houseface2000

Sellers withdraw from the market

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, azal777 said:

Hi there 

I wouldn’t sell under any circumstance if it’s mortgage free, take the rent money it offers.

its true in today’s market you could get top dollar but I tend to have a more long term view, because I have children.

its pretty common knowledge that as parents we are all concerned for our children’s futures, cost of living, opportunities not being the same as past generations etc.

you may not have children yet but if you do, you have a fantastic asset to help them on their way.

i did this with one of our properties, gifting it to my 18 year old and paid little to no capital gains tax as we brought it in recession and paid for it over next 3-4 years when still with depressed prices. It shifted it out of my wife and I tax bracket into my daughters who was only working part time so it had an extra bonus.

You shouldn’t feel guilty about owning more than one home, I’m assuming since you do you have a gold plated pension in place?

because we don’t and have never paid a thing into a system that returns nothing and I have no control over.

perhaps before ppl berate investors they should think about getting something done about pension reforms where clients stop getting screwed and in fact such ppl should be congratulated for taking their own responsibilities and risks. I view pension provision and security very seriously and will fight hard to attain it, however I choose.

houses seemed the best route forward and I’ve seen nothing thus far to dissuade meotherwise. 

How man ‘properties’ do you have and how were the purchases funded?

Share this post


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

Aspire to being a rentier. Classy

I go for depressing, it a shame that people don't want to invest into companies that create jobs instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, azal777 said:

Hi there 

I wouldn’t sell under any circumstance if it’s mortgage free, take the rent money it offers.

its true in today’s market you could get top dollar but I tend to have a more long term view, because I have children.

its pretty common knowledge that as parents we are all concerned for our children’s futures, cost of living, opportunities not being the same as past generations etc.

you may not have children yet but if you do, you have a fantastic asset to help them on their way.

i did this with one of our properties, gifting it to my 18 year old and paid little to no capital gains tax as we brought it in recession and paid for it over next 3-4 years when still with depressed prices. It shifted it out of my wife and I tax bracket into my daughters who was only working part time so it had an extra bonus.

You shouldn’t feel guilty about owning more than one home, I’m assuming since you do you have a gold plated pension in place?

because we don’t and have never paid a thing into a system that returns nothing and I have no control over.

perhaps before ppl berate investors they should think about getting something done about pension reforms where clients stop getting screwed and in fact such ppl should be congratulated for taking their own responsibilities and risks. I view pension provision and security very seriously and will fight hard to attain it, however I choose.

houses seemed the best route forward and I’ve seen nothing thus far to dissuade meotherwise. 

And those risks include house prices falling/crashing - not just foreverHPI/GenRent should applaud you for having all the mad-gainz, and all the homes - vs them.

They rent, priced-out in large part because of BTLers/investors like you, and need to provide a pension for themselves too.

Interesting you tip up back to HPC wanting to prevent people selling. :)

And I'm against you on housing financialisation side and fight against your position.  Eat S24 and everything else coming on you.

Look; you're not going to get any applauding from me, with you as a housing investor, more than 1 home...  for helping to cause housing financialistion - hiding behind how you don't have a great pension outside of housing as the reason you went into BTL (sob story)-  and all your posts about the mad-gainz.

Your BTL pension/me excuses are utter crap.  Eat hard HPC.

*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.

This BTLer below is not in control of things with his 7 BTLers, because S24 does him in:D

If he's neighbour to you, consider that he may soon become a forced seller - no matter if your housing investments have little debt ("forget taking £500,000 cash and make renters pay and pay with no fear HPC.. nothing I've seen to change my mind."

On 22/10/2015 at 9:29 AM, Thsurer said:

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:

....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.

 

On 22/10/2015 at 2:20 PM, Neverwhere said:

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 arrangments with bankers by taking what would have been your savings and leveraging them against investment properties via buy-to-let financing from bankers.

....Sorry to disappoint but far from some irrational and emotive personal dislike this is simply an overriding conflict of interest: we (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).

FatherFred also not happy earlier this year (2017), with all his BTLs, and facing S24 - owner for so many many years, then more and more and more BTLs homes taken. :)

All his years lurking on HPC, silently... buying up more and more homes.  FU.  S24 comes along and he bitches hard about it about unfair.  Get repo'd you greedy ****.

Quote

FatherFred...I bought my first BTL for a very very simple reason.  I don't trust stock markets or financial institutions and I do not trust government not to change the rules on pensions.  

Government were encouraging BTL and I thought - so far rightly - that it was a good bet to provide for myself and my family as I got older.  

My very simplistic thinking was that if the typical household spends a third of its income on housing then if you own three outright you can get by OK.  My plan was to buy buy buy and then sell off a few to pay down debt on the rest.

Quote

FatherFred.. Government deliberately created circumstances which encouraged people like me to do it.  Whether or not you like it they encouraged me to BTL and my net wealth and post tax income over the last 16 years has been higher as a result.  I do feel somewhat bad for the tiny marginal effect my participation in the market has had on people like you, but I think you should blame government and not me

Quote

FatherFred.....  Perhaps this is me being optimistic but I really do think that S24 is unfair (not that it is going to effect me massively if my calcs are right), and also potentially very destructive in terms of repossessions, house price crash (which would be destructive in some ways but a very good thing in many ways as well), disruption to tenants lives etc etc.  I think S24 may well end up being used as a short term shake up of the system, to be withdrawn when prices start collapsing (destroying banks balance sheets) and too many tenants lives are disrupted.  Having got rid of the worst over-leveraged landlords government will withdraw S24.  However by this time generation rent will be bigger, more younger people will be working in government, and the withdrawal of S24 will mean fairer and better anti-landlord policies, not fewer anti-landlord policies.  And many anti-landlord policies are not really 'anti-landlord', they're more "pro-tenant" and 'pro-society', which is not the same thing as anti-landlord.

:rolleyes:

Quote

Neverwhere:  

:lol::lol::lol:

I've not seen the I don't trust the government  and the government made me do it arguments offered in such quick succession before. Very funny!

I guess no more ridiculous though, than I don't trust financial institutions so I'm going to spend all of my savings placing bets on a heavily financialised market using high risk, economically destabilising, interest-only finance, with no consumer protection whatsoever, so that said financial institutions which I don't trust can ultimately have complete and total control over my ongoing financial well-being. :rolleyes:

Also loving the whole but I'm a left wing neo-feudalist schtick, as if making the people you exploit marginally more comfortable so that they're less inclined to seek to overthrow your exploitation of them is anything other than a self-serving move. Pity that BTLers couldn't quite get their greed in check to actively fight for such reforms when they thought they might have a minor impact on their profit margins, but are all for going out of their way to publicly advocate for them now that their lack has resulted in political action which they think will cost them even more.

 

Quote

For me the line where I’ll not worry about making someone cry lies at them having two houses when I’m priced out of one solely because of a questionable pact they’ve made with the banks. The line at which I’ll start calling them scum lies somewhere north of two houses, (probably at three). It may serve no purpose to call a HLPI scum, but who knows? My instinct is that sometimes when somebody else’s moral compass is sufficiently badly broken, civility is a waste of time. You need to fight - taunting them might help keep your spirits up. I continue to question my instinct on that, but as argued earlier, I just need them financially dead. I’m certain I’ll feel no need whatsoever to dance on their financial grave, though a decent pint and a wry smile at the wake may be in order.

-A goodbye to all that buy-to-let

Quote

BTL: A strategy based on nothing other than a reverence of money, and a complete disregard for the havoc wreaked on the lives of others, both by running a very precarious business based on a neverending supply of cheap money to corner a precious resource, and also by completely discounting the potential for upheaval in tenants' lives if(when?) the money runs out.

Ought to be utterly ashamed of overt avarice and the sooner insolvent chancers like her are systematically bankrupted, the better we will be as a nation.

Quote

Neverwhere: I have far more respect for those landlords who admit that - during a homeownership crisis for younger generations - they are not engaging in a public service by monopolising housing that would continue to exist and provide homes without them owning it,  and are in fact acting solely in their own financial interests,  and to the total exclusion of their anti social impact on wider society.

 

Edited by Venger

Share this post


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

I go for depressing, it a shame that people don't want to invest into companies that create jobs instead.

Replicating the worst intersection of incentives and human nature and passing them off as best alternatives. Depressing indeed, particulary here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azal777 said:

Hi there 

I

i did this with one of our properties, gifting it to my 18 year old and paid little to no capital gains tax as we brought it in recession and paid for it over next 3-4 years when still with depressed prices. It shifted it out of my wife and I tax bracket into my daughters who was only working part time so it had an extra bonus.

 

Go on then, explain this me.

If you gift an house then you pay CGT on the difference between the purchase price and market price when you gifted it.

If you bought the house in 'a recession' then youd face a steep CGT when gifting it to a child - about 30%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azal777 said:

Hi there 

I wouldn’t sell under any circumstance if it’s mortgage free, take the rent money it offers.

its true in today’s market you could get top dollar but I tend to have a more long term view, because I have children.

You shouldn’t feel guilty about owning more than one home, I’m assuming since you do you have a gold plated pension in place?its pretty common knowledge that as parents we are all concerned for our children’s futures, cost of living, opportunities not being the same as past generations etc.

because we don’t and have never paid a thing into a system that returns nothing and I have no control over.

perhaps before ppl berate investors they should think about getting something done about pension reforms where clients stop getting screwed and in fact such ppl should be congratulated for taking their own responsibilities and risks.

I view pension provision and security very seriously and will fight hard to attain it, however I choose.

houses seemed the best route forward and I’ve seen nothing thus far to dissuade meotherwise. 

----------------------

cash is fiat and has no true value, property is a tangible asset.

by all means use the fiat system to accumulate cash but then get it transferred as soon as you are able.

given the choice of £500k cash in my hand or property to the value, I’d know what I’d choose.

I view fighting back against housing greedsters/BTlers/me-me-me /'property pensions'/ my children matter most with property - seriously, and fight back hard too.

Eat Section 24

Have a short-term and long term future of HPC from these levels, to you and all the BTLer - even all those pondering whether not to sell 2nd homes (on HPC) with their position entirely"because they may be able to squeeze more £ out of priced-out young." - "downside risks but I'm unsure because Govt seems to back multi homeonwership and loads of upsides too." :rolleyes:

Quote

Bland Unsight

But what if what your what your daughter will want, in the fullness of time, is to grow up and make her own way in the world? To meet a young man, or a young woman, and establish her independence from you, so that she can meet you as an equal. Will the flat you've gifted be a dowry or sorts, or will she be encouraged to make a love match only with people who own their own homes, and not some loser who has crawled out from under their rented rock?

lightning-o.gif

Life is a rich web of connections. An apparently hyper-rational decision, informed by love, can have disastrous consequences. Just as the tracers of the incipient lightning strike work their way through disparate cascades towards the ground, a society that seeks to escape its debt problem by loading itself up with debts it cannot pay seeks only its own destruction. If that's what you really want for your daughter, are you right, or are you a monster? Seventy-months and counting on so-called emergency interest rates...

Monsters need Slayers.  

1541d40f65e6de6e891031426279d68a.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azal777 said:

perhaps before ppl berate investors they should think about getting something done about pension reforms where clients stop getting screwed and in fact such ppl should be congratulated for taking their own responsibilities and risks. I view pension provision and security very seriously and will fight hard to attain it, however I choose.

What do you think is the problem with pensions, from a personal perspective (i.e. how the pension system affects you or me as we save for our respective retirements)?

If you are in an occupational scheme and worry it won't pay out then don't make big contributions, or don't leave much money in there (I think there are posters on here who have mentioned getting regular transfers from their occupational scheme to a SIPP). In any case, I think the number of schemes which don't pay out are small.

If you have a problem with the state pension (how much it will be, at what age you can claim it or whether it will eventually be means tested) then don't rely on it.

If you are self-employed, or otherwise have a lot of money to invest for your retirement, you can invest in a SIPP. It's fairly easy to do and charges are low these days. Charges used to be high, but so did returns.

If you don't trust the government on tax and are worried that taxes will go up for pension income what do you think of the recent changes to property taxation?

If you don't trust financial institutions (to manage your money, to provide annuities etc.) then do you trust them in their capacity as mortgage lenders? Don't you worry they might deny you consent to let, or put you on an expensive SVR, or call your loan in early?

If you are worried about the changes to pension rules, then don't save everything in your pension. If you want to retire several years before you can draw your pension you just need enough money in ISAs etc. to cover that period.

As you are married it's probably even easier for you to diversify. Unless you both worked for the same employer throughout your careers, you are in more than one occupational scheme, so this reduces your risk. You can use different companies for your savings, investments and annuities.

If you still think pensions are best avoided, equity returns still compare favourably to other assets classes. So I think you left out some steps in your argument that you invested in property because you didn't think pensions were a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

What do you think is the problem with pensions, from a personal perspective (i.e. how the pension system affects you or me as we save for our respective retirements)?

If you are in an occupational scheme and worry it won't pay out then don't make big contributions, or don't leave much money in there (I think there are posters on here who have mentioned getting regular transfers from their occupational scheme to a SIPP). In any case, I think the number of schemes which don't pay out are small.

If you have a problem with the state pension (how much it will be, at what age you can claim it or whether it will eventually be means tested) then don't rely on it.

If you are self-employed, or otherwise have a lot of money to invest for your retirement, you can invest in a SIPP. It's fairly easy to do and charges are low these days. Charges used to be high, but so did returns.

If you don't trust the government on tax and are worried that taxes will go up for pension income what do you think of the recent changes to property taxation?

If you don't trust financial institutions (to manage your money, to provide annuities etc.) then do you trust them in their capacity as mortgage lenders? Don't you worry they might deny you consent to let, or put you on an expensive SVR, or call your loan in early?

If you are worried about the changes to pension rules, then don't save everything in your pension. If you want to retire several years before you can draw your pension you just need enough money in ISAs etc. to cover that period.

As you are married it's probably even easier for you to diversify. Unless you both worked for the same employer throughout your careers, you are in more than one occupational scheme, so this reduces your risk. You can use different companies for your savings, investments and annuities.

If you still think pensions are best avoided, equity returns still compare favourably to other assets classes. So I think you left out some steps in your argument that you invested in property because you didn't think pensions were a good idea.

+1

@azal777 Gifting a living to your offspring will handicap their ability to live on their own. Morals apart, hoarding houses is NOT an investment. 

Share this post


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

Go on then, explain this me.

If you gift an house then you pay CGT on the difference between the purchase price and market price when you gifted it.

If you bought the house in 'a recession' then youd face a steep CGT when gifting it to a child - about 30%.

As you aware the transaction was classed as a sale (I dint believe that’s right but that’s the law)

my wife and I were allowed a certain increment before taxation was applied.

the gap between what we paid initially, add our combined allowance, less the market value at time of sale was virtually zero.

therefore it was a no brainer in our view and dealt with by the solicitor and accountant.

not rocket science.

there is a fair argument for helping out our children too much but, they will help us out too and families working together like many Asian communities is I think the best way forward. Just my view 

Share this post


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

How man ‘properties’ do you have and how were the purchases funded?

I own a massive portfolio of 3, I like to have only what is manageable, one of which was a firmer home.

 

funded by saving up and doing nothing for 10 years from 1996-2006. Not a fun life style but means to an end, surprising what you can save when you go nowhere and do nothing, more ppl should try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'FatherFred...I bought my first BTL for a very very simple reason.  I don't trust stock markets or financial institutions and I do not trust government not to change the rules on pensions.'

Where's this Father Fred posts?

I like these homespun, simple Ma + Pa LLs,whittling away at their property investments, away from these high faluting city folks. Just simple country folk, looking to make a pension investment using my homemade possum stew ... sorry, I mean 1M+ borrowed IO from a small, lunatic bank.

My questions - which are obvious - remain the same.

Dont trust UKGOV with pensions, or stock market.

But do trust a bank lending you *huge* fuxxing leverage amount to *not* but (IO remember) an assets which requires a massive oversight of regulalation (no banks were stupid enough to lend IO loan for property speculation before). And assume UKGOV wont enforce the existing rules on personal income - which theyve clarified with S24.

 

Share this post


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

And those risks include house prices falling/crashing - not just foreverHPI/GenRent should applaud you for having all the mad-gainz, and all the homes - vs them.

They rent, priced-out in large part because of BTLers/investors like you, and need to provide a pension for themselves too.

Interesting you tip up back to HPC wanting to prevent people selling. :)

And I'm against you on housing financialisation side and fight against your position.  Eat S24 and everything else coming on you.

Look; you're not going to get any applauding from me, with you as a housing investor, more than 1 home...  for helping to cause housing financialistion - hiding behind how you don't have a great pension outside of housing as the reason you went into BTL (sob story)-  and all your posts about the mad-gainz.

Your BTL pension/me excuses are utter crap.  Eat hard HPC.

*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.

This BTLer below is not in control of things with his 7 BTLers, because S24 does him in:D

If he's neighbour to you, consider that he may soon become a forced seller - no matter if your housing investments have little debt ("forget taking £500,000 cash and make renters pay and pay with no fear HPC.. nothing I've seen to change my mind."

 

FatherFred also not happy earlier this year (2017), with all his BTLs, and facing S24 - owner for so many many years, then more and more and more BTLs homes taken. :)

All his years lurking on HPC, silently... buying up more and more homes.  FU.  S24 comes along and he bitches hard about it about unfair.  Get repo'd you greedy ****.

:rolleyes:

 

 

Nice try regarding s24, i know the gvt would make moves on landlords 5 years ago when all the money starting moving from unproductive bank interest rates into houses. They must have been wringing their hands waiting to snare them with such a decree. I don’t trust the gvt in any way shape or form so already covered my base on that thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Todays insane property pyscho babble award goes to this:

http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/yorkshire/news/2014251-how-one-family-continues-to-disrupt-the-property-marketplace?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Yorkshire_7th_Dec_2017_Daily

Idiots, idiots idiots.

'Brothers Shaan and Haaris set up crowdfunding property firm last year. Shaan said: “Both Haaris and I think the property right now is ripe for change. Property has become inaccessible to the majority.”

He said that as a millennials themselves, they found that all property was completely inaccesbile to buy an among the “generation rent.”

Shaan said: “At UOWN, we asked ourselves one question: was it possible to make accessing property cheap?”

They wanted to find a solution to make investment accessible to anyone. Haaris said this led to them combining software development and hardware to start UOWN.

He said: “You can log on to website and in 1 minute and 30 seconds you can sign up to buy a chunk of a house at the moment in Leeds from the second you have bought the chuck, you are earning rent. We count it up by the second and at the end of the month we pay you the returns.'

By selling 'bits' of a house They have created whats know as a security. And should now be regulated, at great expense, by the FSA.

These loons will end up in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

millenials: why not just invest in a piece of one of your housemates, lend em as little as a tenner a week, then when payday comes around, ask them for fifty quid back

 

they don't even need to pay you in actual cash! as long as you keep a tally of how much they owe you, you can keep reinvesting your wealth each month, steadily growing your 'stake' in 'them', remember you can cash in your investment at any time but experts recommend never doing so and instead keeping track of your burgeoning wealth on the shared calendar in the kitchen

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, thewig said:

millenials: why not just invest in a piece of one of your housemates, lend em as little as a tenner a week, then when payday comes around, ask them for fifty quid back

 

they don't even need to pay you in actual cash! as long as you keep a tally of how much they owe you, you can keep reinvesting your wealth each month, steadily growing your 'stake' in 'them', remember you can cash in your investment at any time but experts recommend never doing so and instead keeping track of your burgeoning wealth on the shared calendar in the kitchen

 

 

Get with the kidzzzz.

BiTLcoin - the land lords cryptocurrency.

Im off to launch an ICO (thats Initial Coin Offering for all those simple, Ma+Pa Possum eating BTLers).

Get this - its not owned by the government or big finance, with their fancy suits and socks. - they cant tax it!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, thewig said:

millenials: why not just invest in a piece of one of your housemates, lend em as little as a tenner a week, then when payday comes around, ask them for fifty quid back

 

they don't even need to pay you in actual cash! as long as you keep a tally of how much they owe you, you can keep reinvesting your wealth each month, steadily growing your 'stake' in 'them', remember you can cash in your investment at any time but experts recommend never doing so and instead keeping track of your burgeoning wealth on the shared calendar in the kitchen

 

 

You could give it a groovy ethno name like 'bonsai scheme' 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Si1 said:

You could give it a groovy ethno name like 'bonsai scheme'

hands off, I'll sue for something or the other

 

Share this post


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

Where's this Father Fred posts?

See below.  Neverwhere totallyexposed all the warpness of his positioning, trying to make himself out as 'the innocent one' - to blame Govt for all his eagerness to buy up all the homes.

And just like azal777 who has rocked back up to HPC in 2017 (joined forum in 2005), to make his 5th,6th 7th post, about HPI greatness, BTL rent-it-out, "don't cash in for £500,000 cause property where it's at" / "I think long term with property" / "can't see any risks" / property galore, "get the rent in"

Father Fred also a 2005 joiner.....  knew all the issues, has happily look in on HPC forum silently for years... while buying more and more and more houses to rent out.

Father Fred Comes back in 2017 with how S24 so unfair, and could lead to tenants losing homes, and repossessions... he don't give a damn apart from anything but all his HPI++++ and he's just another BTLer landlord pure focus to extremes on himself... and **** GenRent/young.

Quote

Father Fred
JOINED
May 13, 2005

 

 

It never ceases to astonish me that whenever a BTLer rocks up, or rocks back up after years, there's so many do-gooder HPCers who think it's just a matter of 'splaining things to them.  That if they can reach them from goodness of their hearts they would change their ways.

It's no wonder things reached stage they have with housing financialisation to extremes.  Softy limp-wimp GenRenters, with a view that BTLers just misguided - all some pathetic big accident, that the BTL can be 'splained to, and turned good.  They don't care.  He's here to tell you, on HPC forum, he's fighting for HPI and BTLism, and rent it out glory...."property long term".   Just like all the others over the years, and on other forums.  Completely totally pathetic.   They chose their sides already.  They've spent years reaping rent, buying up more homes, feasting and causing GenRent.  You want to help them out of their delusion?  First you need to break your own delusion.  It's a battle between BTLers/HPIers, and GenRent/those on side of anti-housing financialisation, and BTLers/HPiers spent decades winning it, to the cost of GenRent/young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/04/2017 at 8:39 PM, Father Fred said:

Funny you should say that Parkwell, but I was thinking just before I read your reply how I can see that many priced out FTBs and other tenants might well take the view that S24 is a good thing even if it brings carnage that spreads well beyond solely affecting landlords.  Decades of neo-liberalism and it is inevitable that people make desperate destructive choices.  (Brexit, Trump, possibly tenants in favour of S24.  To be clear I don't think S24 will be bad for tenants generally, and for many it may enable them to buy at a sensible price... but it is another example - IMHO - of a risky policy that those screwed by neo-liberalism are happy to vote for even thought it might harm them as well as the people they wish to punish.). 

Assymetric notice is a massive one.  Anyone who claims to be a landlord should be able to say to a tenant "you can definitely stay for 5 or 10 years". 

Venger - in 16 years as a landlord I have only ever once put up the rent mid-tenancy and have never asked a tenant to leave for any reason.  The once I put up the rent mid tenancy is on a property that has been occupied by the same people for 10 years and the rent has risen 5% in that time.  I bought my first BTL for a very very simple reason.  I don't trust stock markets or financial institutions and I do not trust government not to change the rules on pensions. 

Government were encouraging BTL and I thought - so far rightly - that it was a good bet to provide for myself and my family as I got older.  My very simplistic thinking was that if the typical household spends a third of its income on housing then if you own three outright you can get by OK.  My plan was to buy buy buy and then sell off a few to pay down debt on the rest.  

Edit - S24 is VERY unfair for the simple reason is that it punishes those with assets and debt, but does not punish those who are very very rich and do not have debt.  

FU.

Govt simply didn't close it down when they should have.

And now they've changed the rules on all the tax-reliefs the BTLers been gobbling up all the homes with, to create the rental demand in the first place... with all their claims on multiple homes.

And he hides behind tenants as human shields vs S24 - also trying to take view of job losses recession, when lower prices are good thing for most GenRent, and less money in housing likely means more money to be spent in productive economy.

Anything is better than <35 year olds with only 3% of the housing wealth, and people like him, who made their choices, having loads and loads of homes, claimed by ever more debt, MEW, buy more homes, MEW, for decades - all while reading HPC and seeing how hard GenRent getting it for years.   Go bankrupt you greedy chump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azal777 said:

As you aware the transaction was classed as a sale (I dint believe that’s right but that’s the law)

my wife and I were allowed a certain increment before taxation was applied.

the gap between what we paid initially, add our combined allowance, less the market value at time of sale was virtually zero.

therefore it was a no brainer in our view and dealt with by the solicitor and accountant.

not rocket science.

there is a fair argument for helping out our children too much but, they will help us out too and families working together like many Asian communities is I think the best way forward. Just my view 

The current CGT allowance is 11k.

Even if you could use 2 CGT - which you may not - thats only 22k difference between buying the place in the 90s and when you sold it.

Share this post


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

The current CGT allowance is 11k.

Even if you could use 2 CGT - which you may not - thats only 22k difference between buying the place in the 90s and when you sold it.

Alas I brought in 2009, wished I did buy in the 90s, but “sold” it in 2012. Market had only moved about the amount of the allowance. No brainer. 

Share this post


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

See below.  Neverwhere totallyexposed all the warpness of his positioning, trying to make himself out as 'the innocent one' - to blame Govt for all his eagerness to buy up all the homes.

And just like azal777 who has rocked back up to HPC in 2017 (joined forum in 2005), to make his 5th,6th 7th post, about HPI greatness, BTL rent-it-out, "don't cash in for £500,000 cause property where it's at" / "I think long term with property" / "can't see any risks" / property galore, "get the rent in"

Father Fred also a 2005 joiner.....  knew all the issues, has happily look in on HPC forum silently for years... while buying more and more and more houses to rent out.

Father Fred Comes back in 2017 with how S24 so unfair, and could lead to tenants losing homes, and repossessions... he don't give a damn apart from anything but all his HPI++++ and he's just another BTLer landlord pure focus to extremes on himself... and **** GenRent/young.

 

 

It never ceases to astonish me that whenever a BTLer rocks up, or rocks back up after years, there's so many do-gooder HPCers who think it's just a matter of 'splaining things to them.  That if they can reach them from goodness of their hearts they would change their ways.

It's no wonder things reached stage they have with housing financialisation to extremes.  Softy limp-wimp GenRenters, with a view that BTLers just misguided - all some pathetic big accident, that the BTL can be 'splained to, and turned good.  They don't care.  He's here to tell you, on HPC forum, he's fighting for HPI and BTLism, and rent it out glory...."property long term".   Just like all the others over the years, and on other forums.  Completely totally pathetic.   They chose their sides already.  They've spent years reaping rent, buying up more homes, feasting and causing GenRent.  You want to help them out of their delusion?  First you need to break your own delusion.  It's a battle between BTLers/HPIers, and GenRent/those on side of anti-housing financialisation, and BTLers/HPiers spent decades winning it, to the cost of GenRent/young.

not sure what your point is really. There was a serious recession in 2007, house prices dropped down to a sensible level, the market was open to ANYBODY that had savings. If they were FTB these gen/rent that you refer to they required only 10% as the lending got underdtandly stricter. Landlords needed 25%

the market was open to anybody who had worked and saved, not worked and wasted or liked to show off fancy holiday snaps from all other the world like I often had shoved under my nose since we saved and went nowhere. We put our life on hold ten years prior to take advantage should prices ever fall to a realistic level.

gen/rent could so easily have been gen/buy but clearly had no savings, it’s as simple as that. 

Then the estate agents and gvt orgasmed over the flood of landlords who took advantage and kept them in jobs whilst showing a future income stream to the depressed coffers of the gvt, which was inevitable.

fyi I came on here as I’m no longer working due to ill health so have a lot of time to pass.

i would agree with you on a fairer way of doing things but in a capitalist society it works on competition, we are al forced to be competitive every single day, closing sales, beating prices, searching for jobs, it’s the way things work. In the end we are all forced to work within it, it’s not a system I think is right but it’s one I’m stuck with so I don’t feel guilty one bit.

btw the way money is created is via debt, if nobody took any out this economy would collapse in no time, no growth =no debt, no debt =no growth. So debt will always be encouraged in one form or another as the fiat currency gets created off the back of signed mortgages, it’s those signed agreements that create cash.

and for those gen/rent now I would advise another large correction is coming so if you want to break that cycle, be patient, save and buy in at sensible prices with a 10% deposit.

alternatively if you really hate the system that much stay at home, rent free so you can really save hard and be in a position to buy later. Certainly there’s an upswell in that camp amongst the friends of my daughters young enough not to be committed and old enough to work and save.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, azal777 said:

Alas I brought in 2009, wished I did buy in the 90s, but “sold” it in 2012. Market had only moved about the amount of the allowance. No brainer. 

Does not tally with your earlier to claim to have 'bought in a recession and paid for it over 3-4 years whilst prices were still depressed'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, azal777 said:

not sure what your point is really. There was a serious recession in 2007, house prices dropped down to a sensible level, the market was open to ANYBODY that had savings. If they were FTB these gen/rent that you refer to they required only 10% as the lending got underdtandly stricter. Landlords needed 25%

the market was open to anybody who had worked and saved, not worked and wasted or liked to show off fancy holiday snaps from all other the world like I often had shoved under my nose since we saved and went nowhere. We put our life on hold ten years prior to take advantage should prices ever fall to a realistic level.

gen/rent could so easily have been gen/buy but clearly had no savings, it’s as simple as that. 

Then the estate agents and gvt orgasmed over the flood of landlords who took advantage and kept them in jobs whilst showing a future income stream to the depressed coffers of the gvt, which was inevitable.

fyi I came on here as I’m no longer working due to ill health so have a lot of time to pass.

i would agree with you on a fairer way of doing things but in a capitalist society it works on competition, we are al forced to be competitive every single day, closing sales, beating prices, searching for jobs, it’s the way things work. In the end we are all forced to work within it, it’s not a system I think is right but it’s one I’m stuck with so I don’t feel guilty one bit.

btw the way money is created is via debt, if nobody took any out this economy would collapse in no time, no growth =no debt, no debt =no growth. So debt will always be encouraged in one form or another as the fiat currency gets created off the back of signed mortgages, it’s those signed agreements that create cash.

and for those gen/rent now I would advise another large correction is coming so if you want to break that cycle, be patient, save and buy in at sensible prices with a 10% deposit.

alternatively if you really hate the system that much stay at home, rent free so you can really save hard and be in a position to buy later. Certainly there’s an upswell in that camp amongst the friends of my daughters young enough not to be committed and old enough to work and save.

No. There was not a serious recession in 2007. The massive bubble started to unwind from 2007- 2009, then QE ZIRP was thrown in at the cost of mine and your kids future to bail the banks and overleveraged out.

Share this post


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

No. There was not a serious recession in 2007. The massive bubble started to unwind from 2007- 2009, then QE ZIRP was thrown in at the cost of mine and your kids future to bail the banks and overleveraged out.

Well I agree the recession was nowhere near as serious as it should have been but I classified it as one on the basis of buying a house for £97k in 2008 when it cost the previous owner £175000 only 3 years before.

If that wasn’t a serious discount due to depressed market forces I’m not sure what else constitutes a recession. 

I agree on the QE and us being on the hook for the banks, out of order, and should be against the law, but, instead of jail those folks got bonuses and commendations. 

Ptecisely because of trying to keep the illusion running we just kicked the can further down the road, it will in my view blow up again and be even more serious this time around. 

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.