. I presume he can offset that loan as a legitimate business expense.?

Why should a car dealer selling 50K cars ( a complete luxury item) not be penalised whereas as me who provides social housing ( a complete necessity item ) be taxed out of existence

Some things were totally socially acceptable 20 years ago ( eg smoking in pubs/ restaurants) Today the exact opposite is the norm. The public mood can change but it takes time. Naivety can be the precursor to vision! The landlord today gets bad press as we know. My tenants though are very grateful for the service i provide. The council / government/ housing associations / charities cannot provide what they actually need or want despite their rhetoric. I fill that gap and provide that service and indeed necessity. Some people will never own their own home. That is indeed not even the goal or aspiration for some. We fill their need and the countries need. I think i should get good press not bad press.

So I do expect in time more and more people will support what we do. I believe ignorance and popular culture are the obstacles to overcome. But because humans learn so slowly this may take 10 years or so. Popular culture will only change when it affects the majority not the minority.

To achieve that I fear the very sad fact is we have to see 100`s of starving / homeless people on our streets begging for food and shelter. Only when enough of us cannot go about your normal business without being constantly asked for £1 for a bag of chips will the mood change.

They will start to ask where are all the landlords now. We will shrug our shoulders and say sorry tried to help but 10 years ago were taxed out of existence. ... Oh i didnt realise that they will say. I always was led to believe you were the enemy now i see it in a different light . What a stupid government. Now where is that petition you wanted me to sign.... Thanks i will saywith a wry smile but you are 10 years too late .

Only when tent cities spring up and there are 20 homeless outside the train station / supermarket / John Lewis and you literally have to step around them to get inside rather than the odd one at the moment will the tide turn in our favour . The traditional anti brigade like the homeless charities / councils will begin to work with us rather than against us . The damage of course will largely have been done by then of course but thats where we are in my view

My council was really anti 10 / 15 years ago. Now they have a landlord liaison officer, a dedicated welfare team etc . They pay deposit and rents in advance for the HB tenants ( I had £1300 yesterday for a homeless tenant ) . Years ago they wouldn't have dreamed of doing that. But now they court me because I am a dying breed. They are desperate to find accommodation for their ever growing homeless lists.

This is the lull before the storm.

The homeless situation is going to get much worse and rapidly now due to these tax measures. Yes something has to be done to curb BTL landlords taking over the world but this is going about it the wrong way

I see myself as part of the solution and part of the problem.