Miliband To Outline Plans To Protect Private Tenants

[tomandlu]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20996278

The 'proposals' are vague and half-hearted, and, strangely, I don't feel particularly inclined to be grateful to the party who created this mess in the first place.

Still, it's interesting that renters are suddenly a demographic worth pursuing...

"Most people who rent have responsible landlords and rental agencies. But there are too many rogue landlords and agencies either providing accommodation which is unfit or ripping off their tenants.

"And too many families face the doubt of a two-month notice period before being evicted.

"Imagine being a parent with kids settled in a local school and your family settled in your home for two, three, four years, facing that sort of uncertainty."

[aa3]

If renters do become the majority of voters, politicians would at least have to pretend to be fighting for their rights.

An idea I like from this forum, is that real rights for tenants will not only help the tenants, but in the long run create a more professional class of landlord. For example the fear of having to move, and possibly not finding another tenancy in the same school area. Well a professional landlord isn't a person renting out a second house, then trying to flip it. Likely they will have dozens or even hundreds of rental units, and will follow the code line by line.

[doahh]

Likely they will have dozens or even hundreds of rental units, and will follow the code line by line.

I am a bit more cynical than you and would think that many landlords would not bother to follow the codes. The councils would take years to get around to a prosecution and it would be at least a decade or more before anything really changes. By that time the government will be happy to encourage the housing market again and they will rip down the regulations to encourage 'entrepreneurs'.

[Bloo Loo]

Id vote labour if they had a policy on tenants rights.

such is democracy....

[Anna_1980]

Id vote labour if they had a policy on tenants rights.

such is democracy....

Me too, although I vote for anybody who will introduce a meaningful social housing building program, which will drive rental prices down as there will be more choice and not monopoly of greed...

Talking about monopoly, interesting game - anybody played it this Xmas?

[tomandlu]

Me too, although I vote for anybody who will introduce a meaningful social housing building program, which will drive rental prices down as there will be more choice and not monopoly of greed...

Talking about monopoly, interesting game - anybody played it this Xmas?

Frequently (also "The Walking Dead" board game based on the TV show, but that's another story - good game though).

There are some interesting Monopoly variants:

http://www.moneyreformparty.org.uk/fun/credit_monopoly/index.php

http://antimonopoly.com/how-anti-monopoly-plays/

[Venger]

If renters do become the majority of voters, politicians would at least have to pretend to be fighting for their rights.

An idea I like from this forum, is that real rights for tenants will not only help the tenants, but in the long run create a more professional class of landlord. For example the fear of having to move, and possibly not finding another tenancy in the same school area. Well a professional landlord isn't a person renting out a second house, then trying to flip it. Likely they will have dozens or even hundreds of rental units, and will follow the code line by line.

Yes, doctors in their mansions with 40+ BTLs to pass to their children. We can totally rely on them. I want to see more younger home-owners with a stake, whereas you want new Wilson types acquiring hundreds of houses.

It would be more palatable if were pension funds ect running it rather than your preferred landlords are doctors and teachers. There is already evidence such individuals don't make the most reliable landlords when they've acquired many 'units' taking ages to repair things and even taking tenants to court over minor breakages that should be covered by insurance.

And that their main interests not being aligned to providing a well running home for the tenant at a fair market rate, but of money, always with an eye to get more money in. Go promote your scheme to your doctors and well-to-do people. I want to see more of them overleverage themselves and end up with nothing, following such a greedy path.

“Agents know to come to me if they think people are prepared to drop the price,” Wilson boasts. In a few instances, he has bought properties from people in financial difficulty and rented them back to them. “It’s sad sometimes, but we’re in the business to make money, not to house people,” he says. “People end up in financial difficulty because they don’t pay attention. They’re busy watching the rugby rather than doing their paperwork.”

.

Its something that over many years, like 30+ years, can build capital, and produce a modest income per unit/house. I recommend BTL to people with very high incomes, like specialist doctors, as something to build up capital to pass on to their children and grandchildren. These are people who actually invest and maintain their properties; they hire a commercial operator and follow their recommendations. It is a professional level approach.

The unit you mentioned pays £720 a month. So £8,640 a year, not a bad start. Then £210 is deducted in the service charges. Then there is council tax. Then insurance which realistically is going to be £600 a year. Long term maintenance is about 1.5% of the value of the unit a year, although the service charge will cover most of this. (to do it on a professional level I am a big fan of the condos.. detached houses have too many costs associated with them).

When you start accumulating units there will be a vacancy rate, realistically 5%. To have a property management company takes between 12-30% of the rent depending on how many units you have. Again favouring the people with very high incomes, who can have many.

Then to have it incorporated, it is going to take annual legal fees and bookkeeping and accountancy fees. Again favouring the person who has many units. There are also mortgage refinance fees, but this can be factored into the cost of financing.

The real payoff comes many years from now, like 30-40 years, when you have 40 units, and the early ones are now paid off. But even then you won't be a super rich person. 40 units, each bringing in net income of £4,000 a year, is £160,000 a year. But assuming you have a small family, it is an incredible advantage for those children.

[Gone baby gone]

Surely we should let the market decide?

Nobody forces tenants to stay with their current landlord? Why should any landlord be forced to keep the current tenants?

Or do we need state intervention when it might benefit us?

[okaycuckoo]

Frequently (also "The Walking Dead" board game based on the TV show, but that's another story - good game though).

There are some interesting Monopoly variants:

http://www.moneyrefo...opoly/index.php

http://antimonopoly....monopoly-plays/

You can now play it with the iPhone:

http://www.ea.com/monopoly-iphone

[tomandlu]

Surely we should let the market decide?

Nobody forces tenants to stay with their current landlord? Why should any landlord be forced to keep the current tenants?

Or do we need state intervention when it might benefit us?

But the market is so distorted in other ways that you cannot just let it decide.

[Bruce Banner]

Id vote labour if they had a policy on tenants rights.

such is democracy....

They'd probably wriggle out of it like they always do.

I remember the 1997 election campaign when Blair kept repeating "Watch my lips, no tax increases", I was almost shouting at the TV for the interviewers to ask "What about National Insurance", but none did . Sure enough, as soon as they got in, up went NI :angry:.

[@contradevian]

Surely we should let the market decide?

Nobody forces tenants to stay with their current landlord? Why should any landlord be forced to keep the current tenants?

Or do we need state intervention when it might benefit us?

You don't have a lot of real choice of landlord though. Its either an AST or if you are lucky to get accepted by some kind of social landlord which these days is umm an AST.

Also I suspect like most towns pretty much all the BTL rentals are laundered through half dozen or so letting agencies all jostling to push up fee's and rentals to survive.

[Eddie_George]

Why has it taken so long for this to be even mentioned? This should be a staple policy of the Labour Party since the year dot. Ridiculous.

[LiveinHope]

Why has it taken so long for this to be even mentioned? This should be a staple policy of the Labour Party since the year dot. Ridiculous.

Because they don't have a clue what to do having never been in the 'real world'. They, like others, are learning on the job and seeking popularity. If elected, they will tun out to be fraudulent, not by intent but due to inexperience and incompetence.

Edited January 12, 2013 by LiveinHope

[Eddie_George]

Because they don't have a clue what to do having never been in the 'real world'. They, like others, are learning on the job and seeking popularity. If elected, they will tun out to be fraudulent, not by intent but due to inexperience and incompetence.

Yep, and it just goes to show that the politicians have always been on the side of the rentiers.

[porca misèria]

Why has it taken so long for this to be even mentioned? This should be a staple policy of the Labour Party since the year dot. Ridiculous.

It kind-of was. In that post-war period they regulated the rental sector right out of existence. Tenants were protected, but very soon the burden on landlords became so onerous there were none left except the very tough (borderline) gangsters in the market, and they'd offer a 'license' to live somewhere, not a tenancy with rights. Hence you basically had only the mafia to rent from, unless you could get housed on a who-you-know basis.

[SHERWICK]

They'd probably wriggle out of it like they always do.

I remember the 1997 election campaign when Blair kept repeating "Watch my lips, no tax increases", I was almost shouting at the TV for the interviewers to ask "What about National Insurance", but none did . Sure enough, as soon as they got in, up went NI :angry:.

Wasn't that George Bush 1 in 1988 though?

[SHERWICK]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_my_lips:_no_new_taxes

[Bruce Banner]

Wasn't that George Bush 1 in 1988 though?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_my_lips:_no_new_taxes

So that's where Blair got the idea from .

[porca misèria]

Wasn't that George Bush 1 in 1988 though?

Noone in the UK believed him. Noone in the US believed him unless they desperately wanted to, as an article of faith.

At the time it was the most obvious reason why he tricked[1] his regional henchman Saddam Hussein into invading Kuwait, then led an invasion of Iraq. He needed a distraction and the cover of a war.

[1] As first explained by the late, great Alistair Cooke who pieced together the chain from Bush instructing his ambassador in Iraq to encourage a historic 'reunification' and assure Saddam the US would turn a blind eye.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

So that's where Blair got the idea from .

My history may be fuzzy but im pretty sure there was a massive redistribution away from income tax on to NI in the 80s

[Bruce Banner]

My history may be fuzzy but im pretty sure there was a massive redistribution away from income tax on to NI in the 80s

The words, not the action.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

The words, not the action.

So all you give a sh@t about are politicians words, they can do what they want as long as they talk a good show,

No doubt youll be giving away your Democratic* right to the Lib Dems in the next election

*Poetic Licence

[davidg]

So Millipede thinks some huge database run by councils is the answer, no doubt he'll get his chums in from Crapita or CGS to do the IT needed, with a nice back hander paid into his Cayman Island's bank account, if you please. I thought we had enough of these schemes under the last lot.

It might be better to extend the existing HMRC scheme to make sure all rented houses are declared by law and tax is being paid. It would be an idea to offer longer leases as standard to agreeing tenants and landlords but without onerous longhold tenancy issues. Perhaps tax breaks that encourage landlordism as opposed to other investments should be examined, although with the FLS hammering investors who can blame them for looking at property? Other than creating a more even playing field between buyers, renters and landlords the govt should get out the way of the market.

As an earlier poster said, all these no-nothings like Millepede, Cameroon etc are all out of their depths. You wouldn't give the Prime Minstership to an 18 year old school leaver, why give it to someone who has lived their life sucking the public purse and who has never had a proper job? Madness.

[doomed]

So Millipede thinks some huge database run by councils is the answer, no doubt he'll get his chums in from Crapita or CGS to do the IT needed, with a nice back hander paid into his Cayman Island's bank account, if you please. I thought we had enough of these schemes under the last lot.

It might be better to extend the existing HMRC scheme to make sure all rented houses are declared by law and tax is being paid. It would be an idea to offer longer leases as standard to agreeing tenants and landlords but without onerous longhold tenancy issues. Perhaps tax breaks that encourage landlordism as opposed to other investments should be examined, although with the FLS hammering investors who can blame them for looking at property? Other than creating a more even playing field between buyers, renters and landlords the govt should get out the way of the market.

As an earlier poster said, all these no-nothings like Millepede, Cameroon etc are all out of their depths. You wouldn't give the Prime Minstership to an 18 year old school leaver, why give it to someone who has lived their life sucking the public purse and who has never had a proper job? Madness.

They are just puppets doing as their paymasters tell them. They want people out of their depth as they are less likely to rock the boat. I see no hope in my lifetime of anything ever changing.

This protecting private tenants is just a way for them to collect more tax nothing else.