Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "David Price" at "02/03/2016 - 17:55":

David, I can imagine you making the beds.... That is funny - good for you.

Of course the 10% W&T will become and earner for me rather than a loss never the less the notion it was n=money for nothing is simply not true as I could easily have spent to all and been in the same place. However rents will / have increased so that I am not pit of pocket because of it.

Of course the Tenant Tax is the big issue! I mentioned it in reply to a post about it so that others know what was what and what they may want to do to maintain the level or status quo where costs and replacements are concerned.

"Tory hopes of a UK economic revival were dealt another shattering blow as housebuilding activity plunged to its lowest level in nearly three years.

According to the Markit/CIPS construction purchasing managers’ index growth in the building sector sank to a 10 month low in February."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fresh-blow-george-osbornes-recovery-7482328

Reply to the comment left by "Appalled Landlord" at "02/03/2016 - 19:50":

Thank you for the heads up.

In a few days I should be all over this 🙂

The Independent reported on the 'profiteering' of institutions. And they are to be the saviours of the PRS. Yes, my arse they will be. The Build to Rent lot will be the same as the Build to Sell - going as high as they can with rents and as low as they can with costs...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-housebuilders-restricting-the-supply-of-new-houses-to-keep-prices-unnecessarily-high-a6906016.html

A friend has just returned from The Philippines where property in London is being widely advertised on the local television. 12.5% deposit and the rest in easy low interest payments.

In the country concerned Foreign nationals are not allowed to own real estate.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "02/03/2016 - 23:21":

Noteworthy article.

"Some senior Whitehall figures are concerned that because some smaller developers went bankrupt as a result of the financial crisis, the market is now dominated by a handful of big companies reluctant to increase output significantly."

In a free- market economy, competition between major builders should ensure the more/sooner houses built, the greater the profit.

Collusion????

If they can build houses in 4 weeks, but take 20 as quoted, they same money invested can be turned over 13 times, rather than 2.5 times.

But their profit margin is already 17.9 to 25% as quoted.

Very strong case to have council tax payable, at a graduated, increasing percentage, for each house that is not completed that could have been.

How I would love a profit margin of 18-25% of my money invested in rented properties.

It takes Gov, typified by Osborne, to royally screw things up like that!

If he dis-allowed their finance cost as an expense, what would happen then? Source, Goose, Gander?

I could add that with the tenant tax potentially bankrupting some PRS home providers, SDLT *intended* to deter, RtR checks, sloping playing fields, etc etc, leading to great uncertainty and foreboding in PRS, competition is reduced, hence intolerable upward pressure on rents. Freeze on HB, the homeless will find it incredibly difficult to be housed.

Less buy off-plan, Less refurb. More demand from migrants. Less Intergenerational Fairness. Potty George.

Only a rumour but could be a response to review one thing if it is landlords are in the firing line big time

http://www.propertytribes.com/removal-of-interest-relief-for-corporate-lls-t-127624029.html

Reply to the comment left by "Chris Byways" at "03/03/2016 - 07:57":

I do training for a couple of the big house building companies (one mentioned in the article). The project managers complaints (everyone moans to the trainer) don't suggest that it is at their level, but I'll see what I can find out next week.

Reply to the comment left by "NW Landlord" at "03/03/2016 - 10:58":

Yes NW the reality of C24 in its current form is that the effect could financially ruin Landlord A while giving Landlord B a boost in terms of market advantage.

Landlord A could be exceptionally professional and honest, giving very high levels of customer service to tenants, offering quality accommodation at a comparably cost effective price. On call 24-7-365 to deal with any issues instantly.

Landlord B could be a highly leveraged armchair investor, who does not provide the same standards, very unprofessional, almost uncontactable and does very little other than: (1) receiving the rent from local letting agent and (2) telling that agent to up the rent every year. BUT bought his/her BTL(s) using a Ltd company they created online in less than an hour.

I know some LLs who fit perfectly into category A and others into category B.

But given that Landlord B is a technically a ‘corporate’, surely GO will find it much harder to go after him/her without simultaneously attacking all George’s wealthy ‘corporate’ LL chums, who might have been the folks who gave him the nod to conjure up C24 in the first place?