ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I think the "mixed development" thing was something put out by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, but I'm not sure if it was a policy idea or was actually legislated for.
What housing shortage?
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
I think the "mixed development" thing was something put out by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, but I'm not sure if it was a policy idea or was actually legislated for.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Hardly an effect that couldn't have easily been predicted, either, given the scarcity of social housing just about everywhere in the UK.
Still, isn't a "captive market" of tenants ever so convenient for the buy-to-letters? One might almost think that current housing policy had been constructed with Landlordism in mind.
Still, isn't a "captive market" of tenants ever so convenient for the buy-to-letters? One might almost think that current housing policy had been constructed with Landlordism in mind.
there is also the tax breaks on property based pensions .. can't remember what they are called .. there was a big argument from the left to get them taken away as they were stoking teh BTL market but brown held firm!
Stardark
'Cause I'm an asshole...
I hope there are sinks of some kind on the other side...These urinals in Amsterdam seem like a good idea to solve the problem.
We probably do have a housing shortage at the end of the day, but the question certainly is 'Why?' Lack of vision and funding are probably foremost, because the best constructed housing isn't going to last forever, and now we have the prospect of climate change restricting our options for new build ('fear of flooding' is the new NIMBY-ism, down our way at least).
It's funny in a way. I'm sure a lot of people thought that because we put a man on the moon, we could avoid the fate of every other civilisation, but the decline always catches up, un-noticed until it's way too late...
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
Has anyone given any thought to the people who are so poor that buying a house is a fairytale, even if buy to let was abolished etc...?
For these people (who have to rent), buy to let is good, because more people renting accommodation drives the average rental price down.
For these people (who have to rent), buy to let is good, because more people renting accommodation drives the average rental price down.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
That's a pretty facile argument, given the fact that private rental is more often than not unavailable to people on benefits, is not subject to the same rent controls/affordability criteria as social housing and is also prone to the "area average" rent effect, where areas become populated by those who can afford to rent there, rather than the rental prices descending. It's one of the phenomena that causes the modern-day suburbanisation of the "working classes", pushing them to the economic and geographic periphery.
mentalchik
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit."
My income is way too low to ever buy a house and also way too low to private rent. Private rentals have gone sky high here over the last 10 years i don't see any evidence that BTL has driven rent down at all !
In fact if last year i hadn't had the very good luck (and i mean luck) to get a HA flat (myself and my son were sleeping on sofas at my mums at the time) i would be totally fucked housing wise. Even the HA rent takes more than a quarter of my income, it just went up 6.25 % !
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
IMO the problem is that many people (DapperDon included, by the looks of it) are projecting a classic economic argument (supply and demand) onto a situation (BtL) where the circumstances (especially the over-extension of the buy-to-letters themselves) mean that supply is constrained (two reasons I can think of, off the top of my head, are; 1) the necessity of achieving a rental price of a certain amount, and 2) in light of that necessity and it's non-achievability, the need to keep the property "pristine" for easier sellling on).
My income is way too low to ever buy a house and also way too low to private rent. Private rentals have gone sky high here over the last 10 years i don't see any evidence that BTL has driven rent down at all !
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
Your argument makes no sense. You say that the buy to letters have overextended themselves, yet in spite of a stagnating market and a need to make up mortgage payments they are stubbornly waiting for tenants to materialise to pay their excessive rents or house prices to go up again. I think this is highly unlikely - what would you rather happen as a btl landlord, run out of money and have the bank repossess or lower your asking price a bit?
If anything, btl landlords have increased the supply of housing by taking on the construction risk in developments that would probably not have been built if a substantial amount of sales had not been made off plan.
What about people who aren't on benefits and who are extremely low down on housing lists but who can't afford a mortgage? Should someone's right to housing be dismissed by policymakers because they have a job?
Because there certainly exist people in this category who have been able to rent because of new properties coming onto the market in the way I've described: either directly, or by trading up from lower quality accommodation that they would have rented otherwise, and that now is free for someone (presumably earning less) to rent. It is thus clearly a Good Thing. Now if I was shown evidence that btl landlords are competing directly for existing housing stock with renters and ordinary housebuyers then I would be more inclined to agree with you, but that is a different question.
btw. I've never heard of the 'area average' rent effect. "Areas become populated by those that can afford to rent there"
Profound.
p.s. You might want to take a minute to consider that perhaps prices aren't dropping because of a rise in demand, because you're looking at too small a time slice, or even that people are biding their time in the current climate before buying. All these options seem to me to be more logical than your characterisation of the average 'overextended' landlord.
If anything, btl landlords have increased the supply of housing by taking on the construction risk in developments that would probably not have been built if a substantial amount of sales had not been made off plan.
What about people who aren't on benefits and who are extremely low down on housing lists but who can't afford a mortgage? Should someone's right to housing be dismissed by policymakers because they have a job?
Because there certainly exist people in this category who have been able to rent because of new properties coming onto the market in the way I've described: either directly, or by trading up from lower quality accommodation that they would have rented otherwise, and that now is free for someone (presumably earning less) to rent. It is thus clearly a Good Thing. Now if I was shown evidence that btl landlords are competing directly for existing housing stock with renters and ordinary housebuyers then I would be more inclined to agree with you, but that is a different question.
btw. I've never heard of the 'area average' rent effect. "Areas become populated by those that can afford to rent there"
Profound.
p.s. You might want to take a minute to consider that perhaps prices aren't dropping because of a rise in demand, because you're looking at too small a time slice, or even that people are biding their time in the current climate before buying. All these options seem to me to be more logical than your characterisation of the average 'overextended' landlord.
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
My income is way too low to ever buy a house and also way too low to private rent. Private rentals have gone sky high here over the last 10 years i don't see any evidence that BTL has driven rent down at all !
But the question is has BTL actually harmed you?
If you couldn't buy a house, you weren't in competition with the buy to letters who bought the houses in your area, because you were a long way off from being able to afford them (and they weren't available to let). Its not like they priced you out of the market or anything.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Hmmm, your argument presupposes that all buy-to-letters are "of a type" in that they'd accept a non-deductible loss (i.e. a less than break-even rent) rather than garner a premium (or even a higher price on auction after repossession) for the dwelling being unlived-in. I think that is "highly unlikely".
The supply does not increase if the BtL landlords don't rent out, and of course "off-plan" purchases have the benefit of being cheaper than the "retail" price of a property in the development, so perhaps that makes what I suggest above even more likely.
Of course not, I wasn't aware that I'd even implied that such should be the case (because I haven't actually implied that such should be the case).
And yet all I hear, especially from my w/c mates, is that rental and purchase prices continue to hold or even rise, not that they've fallen. Perhaps they live in the "wrong" areas, eh?
No, just a rather obvious truth.
Ah, so your argument is predicated on what may happen, rather than on what has and is?
You could have made life a lot easier by admitting that what you're peddling is fantasy a bit earlier.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Flats in Manchester seem to be bearing the brunt of the property downturn.
A viewing revealed empty flat after empty flat on sale at half their original price - evidence that investors' dreams of amassing buy-to-let fortunes have been reduced to ashes by fire sales.
With its double-height living room and views across the Pennines and Manchester's city centre, the two-bedroom apartment in a converted Victorian biscuit factory must have seemed fairly priced to Christopher Williams at £236,500. []
Now, three years on, Williams's outlay for a slice of the city-living dream looks ridiculous. His flat has been repossessed and will go under the auctioneer's hammer tomorrow with a guide price of £100,000. []
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/mar/25/houseprices.housingmarket
A viewing revealed empty flat after empty flat on sale at half their original price - evidence that investors' dreams of amassing buy-to-let fortunes have been reduced to ashes by fire sales.
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
Okay I agree with you - these landlords are a very special type of landlord who aren't at all interested in making money. In fact the only reason they exist is to gain sexual gratification from seeing people less wealthy than them unable to rent or buy.
Also, all of these landlords aren't falling for that obvious trick of selling before their portfolios crash and burn, as described in the above post, because clearly that would be silly, because stagnating house prices are actually an illusion of the evil capitalist system.
Similar threads
- Poll
