Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cashinmattress

£700M Welcome Boost For Build-To-Let Homes

Recommended Posts

link

The British Property Federation (BPF) has welcomed the detail of a £700m government pledge to build up to 10,000 new build-to-let homes.

In a Written Ministerial Statement Housing Minister Mark Prisk announced the first tranche of winning bidders of the Build to Rent Fund, which was increased from £200m to £1bn in last month’s Budget.

The BPF welcomed the announcement and the Government’s continued no-nonsense approach to delivering the findings of the Montague Review.

Ian Fletcher, director of policy at the British Property Federation, said: “The bids show the depth and breadth of interest from investors, to housing associations, house builders and construction companies. There are some big names, but also smaller innovative companies, and it all bodes well for round two.

“The further members of the task force have an excellent breath of experience and skills and under the stewardship of Andrew Stanford should act as a good support function within Government for local authorities and this burgeoning build-to-let sector."

So let me get this right... government gives what looks like a grant to some private firm so that they can create commercial housing?

What the hell man? Why is Britain so incredibly screwed up?

What about helping out Joe Bloggs and his family with grants and planning permission to self build a 'nice' dwelling to raise his kids in, instead of fanning the flames of rent seeking scumbags?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our new chinese overlords have got to have somewhere to invest their re-patriated pounds...

Lets face it, the'yre not all going to buy range-rovers that fall apart after a year. Once the cachet of the badge wears off they'll be back to Mercs and BMWs in no time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link

So let me get this right... government gives what looks like a grant to some private firm so that they can create commercial housing?

What the hell man? Why is Britain so incredibly screwed up?

What about helping out Joe Bloggs and his family with grants and planning permission to self build a 'nice' dwelling to raise his kids in, instead of fanning the flames of rent seeking scumbags?

You sound surprised?

The reason that this happened is because, it is the UK and no one gives a toss about each other or society - one of the reasons that I left.

**** society, lets make a quick buck goes right from the bottom up to the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound surprised?

The reason that this happened is because, it is the UK and no one gives a toss about each other or society - one of the reasons that I left.

**** society, lets make a quick buck goes right from the bottom up to the top.

And you think the South of Ireland is any different?

It's not. From the taxi driver to the TDs - they are just as bad, if not worse.

Edited by 2buyornot2buy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/04/2013 at 3:13 PM, PopGun said:

Told you so....

I'd gloat if this wasn't so depressing.

So right, it's been obvious since knocking out the "little people" with S24 - only the big boys will be allowed to make money from renting property. What a screwed up country we've become.

Share this post


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

So right, it's been obvious since knocking out the "little people" with S24 - only the big boys will be allowed to make money from renting property. What a screwed up country we've become.

Oh FFS. S24 came in because of the danger represented to the financial system of highly leveraged innumerate f0ckwits. Institutional investors have professional oversite and besides you can invest in them yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Si1 said:

Oh FFS. S24 came in because of the danger represented to the financial system of highly leveraged innumerate f0ckwits. Institutional investors have professional oversite and besides you can invest in them yourself.

Why that way? They could easily have restricted mortgage availability, which would have stopped any more people becoming fOckwits, and wouldn't have shafted and caused grief to existing BTLers. The number of BTLers would just gradually diminish (people die or just get tired of BTL, it isn't always easy renting out a house you know) without  causing major trouble and grief to them (and their tenants by the way).

 

Share this post


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

And institutional investor will not be emotionally involved with their business. Managers and employees will provide a dispassionate corporate service in the same way that Premier Inns provides a corporate hotel service. Presumably they will forget about their job when they go home at the end of the day. Amateur LLs seem to eat and sleep their BTL investment, their self-assessed investment genius, and their 'winning' LL status, complete with disdain for their 'loser' serfs. 

Have you stayed in a Premier Inn? Did you find it provided "perfect, professional service", does any hotel chain? What makes you think they'll look after the rented out houses? They go home and forget, exactly, not their house, not their problem - who cares that the tap leaks? Hiding behind their desk and PLC status. They still want to make money, just as the BTLer does. And it's the 'loser; serfs who pay both. With decreased competition from BTLers, they're onto a winner, supply and demand, it's basic economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, yodigo said:

Why that way? They could easily have restricted mortgage availability, which would have stopped any more people becoming fOckwits, and wouldn't have shafted and caused grief to existing BTLers. 

 

I don't think anyone actually cares if current BTLrs got shafted. Business risk. Suck it up. And besides, s24 has minimal collateral damage and sorts the problem rather quickly.

 

Share this post


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

I don't think anyone actually cares if current BTLrs got shafted. Business risk. Suck it up. And besides, s24 has minimal collateral damage and sorts the problem rather quickly.

 

Well you would if it was your mum & dad, son or daughter. Suck what up? Doesn't affect me, but it's just a nasty, unnecessary action supported by idiots who don't see the bigger picture.

Share this post


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

Well you would if it was your mum & dad, son or daughter. Suck what up? Doesn't affect me, but it's just a nasty, unnecessary action supported by idiots who don't see the bigger picture.

You wouldn't understand the bigger picture if it bum raped you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Si1 said:

You wouldn't understand the bigger picture if it bum raped you.

Such a nice person aren't you. We're all blessed that you're here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TonyJ said:

 I stayed with friends in one such large block in New York once, completely owned by a large corporate LL that owned several other buildings. They had an on-site manager and dedicated maintenance man, all at the end of the phone.

If it's done that way then it could work. Fingers crossed that it is.

Share this post


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

and wouldn't have shafted and caused grief to existing BTLers.

If it doesn’t do that, what’s the point?  

13 minutes ago, yodigo said:

Well you would if it was your mum & dad, son or daughter

I would feel sad about what they had done, and angry about the people who’d led them into it, but that doesn’t absolve them of guilt.  

It’s no different to my son or daughter murdering someone or selling drugs.

Fortunately, my parents have a decent sense of right and wrong. 

Edited by BuyToLeech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, yodigo said:

unnecessary action supported by idiots who don't see the bigger picture.

Buying up homes to prevent other people having them is wrong, it’s always wrong, there’s no bigger picture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TonyJ said:

I was thinking more they would build blocks of rental flats and terraces of rental houses, and manage whole complexes. I stayed with friends in one such large block in New York once, completely owned by a large corporate LL that owned several other buildings. They had an on-site manager and dedicated maintenance man, all at the end of the phone. And corporate LLs would have a corporate reputation to protect, because their share price would depend on it, unlike an amateur LL.

It's basically the same model as council flats, though as (at least in the nicer blocks) their customers can afford to go elsewhere, they will have an incentive to be reasonably responsive. There's a fair bit of this type of development already happening. Service is unlikely to be perfect, but will tend to somewhere around average. Owning your own home and dealing with tradesmen directly to get stuff fixed is hardly a bed of roses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BuyToLeech said:

If it doesn’t do that, what’s the point?  

I would feel sad about what they had done, and angry about the people who’d led them into it, but that doesn’t absolve them of guilt.  

It’s no different to my son or daughter murdering someone or selling drugs.

Fortunately, my parents have a decent sense of right and wrong. 

What guilt? Making money? Like people have always done? How are businesses funded, just by shaking the magic money tree in the garden or going to the bank?

A BTLer is worse than the legalised drug dealer in the high street (the pub) who allows people to become violent drunks, who can then go out and kill or injury someone? Get real.

Many reasons for high house prices if that's the basis for your resentment, as shown by the the extra tax in 2016 NOT causing a fall in them.

If BTL is a problem in someway, then curb new entrants, then it'll slowly die down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TonyJ said:

And I imagine it was expensive since the friend was a lawyer working in New York at the time. The flat was quite nice and more than my needs.  All I want is a basic, clean, well maintained, modern 'soulless' box, rather than the massively overpriced load of scuzzy, peeling paint, bedsit sh*t that BTL LLs get away with here.

There in lies the problem, the cost. People can only afford what they can afford, and they'll always be that bottom end of the market, legal or otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, this week, the Tories will be forwarding discussions of 'Capitalism' to educate younger voters about the dangers of socialism. Quite a feat when infact the Tories implement 'Crony Capitalism' and not 'Capitalism'. It's quite some bare-faced cheek for the current Tory party to even enter into the debate. We have entered a parallel 1970's universe where it is no longer the unions controlling the economy via their grip over government. Now we have the Bank of England,  Cartel house builders and bailout-banks controlling housing supply and credit and it's in their interest for the housing crisis and rents/house prices to get even worse. As well as the Buy-to-let MPs. It will be interesting to watch the ever more farcical deviation of tax payer revenues into the housing market over the coming years. The 70's didn't end well either in this respect. It's just staggering now. The 'in-your-face' corruption of it all.

 

 

 

Edited by frankvw

Share this post


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

A BTLer is worse than the legalised drug dealer in the high street (the pub) who allows people to become violent drunks, who can then go out and kill or injury someone?

Yes. Much worse. 

Making money is fine.  Taking it from people by threatening them with homelessness is not.

the-eviction-of-irish-peasant-tenants-by

Edited by BuyToLeech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Owning rental homes is a good way for pension funds to get steady, reliable income to pay their pensioners, so a growing number are keen to invest. Legal and General, for example, the giant pensions and insurance company, has earmarked over £1bn to invest in BTR.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43324486

 

It's all connected.

 

On 4/18/2013 at 3:51 PM, Wurzel Of Highbridge said:

**** society, lets make a quick buck goes right from the bottom up to the top.

+1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The governbankment have realised too many of the middle class were turning to BTL to fund working less hours and early retirement. Therefore the tax had to increase on it to make it less attractive, so they have to work more hours for more years and so pay more tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 244 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.