overlander

Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged

10,664 posts in this topic

26 minutes ago, mat109 said:

This is part of our problem. BTL = no risk. These people have few other options with their money that they understand, so property is the only way.

Its not their money.

BTL offers insane leverage. Thats it.

It appears to make money as they are so fcking leverage that a good wind will see them make money.

However, that leverage bites you in the ar5e when IRs go up or a void kicks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, mat109 said:

Perpetual HPI is strong with this one.

in fact although he briefly moved out and lived in the rental property, the area is quite rough and the neighbours threatened him so he soon moved back in.

And a people farmer. Tenant scum must suffer, but my ex couldn't possibly live there.

I'm reluctant to take risks on stocks and shares etc.

This is part of our problem. BTL = no risk. These people have few other options with their money that they understand, so property is the only way.

 

People are not mindless animals. 

BTL = high risk (unregulated until recently), ever higher prices, young priced out Generation Rent Forever - from my point of view, and those of all my renter-saver family and friends.

And high risk which has recently (2015) manifested it to their core-voter huge egos with Section 24 announced, and set to begin this year.  Together with other measures.  Only now seeing many of the BTLers scramble.  One having to look at remortgaging his own mortgage home, with big debt on 5 other Cambridge houses he has claims on.

Other people might have danced into BTL with world-view you suggest ("no risk - understand property") but that is their own sovereign market view.  Their choices and their decisions.

Perhaps you should bail them out then, if they ever begin losing from their mad-gainz positions of the here-and-now?

Sweetest BTL innocence?  'Victims of.... err someone else, cause they assume low risk and forever HPI and dumb renters'.   ??

 Own choices.  Active part of rentierism and causing problems for others.   '"Providing homes for people who can't afford to buy' being something they all too happily lie to themselves about. 

Splendid superior isolation, yet innocence/victims with claims on 1+ 10+ 30+ houses?   I can't do anything about those BTLers still buying today.   So many not realising about S24.  Another one on PT the other day who has bought 3 houses last year and only just found out about S24.   We're in a market, and may friends and family been outbid by BTLers, and farmed for rent by them, for many years.

All the BTLers suddenly 'become less stupid'  when tenants tell them about their issues... repairs/short of rent/arrears.

Blod, on 03 Apr 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:snapback.png

I can't blame the banks, they need BTL gristle for their grinder. Their attitude makes them ideal.

BTL is fiscal fly paper. Entrapping those of a certain mindset. I remember a conversation once where a colleague announced that her husband's pension lump sum was being put into 'bricks and mortar'. One wag quipped 'faites vos jeux' , place your bets in French. She couldn't understand the need to diversify and treat all advice as sales patter. It emerged that they had 'friends' who had followed that route and were willing to share their inside contact.

A BTL and their money as soon parted.

 

On 4/3/2016 at 11:13 AM, Neverwhere said:

+ 1

A culture which does not value its young and presumes that they are somehow less than human - that they lack basic human desires for home, security, family - and should bear the majority of the costs of society with few of the benefits is deeply unhealthy, and ultimately self-destructive.

No fully functioning human adult is so stupid that they can't learn to practice caution if they know that noone else is watching their back, and that the consequences of their poor decisions won't be forced onto those who actually are innocent of making them.

The only way for them to successfully learn that is for them to be allowed to fail. Those who believe that society will always protect them from the consequences of their own actions will always be able to find something so ingeniously foolish and foolhardy that it was not accurately predicted or immediately understood by those who should supposedly be protecting against it.

"Easy money and HPI forever for me" - and - "mug renters / not enough homes / foreverHPI / inflation wipes away debt" worldview for their renters for many BTLers.  

Homeownership for me - my renterierism for you.  No innocence.  Own choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BTL = high risk (unregulated until recently), ever higher prices, young priced out Generation Rent Forever - from my point of view, and those of all my renter-saver family and friends

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Quote

Other people might have danced into BTL with world-view you suggest ("no risk - understand property") but that is their own sovereign market view.  Their choices and their decisions

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mat109 said:

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

 

**** em then!  They made their own sovereign choices.  Many will still come out mad-gainz up.  It's a market out there!

BTLers not allowing tenants to live rent free!  BTLers care very little about other people being able to afford homeownership for themselves.   BTLers bought up millions of homes and been active housing financialisation participants.

Yet I have a SIPP and a Stocks and Shares ISA, standard savings accounts...... and take my chances are part of a balanced investment portfolio, without being any high finance mind.  

I have to make my own choices in the world, and try to make productive choices which are a win-win, but take losses (get burnt) here and there, from time to time, regardless, against gains in other investments and income from work.

It is called LIFE.   There is no one around to ensure you win-win-win and cuddles , or hold onto magnicient MAD GAINZ, whatever mad/risky/selfish/destrutive choices you choose to participate in to extremes.  "EGO core voters deserving" - no.

Other people take other choices, including having own home, MEW, more debt, buy more BTLs, more BTLs still.... more more and more houses, to house other people in a price bubble.    

"Unsophisticated innocents"  - or greedy reckless selfish *****?   I have my view.  And in times past markets have found out such people.

I like to call it a market.  We can all have risk profiles for wold around us.  Adult market participants.  Housing bubble in many areas.   It's a market out there - not a BTL forgiveness fest, after millions of others take the pain from those BTLers own actions!

There is no moaning on this thread - unless you are intent on bringing it -  it is for fun and celebrations, in tracking the fall out on the BTLers.

Many a HPCer has been firm on the view that BTL would stop.  That something would come along to break their advantages and grip on the market.  That they were doubling down into trouble ahead.  So many BTLers did not want to know, treating us as inferior (tenants generally - Generation Rent Forever) as they doubled-down into BTL.  Their own choices.

I will allow someone else to field the technical aspects of your concern of BTLers being treated as "missold".  

The political risk has manifested itself with S24...  Is that pity?

What about the Government/MP response to all the core-voter begging letters from BTLers in recent times, who complain they're set for bankruptcy with S24?   Cold response.   Is that any sign of pity / missold-bailout future?

I do like to consider all aspects/risks, but there is only so much gloomy thinking (BTLers as "missold" unregulated mortgages against £180Bn BTL lending double down just since 2010) I will allow myself against all the optimistic evidence (S24) and higher level concept thinking that exists on this thread/forum - we've already had all the pain and gloom years -imo.   This thread was begun in celebration and fun at the SHOCK huge political turn on the BTLers!

The secret was to think of everything, or - because maybe the Culture was right, and only a machine could literally do that - just to be so in tune with what was going on that you thought automatically of all the important and potentially important things, and ignored the rest.   With something of a shock, Horza realised that his own obsessive drive never to make a mistake, always to think of everything, was not so unlike the fetishistic urge which he so despised in the Culture.

-Consider Phlebas

BTLers have no pity for my friends and family.  So many of them thinking they are doing us the favour.  Others yet pretend they are like a family friend to their tenants...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, mat109 said:

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

 

The very fact you (and many others it has to be said) see the BTLers as such mindless innocents, troubles me.

Ever higher house prices, and so much pavement licking excuses for those on the BTL people-farming side - who make their own adult choices - which millions of tenants rent, unable and unwilling to pay prices BTLers been paying for houses.

I take my position.  There is no pity/bailout position coming for the BTLers as your 'unsophisticated investors' (diddums).  People farming greedsters for the most part, who don't walk a mile in tenants shoes, despite mixing with them time over for inspections and reference checks.

Magnificently covered by Neverwhere, imo.

There is a severe conflict of interest in this market, and I am on the side of the young/priced out + future generations.  Not BTLers with 2, 5, 10, 30+ houses.... going to their MPs in shock about S24, claiming they are providing homes...  too many greedy claims on multiple properties, in self-centered world-views.

Neverwhere, on 22 Oct 2015 - 1:20 PM, said:snapback.png

 

 

Thsurer, on 22 Oct 2015 - 08:29 AM, said:snapback.png

As a landlord, with 7 properties that I have bought over 15 years instead of putting money into a bankrupt pension plan, I feel I only have three options:

 

1: Sell up. This will put seven families on the street or facing higher rental costs as demand falls. It will also turn my pension into a single pot of cash in the bank - and I don't trust bankers - and that's useless as a pension to live on, I need income

 

The Government wants their cake and to eat it and the poor will pay for it. And all the landlord haters who are so happy now, will not be smiling when the homeless come knocking on their door and start sleeping outside their offices.

 

 

Not all pension plans are bankrupt and there are other investment options, you should think about taking them.

 

Then it was very silly indeed to enter into high risk financial arrangements with bankers by taking what would have been your savings and leveraging them against investment properties via buy-to-let financing from bankers.

 

When you put cash in the bank then it is protected under FSCS and, while you might not get the best return on it, you cannot lose the cash that you put in. The bankers cannot take you savings if they are in cash.

 

When you use your cash as deposit for a buy-to-let property then, if you are forced to sell at a time and in a manner not of your choosing, you risk losing all of that money and more. Gearing works the same way on the way down as it does on the way up, it magnifies price movements. If property prices decline then you can lose all of your deposit and then you keep on losing money.

 

Because you have chosen to enter into high risk financial arrangments with bankers you have chosen to put not only your savings, but any other sources of income you might have at risk. The bankers can force you to sell at a time of their choosing and thus crystallize whatever financial position your investments are in at that point, whether positive or negative.

 

Buy-to-let is an investment activity. It has no consumer protection. You have specifically chosen to put your savings into something where you have given up that protection from bankers and are instead entirely reliant on the bankers doing the right thing by you.

 

What's more that is the only reason that the investment decisions that you have made exist for you to make: the lack of consumer protection is what allows the bankers to offer you financially risky interest only finance and thus to be able to leverage your tenant's wages (via the medium of rent) to a greater extent than they are able to do so themselves.

 

[...]As others have mentioned other landlords exiting won't increase demand (one less rental property + one new family of owner occupiers = no change in demand for rental properties) and will likely decrease the average wages of the remaining renters (as those who are in the best positions financially take the opportunity to buy) which is likely to put downwards pressure on rents.

 

Also rents are intrinsically tied to wages - bankers aren't offering anyone interest only loans to pay their rental costs - and so renters can only pay what their wages will afford or, in poorer areas, what the LHA will artificially raise them to. They literally cannot pay more than their wages minus taxes and necessities and they will likely rebel before that point. If you try to increase rents above the level that the local market will bear then you will simply end up with voids and arrears.

 

Whereas you don't own any of these properties. You are simply renting them from bankers, whilst risking your savings and carrying all of the risks on the bankers' behalf, and then attempting to charge a higher rent to your tenants. Note that if at any point the bankers demand a higher rent from you this does not mean that you tenants will be able to pay you a higher rent in turn. You have given the bankers all of the power.

 

Many tenants would prefer to be owner occupiers so a contracted rental sector would be a good thing.

 

Rent is not tied to landlords' costs it's tied to tenants' wages. What's more many landlords have very little or no leverage and so they will be in a very good position to out compete leveraged investors like yourself by keeping rents at a reasonable level.

 

The total stock of housing in the country won't change - former buy-to-let properties are not going to be demolished - and so there is no logical reason to think that a contracted rental sector would lead to any increase in rough sleeping.

 

 

Mortgage costs are not being treated as income.

 

If you think that they are then you do not understand the changes at all and I suggest you read up on them further. Rental income is being treated as income (and therefore increasing rents - if you can - will increase tax liabilities).

 

Finance costs are simply no longer a deductible expense, as with all other investments, though they will still attract a tax break of 20% that isn't available to any other investment class and so buy-to-let is still getting special and favorable treatment under the new arrangments.

 

All residential mortgages are paid out of taxed income with no tax breaks whatsoever, unlike buy-to-let which will still gets a 20% tax break against finance costs even once these changes are phased in.

 

All residential mortgages are subject to MMR and must effectively be on a repayment basis, whereas buy-to-let is still largely interest only and thus poses a potential risk to financial stability.

 

There is nothing that legally stops a buy-to-letter from owning their own home - indeed I understand that many bankers require this as an additional asset that they may repossess in the event of arrears and negative equity - and thus enjoying the tax arrangements available to owner occupiers.

 

What's more buy-to-letters are competing with first time buyers for properties, not existing owner occupiers.

 

MMR-constrained first time buyers who have been out competed on price by leveraged investors using high risk interest only buy-to-let financing do not benefit from the tax arrangements available to owner occupiers and so these are irrelevant.

 

The only tax arrangments that are relevant are those that apply to financing costs and first time buyers are still at a disadvantage as they still have to pay theirs entirely out of taxed income and with no tax reliefs, whereas leveraged buy-to-let investors are still going to be able to claim a 20% tax relief on finance costs.

 

There is a strong argument to be made that this remaining tax break should be phased out as well.

 

 

Sorry to disappoint but far from some irrational and emotive personal dislike this is simply an overriding conflict of interestwe (people in general) want to own the homes that we live in and you (landlords in general) want to own the homes that we live in.

 

Both groups can't reach a mutually satisfactory arrangement because the two positions are mutually exclusive: the more landlords get what they want (our homes) the more people in general are denied what they want (their own homes).

 

Unless you're all planning on irrationally demolishing your investment properties there is no reason whatsoever to think that the government being slightly less encouraging towards leveraged property investment (remembering when all is said and done there is still a 20% tax break on offer for such) will lead to any increase in homelessness.

 

Claiming that it will is both illogical and an implicit admission that your own fate - as a leveraged investor who has been, up until this point, profiting off the back of high risk deals that you chose to make with bankers of your own free will - is unlikely to bother anyone at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mat109 said:

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

Theres going to be nothing slow about BTL getting burnt.

Most leveraged - over 50% LTV - with 3+ BTLs will be bust in 2 years time.

Its going to be that quick.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mat109 said:

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

They are not investors, they are very leveraged speculators.

The rules on investments and being bailed out all hinges on whether the investor is regarded as a professional/commercial investor.

A compensation scheme for endowments was OK as they were missold and the buyer was lied too.

BTL is commercial lending. There will be no compensation. If you are buying a house to rent out it ill be assumed that you have sought professional advise.

The last point cannot be stressed enough - no bailout, no sympathy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As @spyguy above. 

And not all the BTLers going to lose out - IF IF IF the market yet turns in many areas.   Prices are mad high in my areas of interest.  

So many big BTLers ("innocent unsophisticated special-case investors" according to some) on mad-gainz, will still come out with big unearned wealth way above many young people ability to ever save.  

Some may be made bankrupt but that's not death.   Those BTLers can become renters themselves later, and begin again.  Those BTLers believe renting great lifestyle choice for young people now.

He gazed into the alien eyes. And saw nothing. No pity, no compassion, no spirit of kindness or sorrow. He looked into those eyes, and at first he thought of the look criminals had sometimes, when they'd been sentenced to a quick death. 

Yet although, in that instant of recognition, the doomed convict was the first image Bermoiya clutched at, he knew immediately it was not the fit one. 

Then he knew. And suddenly, for the first time in his life, he understood what it was for the condemned to look into his eyes.

He fell. To his knees at first, thudding down on to the board, cracking raised areas, then forward, on to his face, eyes level with the board, seeing it from the ground at last. He closed his eyes.

-Player of Games

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Venger said:

The very fact you (and many others it has to be said) see the BTLers as such mindless innocents, troubles me.

This is - although perhaps clumsily put - my point. Go onto any BTL forum and marvel at their inability to string two sentences together or argue with any coherence, or make rational decisions. These aren't the creme of society, they are participants in a get rich quick scheme who lack the skills and empathy to see the danger.

I wouldn't be too troubled. For me, It's an explanation of thier behaviour (poorly informed, greedy, stupid) rather than a justification or a reason to bail them out. I have sympathy for anyone who loses their shirt, even if they deserved it or spent said shirt on a socially damaging bandwagon. Doesn't mean I or anyone else have to pay for it. 

However, if it becomes politically expedient, a politician will do anything, but with - as you say - a declining core vote and increasing public hostility towards BTLrs this seems unlikely.

I completely agree with you that their effect on aggregate is destructive (many know this) and many individually abuse their position with a breathtaking lack of empathy.There is a thread (I can't find it now - possibly disappeared down the 'memory hole' they have over there) from 118 where BTLs discuss why they themselves would hate to rent which I found astounding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, mat109 said:

This is - although perhaps clumsily put - my point. Go onto any BTL forum and marvel at their inability to string two sentences together or argue with any coherence, or make rational decisions. These aren't the creme of society, they are participants in a get rich quick scheme who lack the skills and empathy to see the danger.

I wouldn't be too troubled. For me, It's an explanation of thier behaviour (poorly informed, greedy, stupid) rather than a justification or a reason to bail them out. I have sympathy for anyone who loses their shirt, even if they deserved it or spent said shirt on a socially damaging bandwagon. Doesn't mean I or anyone else have to pay for it. 

However, if it becomes politically expedient, a politician will do anything, but with - as you say - a declining core vote and increasing public hostility towards BTLrs this seems unlikely.

I completely agree with you that their effect on aggregate is destructive (many know this) and many individually abuse their position with a breathtaking lack of empathy.There is a thread (I can't find it now - possibly disappeared down the 'memory hole' they have over there) from 118 where BTLs discuss why they themselves would hate to rent which I found astounding.

I read such a thread on a different BTL forum a few months ago.  

Smart bragging homeowners themselves and how they couldn't possibly ever live as a renter where they only had couple of months notice -  but making themselves out as the big cuddly house providers as BTLers.  One of them projecting how his portfolio is set to be worth £8 million in future despite S24.

I am on side of renter-savers, priced out, and for widespread homeownership future.

At the moment prices are in bubble in my area, and seen friends and family outbid for years by BTLers, with properties coming back to RM rental market soon after completing.

You see just one narrow type of BTLers on some forums.   There are many many BTLers.   

There's an accountant on HPC who is a happy BTLer, who was cheering on BTL forever in lead up to S24 announcement, telling us basically that we're all HPC renting idiots, and about forever HPI population growth and yield.   Time over teh BTLers have strutted their stuff in the foreverHPI years, over renter-savers and HPCers.

Is the IT BTLer with 5 rental properties in Cambridge an idiot.  There's so many high level intelligent people into BTL.  In a multi-trillion-pound housing market full of haves-and-have-even mores, you need a wider view.  I want a HPC to bring down higher end house prices too, of long-wave equity rich owners, where only damage is to some smug ego owners.  Human shield LLs and their innocence.  No way.

Sympathy for the BTLers.  If you don't want to bail them out personally, why focus on your sympathy for BTLers who lose out, on this thread?  BTLers losing portfolios of houses(!) hasn't yet happened in much number.  It's a growing risk for BTLers now.     

What about the priced out young and tenants who would prefer to be homeowners???????????   Should dumb decisions, that impact hard on other people, be bailed out, to keep disadvantaging the renter-savers?    The BTLers have danced into the market big time since 2010 on the double-down.   

It's a market market market!

If you ever see one of these BTLers ever lose their financial shirt (and the BTLer suffering you care so much about ----IF it ever happens from these mad house prices all around me (imo) - please post it on HPC, so we can review it - and so I can read all about your sympathy for that BTLer.

Neverwhere, on 28 Feb 2016 - 9:52 PM, said:snapback.png

Weak as hell.
 
More people are already suffering, because of the current dislocation between house prices and wages, than will possibly suffer in a HPC.
 
People who own their homes outright won't suffer.
 
People who have borrowed sensibly in relation to their household incomes and savings buffers won't suffer.
 
The only people who might possibly suffer are those who have acted speculatively, whether by holding multiple properties or by borrowing unsustainably for their main residences in order to maximise their stake in the housing market.
 
This relatively small cohort who might possibly suffer are also the ones who are most likely to have been driving the bubble and causing the suffering of those who are, as a result, priced out and unable to own homes of their own without borrowing in a similarly reckless manner.
 
In so doing this relatively small cohort who might possibly suffer have ultimately caused this possibility themselves. Not only in choosing their own personal exposure to the housing market, but also in the aggregate effect of their actions on house prices. It is the build up over the course of the boom that causes the bust. The boom is the bad times. The bust is just the bad times coming to an end.
 
This relatively small cohort who might possibly suffer are also, currently, not suffering. In fact they are enjoying the fruits of their speculation as we speak, and many of them have been doing so for quite some time now, and may well continue to do so even in the event of a HPC, if they play their cards right.
 
(Venger) - The fact that you are more concerned about people who are actually suffering right now as a consequences of the actions of others than you are about people who are currently very well off in relative terms but might possibly suffer at some point in the future as a consequence of their own actions, makes you a poster to admire in my opinion. 
 
Not only moral, and honourable, but with the intelligence to understand the wider social consequences of the housing market and not have them obscured by individuals who would be put - or put themselves - before the quality of life of those who are already less well off than them.

 

And we don't yet know how many BTLers will 'lose their shirts'  - ("let's stop the financial change/pain for the poor BTLers who were just greedy and bandwagon and didn't know what they were doing, and innocence etc")  *******  ******* ****.

Few BTLers have lost their shirts yet!   I'm kicking up the ******* rent to them each month, and set to help family move to another rental where BTLer has 5 BTLs (that's five houses - FIVE HOUSES), in a few days.  (I will take photos of the move).   A homeowner would make some serious improvements to this rental (new doors / carpets / kitchen) but it's best house they can get for the moment, and an improvement on previous place.  £1000 a month.  So-so for what it is.  The BTLer doesn't care about anything apart from his own wealth and position.  He made his claims.  He possibly won't be badly affected by S24.

There are very very intelligent people deep into BTL.   Intelligence is not be all and end all.   It's also how we see people and the world.  

We're all idiots.  Life isn't fair.   It is a market.   You take your positions.  And BTLers took their positions.

Idlewild, on 15 Jul 2015 - 6:27 PM, said:snapback.png

When you come out to play you really come out to play. Adding to "It's not fair", you do realise that you've just posted "He started it"  :blink:

It's a forum for argument and discussion. People may be interested in your opinions, but if your opinions are challenged and you want to defend your opinions, you need to roll your sleeves up and bring data, sound knowledge and reasoned argument. If you refuse to defend your opinions then we'll know what they are worth to you, and presumably therefore, what they are worth. You are just trotting out the same dull vested interest claptrap we've read and demolished times many. One of the reasons I love this forum is that it is a place where the nonsense is acknowledged as nonsense. If you are going just regurgitate it here and not defend it, your claim to be balanced is a castle built on sand, (and presumably financed with an interest only mortgage and rented out).
 
By the way - you are really struggling to keep your argument straight. I've been having a go at you because your argument is just "It's not fair", and my counter-argument is "Life's not fair". A number of other posters have developed the argument, starting out from the radical proposal that "Life's not fair", to include the corollary that an investment strategy based on assuming that life is fair is dumb.
 
You seem to think that the outcomes from the budget might resolve the question of fairness. How the hell is that supposed to work? All we'll learn from outcomes was whether or not the heavily leveraged large portfolio buy-to-let strategy can survive these changes (which were obviously designed to shut it down). We may then separately discover whether or not the buy-to-let investor was the marginal buyer (I'd bet the ranch they are at these interest rates with MMR keeping the lid on owner-occupier borrowing LTIs). Following that we'll discover if the market is far more prone to over-correct downwards in the presence of a large cohort of leveraged speculators with weak hands and face-washing investments. There is no way the outcomes will have anything to say about fairness.

 

Too many BTLers thought life easy and fair only for them - it's a market.  Spare me the BTLer suffering and your sympathy please - for something that hasn't happened yet - and where YOU still believe margin of risk that Gov will come to the BTLers rescue with loadsafreemoney bailout for BTL.   You can't have it both ways.  

It's a market and many renter-savers/young have already suffered because of the BTLers own housing financialisation buying-up-all-the-houses freewill choices!!!!! 

If you want to go on about sympathy for BTLers, I do suggest you get your money ready to personally bail out BTLers.  My money is towards buying a house in the future.  I'm not on a BTL forum.  There is a severe conflict of positions in the housing market.

 

Quote

"You are a god damn idiot."

Church:   And I'd like to prove this mathematically if I may. Take your current age. Now subtract ten years from it. Were you smart back then? Of course you weren't. You were a God damn idiot.

The fact of the matter is, you’re just as big an idiot today, it’s just going to take you ten more years to realise.

-Red vs Blue

 

Quote

 

Neverwhere - in discussion with a BTLer.


~The impact of ones actions upon the world is the only morality worth speaking of. They're our own responsibility.
~If you rely on the statute book alone to tell you what is & is not acceptable to do then you have no morals.
~The lives of tenants have already been disrupted & damaged by the advantages given to BTL landlords over them.
~You are the excesses! You, & people who've behaved as you have, have caused all of this.
~Without the players there is no game. You made this mess. You are responsible for all the damage done by it.
~Hand-waving over disruption to lives that are insecure precisely because of BTL is faux compassion, faux morality
~You're arguing that the government should have done more to protect the rest of us from you.
~You are not a child & the government is not some omniscient parental figure overseeing your every action.
~The aggregate impact of your actions hurt people. The government should've stopped me is not an adequate defence.
~Pretending the government should have been infallible & omniscient does not excuse you.


---[by association, FTBs that buy houses from BTLers selling up. which the previous tenants 
were displaced to travelodges should shoulder a similar burden]---

~No. That is just more of your desire to blame others for the damage you've caused. It is all on you.
~BTL made things much worse for all of those tenants. Their lives are insecure so that you can hold investments.
~In your gift to not contribute to creating the damage in the first place. But you chose otherwise.
~You exploited that for personal profit. No one made you do it. You own the consequences.
~Keep telling yourself that so you can abrogate yourself of responsibility for causing the underlying problem.
~False characterisation of the cause of the problem. The cause is BTL. Disruption is already present & ongoing.
~BTLers who failed to consider the political risk of pricing a generation out of homeownership should blame 
their own hubris.

 

I am done with any more replies to you on this thread - you can't have it all ways.  BTLers dumb, greedy, sympathy if they lose, but also trying to make out high risk of bailout coming for the BTLers to keep prices high.

Neverwhere, on 26 Apr 2016 - 9:13 PM, said:snapback.png

 

The current lack of affordability is severely negatively impacting on the quality of life of both younger generations and those who did not happen to buy at the right moment in time.

 

The idea that it might perpetuate or worsen is doom and gloom. The idea that from here on out there will only ever be minor corrections is doom and gloom.

 

In contrast, the idea that house prices might fall back in line with historic income multiples is heartening and uplifting to anyone with a social conscience.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mat109 said:

I have sympathy for anyone who loses their shirt, even if they deserved it or spent said shirt on a socially damaging bandwagon. Doesn't mean I or anyone else have to pay for it. 

 

We don't live in a world where anyone has full and total knowledge - we take our positions in a market.   There are people on big incomes deep into BTL.  I won't allow you to offer up a few of the BTLers on some BTL forums as 'innocent victims'  - who still treat renter-savers with so much disrespect and scorn imo.

Their innocence - a full range of people involved deep into BTL.  25 years a landlord guy cries about S24 and financial oblivion - 25 years a landlord and 50+ houses, and a lifetime of high-level spending and enjoyment.   He left himself open to a market change.  Political risk.   That's 25 years enjoying secure homeownership, and laying claim to other homes, outbidding others in the process.  It's a market.  Not a sympathy fest.   The BTLers are not worrying for HPCers/renter-savers at all.  You/they are simply astonished by S24, and now scared renter-savers may have opportunity ahead to buy homes for our families at much better value.

OKAY then.   Please please tell me all about your sympathy for this BTLer - one of the few who met change of financial circumstances in light-HPC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-25889308

Perhaps I can cry. :lol:  Or I could sculpt a statue of her in her honour.  Devote our lives to her, and others similar to her, who MAY be found out in a correction/S24, and houses being sold onto renter-savers to become homeowners. Bring it on.   She is now a renter.  So what?  So am I.   Paying rent out of income.  It was good enough for all her tenants with £millions of pounds in claims on properties, before she was found out.  

And it's true.... Bank to BTLer: "You know what you owe - just pay it"

That's mostly the same response by any landlord to any tenant struggling with rent.  With consequence if can't.  Not sympathy and and free rent, and happy dayz.  Look at all the BTLers who are positioning to ramp up the rent in recent times (because of S24) in their campaigning to Gov.  Putting up tenants as HUMAN SHIELD.  Sympathy for BTLers?   Really, just grow up.  It's a big bad world, and for too long the renter-savers been carrying BTL claims to extremes.  HPI+++ and rent kicked up to them for years.

Rebalance this market.   BTLer people farming mad-debt BTLers, now caught in a trap many renter-saver HPCers warned them was coming.  That change would happen.   As they danced into people-farming at ever madder price levels, and moar and more houses.  Their innocence.

Own choices....

Quote

Buy-to-let landlords in rush to borrow - BBC News
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35603887
18 Feb 2016 - Homebuyers borrowed £17.9bn last month, the highest January total for eight years, as buy-to-let landlords rushed to beat forthcoming tax ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Venger said:

 

We don't live in a world where anyone has full and total knowledge - we take our positions in a market.   There are people on big incomes deep into BTL.  I won't allow you to offer up a few of the BTLers on some BTL forums as 'innocent victims'  - who still treat renter-savers with so much disrespect and scorn imo.

Their innocence - a full range of people involved deep into BTL.  25 years a landlord guy cries about S24 and financial oblivion - 25 years a landlord and 50+ houses, and a lifetime of high-level spending and enjoyment.   He left himself open to a market change.  Political risk.   That's 25 years enjoying secure homeownership, and laying claim to other homes, outbidding others in the process.  It's a market.  Not a sympathy fest.   The BTLers are not worrying for HPCers/renter-savers at all.  You/they are simply astonished by S24, and now scared renter-savers may have opportunity ahead to buy homes for our families at much better value.

OKAY then.   Please please tell me all about your sympathy for this BTLer - one of the few who met change of financial circumstances in light-HPC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-25889308

Perhaps I can cry. :lol:  Or I could sculpt a statue of her in her honour.  Devote our lives to her, and others similar to her, who MAY be found out in a correction/S24, and houses being sold onto renter-savers to become homeowners. Bring it on.   She is now a renter.  So what?  So am I.   Paying rent out of income.  It was good enough for all her tenants with £millions of pounds in claims on properties, before she was found out.  

And it's true.... Bank to BTLer: "You know what you owe - just pay it"

That's mostly the same response by any landlord to any tenant struggling with rent.  With consequence if can't.  Not sympathy and and free rent, and happy dayz.  Look at all the BTLers who are positioning to ramp up the rent in recent times (because of S24) in their campaigning to Gov.  Putting up tenants as HUMAN SHIELD.  Sympathy for BTLers?   Really, just grow up.  It's a big bad world, and for too long the renter-savers been carrying BTL claims to extremes.  HPI+++ and rent kicked up to them for years.

Rebalance this market.   BTLer people farming mad-debt BTLers, now caught in a trap many renter-saver HPCers warned them was coming.  That change would happen.   As they danced into people-farming at ever madder price levels, and moar and more houses.  Their innocence.

Own choices....

 

Actually unlike you (I think) she doesn't pay rent - the tax payer does for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Actually unlike you (I think) she doesn't pay rent - the tax payer does for her.

That is still a far far superior outcome, from my perspective, than having a non-productive people farmer BTLers sitting back and reaping incomes/taxes of other people with a £2m+ BTL portfolio.  Simply because they alone knew magic of forever HPI and had egos to buy up all the houses.  

With those properties sold onto a range of different market participants.  Hopefully a few homebuyers among them.

1 BTL on benefits in nasty little rental (good enough for tenants eh), than BTLers with claims on multiple properties, from excessive debt, who outbid renter-savers for years.

Bring it on big time with future correction / S24 targeting of the BTLers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Venger said:

 

OKAY then.   Please please tell me all about your sympathy for this BTLer - one of the few who met change of financial circumstances in light-HPC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-25889308

Perhaps I can cry. :lol:  Or I could sculpt a statue of her in her honour.  Devote our lives to her, and others similar to her, who MAY be found out in a correction/S24, and houses being sold onto renter-savers to become homeowners. Bring it on.   She is now a renter.  So what?  So am I.  

BTW as of late 2016 she seems to still be chasing her former glory / property riches, trying to find ways to get back to her rightful position - in trying to overcome validity of LPA Receivers being appointed to "her" multi-million-pound portfolio of properties.   I hope her £500,000 own house was sold onto someone at much better price, who enjoys it as a home.  Who doesn't use it as security to lay claim to other people's homes.  If they do.... well BTLers have put their homes up at risk, for the most part.

Still alive despite having lost big rental portfolio of homes.   Apparently not yet contrasting her own position as renter today (if still renter), against the wider housing financialisation caused by other BTLers.

https://www.property118.com/lpa-receivers-letter-appointment-validly-authorised/92157/

Validity.  Paperwork?  Some magical unicorn seal that perhaps one guy didn't put on a document allowing full restoration of the mad-gainz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Phil321 said:

But even this example it required someone to say "so you hate him, he has left you and the kids for a young girlfriend, he does not contribute to the finance despite earning......and you are thinking about buying more houses together!!!"   Beggars belief. 

There's a pretty chunky kernel of rationality there, if induction is allowed as rational (and I see no reason why it shouldn't be). House prices keep going up. If you sell a house you are seen to be effectively throwing away money. The effect of sustained gangbusters HPI on how people see things, HPI out of all keeping with wage inflation and rent inflation, has been enormously powerful.

Edited by Bland Unsight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Bland Unsight said:

There's a pretty chunky kernel of rationality there, if induction is allowed as rational (and I see no reason why it shouldn't be). House prices keep going up. If you sell a house you are seen to be effectively throwing away money. The effect of sustained gangbusters HPI on how people see things, HPI out of all keeping with wage inflation and rent inflation, has been enormously powerful.

Some people - not all people.  They make their own choices.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Powertylater: How do I deal with benefit cap on single parent with 4 kids?

Responses suggest that there is no way to deal with it.  Is sell and get a real job not an option?!!

Page 2 of the thread has a note from Busta: 

Apparently Channel 4 are interested in interviewing people who have commented on this discussion thread.

If you would like me to put them in touch with you please email your contact details to me 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I read that thread yesterday, when someone here was on the BIG SYMPATHY push - and blanket universal sympathy for any BTLer who may lose 'shirt' some properties/mad-gainz or at worse become a renter themselves because of S24 - despite them pushing the likelihood of a big financial bailout coming for BTLers.   No matter how reckless, greedy or generally bad a landlord they are.

Where most LL are high equity anyway, and not at any risk.  Just those at the margin who tend not to make good landlords anyway and have been full of ego for so many years - many still being so despite of S24 and other measures, with house prices that have still continued to go up and up and up and up.

Quote

We can hold the government to ransom if we were organised
If we didnt like some legislation we could unite and we could threaten to make 1000 people homeless in an area by serving a sec 21 . Nothing to stop us at all putting a tenant out on the streets It would send the councils homeless teams into chaos. Emergency legislation would have to be passed to prevent us. They dont want that 

 

Sympathy.  I have it.  A scale.  Family and friends very hard-done by illness / MS, brain tumours etc.   Unforeseeable accidents, and especially victims of other people's recklessness.  Those in foreign war torn situations.  People who really can't get the food they need for nutrition.  And for those severely priced out of homeownership, renting directly from the BTLers themselves, who have been major active participants in causing housing financialisation to extremes, with claims on multiple homes with wild greedy debt positions.   Sympathy and little actions to try and help those who deserve and need help where I can.  

People with 3 jobs working long-long hours to pay up to BTLers, only seeing their young ones a few waking hours at time - landlords pretending to be bit sad at the situation, but "needs" to cover rent on multiple BTLs in pursuit of having multi-million-pound property portfolios - a worker not a UC claimant, although seemingly only bringing in about the same income as someone on full benefits.   With LLs who offer tenants up as human shields with mass S21 threats, and want to 'round them up' to get the tenants to campaign at councils/MPs directly on their behalf to stop S24 (and more).

Not sympathy for BTLers who in an open market have laid claim to loads of homes over many years, to rent out to people who 'can't afford to buy' - who have enjoyed homeownership themselves for many years, but sought to deny it to others, in pursuit of HPI+++ and rents.  Who now find themselves in S24 and CGT pincer.   That's just a market.   An extreme housing market of haves-and-have-nots.   The BTLers already had a huge sympathy win with massive systematic bailout from 2009 that prevented any real house price rebalance in many areas (some areas), and then so many BTLers doubled down into it for moar houses entitlement.  Sympathy for BTLers (!) with claims on multiple houses, most still strutting their stuff still today and only a few at margin at risk from S24, prices at such heights, and so many family and friends renting directly from the BTLers.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bear Hug said:

Powertylater: How do I deal with benefit cap on single parent with 4 kids?

Responses suggest that there is no way to deal with it.  Is sell and get a real job not an option?!!

Page 2 of the thread has a note from Busta: 

Apparently Channel 4 are interested in interviewing people who have commented on this discussion thread.

If you would like me to put them in touch with you please email your contact details to me 

 

Isn't it amazing that landlords did better under labour than under the tories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Isn't it amazing that landlords did better under labour than under the tories.

It just makes this sweeter, I say say bring on the Maltese break dancing fools. They do make me laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

Isn't it amazing that landlords did better under labour than under the tories.

Why amazing?

Do you know how many BTL (type/style) mortgages were around before 1997?    One source I have somewhere suggests surprisingly few - but I haven't got time to search for it.

 

BTL growth and messing around rearranging the organs of the financial system, all came under Labour doing as far as I am concerned, pushing the fever of foreverHPI and speculation and how much it's gone up by again this year.

2002:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/inside_money/2183124.stm

88 might have seen deregulation, but not massive BTLing.   No More Boom and Bust took control in 1997 and then it all took off, getting ever worse until financial system creaked at risk of collapse.   

Hopefully the recent crazy double down BTL, just been putting risk on those market participants who can take the coming hit.  Their own houses at risk.  As many of us have held out for.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Venger said:

Why amazing?

Do you know how many BTL (type/style) mortgages were around before 1997?    One source I have somewhere suggests surprisingly few - but I haven't got time to search for it.

 

BTL growth and messing around rearranging the organs of the financial system, all came under Labour doing as far as I am concerned, pushing the fever of foreverHPI and speculation and how much it's gone up by again this year.

2002:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/inside_money/2183124.stm

88 might have seen deregulation, but not massive BTLing.   No More Boom and Bust took control in 1997 and then it all took off, getting ever worse until financial system creaked at risk of collapse.   

Hopefully the recent crazy double down BTL, just been putting risk on those market participants who can take the coming hit.  Their own houses at risk.  As many of us have held out for.

Basically zilch.

BTL is risky commercial lending.

IO BTL is a commercial bridging loan - think 15% APR.

That goon Brown lowered the regualtion to support his genius economy.

And all the dumb fck ex building societies jumped in - We know what we are doing.

Bradford + Bigley - bist.

Halixfax - bust.

Natwest - bust.

Bos - bust

RBS - bust.

etc etc etc

All within ~10 years.

It takes a special kind of stupid to blow up ~100 years of commercial banking.

Bornw and the bank CEOs had it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Basically zilch.

BTL is risky commercial lending.

IO BTL is a commercial bridging loan - think 15% APR.

That goon Brown lowered the regualtion to support his genius economy.

And all the dumb fck ex building societies jumped in - We know what we are doing.

Bradford + Bigley - bist.

Halixfax - bust.

Natwest - bust.

Bos - bust

RBS - bust.

etc etc etc

All within ~10 years.

It takes a special kind of stupid to blow up ~100 years of commercial banking.

Bornw and the bank CEOs had it.

 

Northern Rock
 
HBOS
 
RBS/Natwest
 
Lloyds-TSB
 
Alliance & Leicester
 
B&B
 
Catholic Building Society
 
Dunfermline Building Society
 
Chesham Building Society
 
Derbyshire Building Society
 
Cheshire Building Society
 
Barnsley Building Society
 
Scarborough Building Society
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope someone, soon, will write up the detail of the finances of the UK banks that went under.

Id love to read about the B+B accounts and losses.

The Scarborugh BS is closest to me. I spent my childhood going by its original HQ.

A search on the local papers website makes interesting reading.

http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/search?query="Scarborough+building+society"&sortBy=Date&pageNumber=3&navigationFlag=true

It starts will a Back to future article, giving you an idea how little control there was:

www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/former-finance-boss-faces-24-charges-1-1410870

Comedy one:

http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/financial-lesson-is-a-game-for-students-1-1390294

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Venger said:

Why amazing?

Do you know how many BTL (type/style) mortgages were around before 1997?    One source I have somewhere suggests surprisingly few - but I haven't got time to search for it.

 

BTL growth and messing around rearranging the organs of the financial system, all came under Labour doing as far as I am concerned, pushing the fever of foreverHPI and speculation and how much it's gone up by again this year.

2002:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/inside_money/2183124.stm

88 might have seen deregulation, but not massive BTLing.   No More Boom and Bust took control in 1997 and then it all took off, getting ever worse until financial system creaked at risk of collapse.   

Hopefully the recent crazy double down BTL, just been putting risk on those market participants who can take the coming hit.  Their own houses at risk.  As many of us have held out for.

Well I meant amazing if you think what the Labour party was set up for.  It is bit like if in 30 years time UKIP were campaigning for us to rejoining the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.