Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fru-gal

Brent Council Consulting On Bringing In Full Scale Prs Licensing For All Landlords

Recommended Posts

The good landlords will join and the bad ones will be fined.

10,000 landlords to administer is a lot of council hours though. Looks like someone wants a job creation scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good landlords will join and the bad ones will be fined.

10,000 landlords to administer is a lot of council hours though. Looks like someone wants a job creation scheme.

Also an easy way for Brent to make money from a popular target and get details of lots of property owners to pass on to HMRC so they can setup a future database of landlords ready for the next Labour government to inflict new crushingly high taxes on them wink.gif.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

crushingly high taxes

How's that going to work? Rent will go up to cover taxes. You lot need to stop calling for taxes or you'll get them!

How about proposing as such:

- determine fair rate of area by suitable average of the mortgages paid by landlords and owners for similar properties

- for any rent paid over that rate give the renter a tax break = 100% of over spend

Or put in rent controls.

Of course none of these solutions will work in emotionally bankrupt Britain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's that going to work? Rent will go up to cover taxes. You lot need to stop calling for taxes or you'll get them!

How about proposing as such:

- determine fair rate of area by suitable average of the mortgages paid by landlords and owners for similar properties

- for any rent paid over that rate give the renter a tax break = 100% of over spend

Or put in rent controls.

Of course none of these solutions will work in emotionally bankrupt Britain.

You sound rattled, are you a landlord? If you think rent will go up to cover taxes in this economic climate I think you are dreaming. The bottom line is, how much rent a landlord gets is determined by ability to pay (or ability/desire of government to subsidise them) how much they chose to borrow to become a landlord during the "good times" is their problem :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rent will go up to cover taxes.

Let me just point out that its doesn't work like that! LL's don't fix the rent's (I know some do try! but they don't understand markets either!) the market does and they will always try to maximize the rents they get. Would LL's cut rents if their costs go down? No... Then additional taxes on BTL will simply make it less profitable to be in BTL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good landlords will join and the bad ones will be fined.

10,000 landlords to administer is a lot of council hours though. Looks like someone wants a job creation scheme.

Sounds like too many private landlords to me. I bet there are a few with most of the houses (sort of mini Wilsons) and then there is a long tail of house distribution with the 'reluctant landlords' having just one or two 'properties' each.

So much easier when the local landlord was 'the Council.'

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like too many private landlords to me. I bet there are a few with most of the houses (sort of mini Wilsons) and then there is a long tail of house distribution with the 'reluctant landlords' having just one or two 'properties' each.

So much easier when the local landlord was 'the Council.'

Actually, if Labour wanted to make amends for the mess they made of housing during their last tenure, they could inflict punitive taxes on landlords (along with rent controls), get a flood of properties onto the market by landlords selling up due to their inability to make money, buy back all the properties cheaply, turn them into social housing and voila, damage repaired. Of course Labour are no better than the Tories and love the rentier class so this will never happen but I can dream.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welfare reforms suggest rents at best will be static in the next few years. Of course London will be different but will eventually fall into line.

The trouble is some of these landlords have brought this on themselves by renting out hovels. Those that saw Benefits street last night would have seen the state of that house the Romanians were renting, clearly that Landlord needs some sort of regulatory framework to kick his **** and provide liveable accommodation.

We have had a (temporary 5 years)scheme around here for the last 2 years or so and it has made a huge difference. Low cost slum rentals went by and large to the problem families and others who would/could not live anywhere else all of course on welfare. Anti social behaviour increased through the HMO's making everyone's life more miserable. A couple of estate agents in the town had bought up most of the larger type properties converted them (badly) to HMO's and let them to rake in the HB. When there were problems they couldn't give a $hit.

Councils registration scheme kicked them into line and made the area much better for everyone else.

I see these schemes as expanding and becoming the norm going forward and rightly so. Yes it does provide jobs for the council but mine stipulates puts no extra pressure on taxation as the scheme is entirely funded from the LL subscriptions.

For the renter it provides a base standard and will do away with hovels.

Newham council first to introduce permanent scheme.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20876934

Newham moves to prosecute rogue landlords

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/legal/newham-to-prosecute-134-prs-landlords/7001532.article

Don't hang about do they!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me just point out that its doesn't work like that! LL's don't fix the rent's (I know some do try! but they don't understand markets either!) the market does and they will always try to maximize the rents they get. Would LL's cut rents if their costs go down? No... Then additional taxes on BTL will simply make it less profitable to be in BTL.

Not immediately of course. However, those landlords who cannot keep going will exit the market leaving those who are successful at covering their costs. If the taxes are too high, then the number of homes available for rent will go down significantly. Higher taxes are ultimately paid by people, not by piles of bricks.

Extra regulation will always make prices higher. An oversupply of rental property improves quality and reduces prices. Rents have not risen much in the last ten years, mainly due to the BTL brigade. I'm not saying it is right, but prices of rental properties would go up if there were fewer about. I choose to rent at present and I would not want to see fewer rental properties about, as the choice would reduce and prices would go up.

The solution to the housing problems is to build more housing, instead people think taxes and regulations can solve the problem. No amount of taxes and regulations on the existing housing stock will increase the numbers of homes or make them more affordable, short of nationalising housing.

Edited by BalancedBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if Labour wanted to make amends for the mess they made of housing during their last tenure, they could inflict punitive taxes on landlords (along with rent controls), get a flood of properties onto the market by landlords selling up due to their inability to make money, buy back all the properties cheaply, turn them into social housing and voila, damage repaired. Of course Labour are no better than the Tories and love the rentier class so this will never happen but I can dream.

What about people who wish to rent homes which are not social housing? If the government wants social housing, it could choose to build some anyway. Why interfere with everyone else's business in the process? Half the solutions proposed on this forum are just as biased to another group as the current system.

Edited by BalancedBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about people who wish to rent homes which are not social housing? If the government wants social housing, it could choose to build some anyway. Why interfere with everyone else's business in the process? Half the solutions proposed on this forum are just as biased to another group as the current system.

There will always be private rentals, there will always be private landlords, we just need more social homes for lower rents and less of a monopoly where all rentals are badly regulated private ones which is the way we are going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be private rentals, there will always be private landlords, we just need more social homes for lower rents and less of a monopoly where all rentals are badly regulated private ones which is the way we are going.

Building more social housing sounds good, but it isn't the most obvious obvious solution to the problem of badly regulated private rentals... Maybe we could also try regulating private rentals a bit less badly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Building more social housing sounds good, but it isn't the most obvious obvious solution to the problem of badly regulated private rentals... Maybe we could also try regulating private rentals a bit less badly?

Totally agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not immediately of course. However, those landlords who cannot keep going will exit the market leaving those who are successful at covering their costs. If the taxes are too high, then the number of homes available for rent will go down significantly.

Every landlord who sells-up increases the supply of houses for owner occupation. This reduces the number of families who need rented accommodation, reducing demand.

Higher taxes are ultimately paid by people, not by piles of bricks.

Landlords are people, they're just bad people is all.

Extra regulation will always make prices higher. An oversupply of rental property improves quality and reduces prices. Rents have not risen much in the last ten years, mainly due to the BTL brigade.

Wages haven't risen much either.

I'm not saying it is right, but prices of rental properties would go up if there were fewer about. I choose to rent at present and I would not want to see fewer rental properties about, as the choice would reduce...

and the competition for those places would also decrease. When a landlord enters the market, they first have to outbid a potential owner-occupier. Through this process they create the demand that they claim to supply. In fact, landlords do not supply housing.

...and prices would go up.

The solution to the housing problems is to build more housing, instead people think taxes and regulations can solve the problem. No amount of taxes and regulations on the existing housing stock will increase the numbers of homes or make them more affordable, short of nationalising housing.

The housing crisis wasn't caused by a lack of housing, however after 15 years it probably has led to a real lack of housing.

Also building is the easiest solution politically, and boosts the economy by creating jobs. So all-in-all, building new houses would be my favoured emergency solution.

Long-term, house building in the face of landlordism and a credit-bubble leads down the path followed by Spain and Ireland.

The real solution is to tax landlords, all landowners actually, until working for a living becomes more profitable than people farming.

Edited by (Blizzard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good landlords will join and the bad ones will be fined.

10,000 landlords to administer is a lot of council hours though. Looks like someone wants a job creation scheme.

All paid from through reduced returns on property

Here comes the long term cyclical trough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good landlords will join and the bad ones will be fined.

10,000 landlords to administer is a lot of council hours though. Looks like someone wants a job creation scheme.

Possibly more like a job retention scheme if the council is cutting jobs. No sure this would be massively profitable for the council unless they get in revenue in in other areas as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound rattled, are you a landlord? If you think rent will go up to cover taxes in this economic climate I think you are dreaming. The bottom line is, how much rent a landlord gets is determined by ability to pay (or ability/desire of government to subsidise them) how much they chose to borrow to become a landlord during the "good times" is their problem :lol:

Hardly. I don't put money into the property market. Too risky and illiquid. I am fascinated and worried by the nations addiction to it though.

7000 posts, you know very well that this isn't true. So who are you trying to convince, and why?

You add a tax to the landlord and you will see rent increase to make up for lost gains, or yields or whatever the BTL crowds call it. How is that convincing? If my taxes go up I'll seek out better salary. Whatever are you on about? Yes there are limits, but we are nowhere near them yet. Not by a long shot. Rents will increase, period. Unless you plan on routing the parliament of all the property holding MP's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call it a landlords tax if you like but BTL is a business but one not usually subject to a business rate.

If the BTL was a shop instead of a flat or house it would automatically have an additional level of taxation anyway.

I know of a few places where people 'live above the shop/business', where they have to pay both a domestic rate and a business rate.

Registration schemes are just levelling the playing field when you look at it like that but has the added value of flushing out the slumlords!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly. I don't put money into the property market. Too risky and illiquid. I am fascinated and worried by the nations addiction to it though.

You add a tax to the landlord and you will see rent increase to make up for lost gains, or yields or whatever the BTL crowds call it. How is that convincing? If my taxes go up I'll seek out better salary. Whatever are you on about? Yes there are limits, but we are nowhere near them yet. Not by a long shot. Rents will increase, period. Unless you plan on routing the parliament of all the property holding MP's.

If landlords could increase rent to pay for a new tax, why don't they increase it right now to pay for a new jag?

What are they waiting for?

Edited by (Blizzard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You add a tax to the landlord and you will see rent increase to make up for lost gains, or yields or whatever the BTL crowds call it. How is that convincing? If my taxes go up I'll seek out better salary. Whatever are you on about? Yes there are limits, but we are nowhere near them yet. Not by a long shot. Rents will increase, period. Unless you plan on routing the parliament of all the property holding MP's.

Percentage of income spent on rent is already over 70% in Brent, how much higher do you think that could go exactly?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20943576

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waltham Forest - no doubt observing the success of the scheme next door in Newham - are currently consulting on introducing a similar licensing scheme.

If anyone wishes to see more detail the consultation homepage is here

http://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/Pages/News/selective-licensing.aspx

There is also online questionnaire which people can complete to comment on the plans which closes on 24 Jan.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   211 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.