Landlord Crusader: Why landlords should not share equity profits with renters

An additional thought:
If I own a property for say 20 years and have had a succession of tenants, all good, who have lived there over the period of ownership.
When I sell after 20 years and make a profit how do I split the profits?
During the period of ownership the value of the property could have gone up and down. Does every tenant get a share of my profit depending on how long they have rented the property?
Utterly ridiculous idea to share the profits.

“Rent: a fixed amount of money that you pay regularly for the use of a room, house, car, television, etc. that someone else owns”. Cambridge Dictionary

exactly !
if any tenant of mine expects a share of the equity , they are very welcome to raise a deposit , the stamp duty , legal fees , valuation fees , mortgage fees and we can buy a property together and they also must put in the same work and money as me to fix it up and get it compliant and pay the mortgage / council tax whilst it's vacant and take on the commitment of it and responsibility and solve the problems of it.
I bet if I asked all my tenants if they would like to do this with me , I expect none of them would take up the offer .

Although I feel your pain, I wonder if you are being sent in a spin by those who know who how to pull our strings.
This is not an attack on Landlords, it is much bigger than this. They want you to believe it is about landlords, it is not. It is about property rights.
There is a concerted movement in the direction of removing all kinds of rights, both civil and human over the last many years, but it has accelerated over the last 4.
We are moving ever so towards a socialist/fascist society. This is not fantasy, it is fact.
Look at the calls for rent controls, look at the calls for removing private property rights, in New York even.
Wake up and smell the coffee people. If you do not know or stand on your rights you have none. This is not a matter of minutia detail of who deserves what, it is fundamental to the structure of our society and it is being eroded.
At the peak of the issue is the debasement of our currency. THIS is the main factor that underpins all our socio-economic problems. I imagine only 1% of you actually know what money is and how is it created at the reserve level. And it will only be that same percentage of us who understand that our money is debt.
This is a system of usury, and those who are the lenders are calling in their loans. The fiat currency system is on it's last legs, and those who control it are running for the life boats while they leave us to argue over the scraps.
This argument of who should get equity in a property is a distraction. It is an argument over scraps.

why is this even a question in the first place? No debate/discussion required. The tenant rents. It doesn't matter who owns the property - it is being rented from them. The process of renting does not entitle the user to a share of anything. They are essentially hiring something for a period of time until that contractual period ends.

Housing is just being used as a political football. Easy to kick and been seen to score a goal in the oppositions net.

Reply to the comment left by howdidigethere at 07/07/2023 - 10:42
Effectively it's the broad imposition of capitocommunism; you are right, mist don't see beyond the headlines.

Reply to the comment left by john isaacs at 07/07/2023 - 10:12
Fred and Tom each by a house next door to each other. Neither had a mortgage: inherited money.
Fred rents his out for 10 years during which time he has received £60,000 in rent. He also had repairs and a few hassles but things were generally ok. Tom leaves his empty and just keeps on paying for the odd minor repair.
After 10 years they decide to sell; £250,000 had become £500,000.
Fred must give his tenant 25% of the profit: c.£60,000. Tom keeps his profit.
Question: of the two landlords who is the moron?
Question: why did Fred bother to run the risks of renting?
Question: what sub-species of imbecile thinks profit share is clever?
Question: why stop with residential? Why don’t the commercial tenants of all the banks, insurance companies, property companies, Oxbridge colleges, et al ask for a share too?
Question: why not just go straight to a slump and let everyone go hungry?
Question: why am I even bothering to write this?

It is absurd. What needs to be stated again and again is that buying, managing and renting out a property is a business. An owner (hate that landlord label) invests and expects a return. Most peoples pensions have some of the money invested in property, because it's a business. It would be like asking Tesco for a share of their profits because you shop there twice a week. It's absurd.

No doubt it would fall to the landlord to keep accurate records of tenancies together with arrangements for contacting all of them in future. Also, to have a property valued at the commencement and end of each tenancy so that a suitable apportionment of gain can be calculated? Hopefully it would only be relevant for long term tenancies, perhaps of a minimum of 5 years?
Whatever, it would add more expense and admin requirement to the lot of us private landlords. So much for the Brexit promise of cutting red tape.

I am a landlord!
I can’t wait until this sharing the capital gains profit comes in with retrospective rules, so I can go back to my two previous tenants from two properties I sold, one with a £35k loss and one with a 30k loss and say you owe me half of that loss!!!!!!!

Being a landlord is great (NOT)

Reply to the comment left by Paul Chetwyn at 07/07/2023 - 12:32
Don't worry yourself, only a share of any gains will be duly forwarded to former tenants. Losses will be ring-fenced for your own personal delectation, and be deductible against any future gains you may have - no doubt after you have also shared such gains with tenants!