Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Bland Unsight's List Of Btl Bullshitters


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 214
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 22/08/2018 at 00:52, Bland Unsight said:

Not sure that a troll who is too lazy to read the forum as a guest when cribbing is a worthy adversary <_<

Seriously pal, if you could turn back time - would you do it differently?

Some know for certain that I am no troll.  Argumentative and passionate about the issues?  Yes.  Troll, no.

Depends what you mean.  There have been many fulfilling gains during my time reading HPC that I wouldn't do differently. 

I feel real sadness about many things around years of BTLers and BTL. 

And I feel lot of sadness for those who don't make honest conclusions about BTL and BTLers.  

"Just these multiple owning BTLer - but not my BTLers who need a pass for advertising and mainstream."   

I'm not in the slightest bit affected by some criticism of me on the thread.  I challenged your conclusions because they deserved to be challenged, on the thread you slipped them into.

Quote

 

You:  (Wednesday 22/08/18)

This is a thread where we have fun. If you want to row with me I have a thread for that (as you know).

 

You claim it a row, I say firm disagreement with your conclusions.

Yes, the other thread is a fun  'party' thread where people expect to read latest tales from the BTLers.   So a few people were annoyed that I got involved with challenging some of your posts (big deal).

You got away with slipping in many theories and conclusions I thought worthy of a National Landlords Association spokesman trying to get Section 24 repealed.   

*"BTL marketed as low risk investment / mainstream - therefore BTLers buyers don't think about what they do  - BTLers totally normal people."* 

It doesn't bother me that some (not all) couldn't understand or see the issues involved in clash of viewpoints, with their minds on hoping to see posts about BTLers getting what they deserve.

BTL is not mainstream for GenRent priced out of buying one home with very high prices in the market.  BTL has been imposed upon them by BTLers who choose to buy up more houses in their financial speculation, and their choice to leverage up. 

Quote

You: (Monday 20/08/18) I think of it as a kind of 'How normal are you?' chart. Each step to the left makes you less normal and more pwoperdee mad. The mean average number of properties held by the investors in the 10+ group is 23.5.

Hence I see it like this. That any interest-only buy-to-let lending to retail investors took place is regrettable but we are where we are and the genie won't go back in the bottle just because we don't like the look of the genie. People on the left in the 1 column are just totally normal people. The focus of this thread has always been the comedy misadventures of the 10+ guys on the right of the chart. What they did was so crazy that if somebody else wants to call them "scum" then I can understand.

What I can't understand is why you, Mossie, seem so determined to conflate these two very different groups of people.

And why not to not criticise the home-owning BTLers, with 1 or 2 properties rented out?  These totally normal BTLers.

 While multiple property BTLers are the main focus of that thread, that may be because they BTLers with the most selfish things to say are mostly the BTLers with lots of leverage and 'owners' of many properties rented out.

Can't be certain that overlander, July 16, 2015 didn't mean all BTLers.  I certainly include all BTLers who are complaining about Section 24, and not just those BTLers who have 10+ properties. 

There have been BTLers with 1 or 2 BTLs there who proved fun on BTL threads with their sense of entitlement. 

I know of a few BTLers who have 'just one'  BTL property, and if anything they at worse end of anything I've read from those on some BTL forums with 10+ BTLs with level of entitlement and how badly they think of Gen Rent and tenants.

BTL isn't mainstream for Gen Rent.  Those who chose to become BTLers, and even just 1 house bought in say 2014, had to think about what they were doing.  It is all upon them if they thought BTL rentierism was low-risk.   

What I don't understand is why you, Bland Unsight, are so eager to give a pass to the BTLers who 'just' have homeownership for themselves, and bought one or two other properties to rent out, rather than 10+. 

 And many 1-2 BTL landlords will have paid down lots of BTL debt and not be financially troubled by S24.   It's only those BTLers who chose to BTL in recent years with 1 BTL who will have more debt.  And they have been the very ones competing against FTBs at very high buying prices.

If someone bought a new place and rented out their old place (BTL) it was on them.  Unfortunately they did have the option to do so (BTL finance) and some took that option.   No one forced them to do it, with housing crisis becoming ever worse for others against prices and the BTL landlords.  And many BTLers very pleased they did take that option to keep old house (BTL) and buy another.  Their choice.

 Other people lived within their means with 1 property, or priced out altogether and in Gen Rent.  

Each and every BTLer made their choice to be BTL landlords (apart from those who inherited a BTL).   There are homeowning + '1' other property BTLers who still would buy a 2nd BTL if they could, or would have if it hadn't been for S24. 

I see little difference between a BTLer with 1 or 2 properties rented out, and those with lot more.  Hold them just as culpable and responsible to deal with any financial changes that might come upon them with S24 as other BTLers who have 5 or 10+ BTLs.   They are not victims.  And it's likely that most  to 2 owning BTLers are far more financially secure than the 10+ BTLers.

 If other newer BTLers, with their own home and say one or two rental properties bought in 2014 (investment assets) rented out in the market,  are more highly leveraged, it's all on them if Section24/possible 'lower financial asset price changes' puts them under financial pressure.

 The first response some BTLers are making into S24 is to try and boost up the the rent on tenants.  BTLers generally own their own home.  Some can sell, downsize, move area, or rent.  Renting was good enough for other people, they were active BTL landlords to.

Quote

You: (Monday 20/08/18)

It's important to note that I'm not arguing that buy-to-let is low risk. I agree with Ah-so's earlier point that we've ended up in a situation where leveraged investment in property is one of the first things that people will think about if they come into a small windfall. That's a very significant change that has occurred since the reform of the law on tenancies between 1988 and 1996 and the subsequent marketing of buy-to-let mortgages to retail investors. But its prevalence doesn't change its character. For all your repeated celebration of buy-to-let investors who are presently ahead there are different stories about bankruptcy and suicide which played out in Ireland in the wake of the financial crisis.

I am going to continue to stand behind the idea that most buy-to-let investors are normal people. What I am not going to stand behind is the idea that most buy-to-let mortgages are held by normal people.

Over half the loans (about 55%) are held by the roughly 20% of investors who have three or more mortgages. 65% of the investors have only one mortgage and these single loan investors hold less than a third of the mortgages.

Seriously?  I really hope there is another way to read all this that I am somehow missing.

Bankruptcy is as it is.  If it happens to some BTLers it's for them to deal with.  

Yet suicide?  I read about Ireland here on HPC during 2008 onward.  There were some people with very high debts in property and some suicides.  Suicide is always tragic.   

 Are you suggesting I should be thinking of 'BTLer suicide' possibilities in all my happiness about Section 24?   In all my challenges to your conclusions that BTLers just normal people/mainstream/don't think.   In my view that I don't see anything so different between many of the BTLers, whether it be 1 or 2 BTL properties in their BTL 'portfolio' or 10 BTL properties in another BTLer's portfolio?

Gen Rent has its own challenges to cope with, and BTLers have chosen to buy up properties and be landlords to the priced out.

 

Quote

You: This takes us back to a point which I have pretty long-held view on which his that seeing rentierism and financialisation as being "caused by the BTLers" is a really serious analytical error.

If you want to understand what happened and why it happened you need to set aside the idea that it was caused by Fergus Wilson, Kevin Green and Angela Bryant.

Once the mortgage product was around somebody was going to use it. For example, I'd contend that if Fergus and Ruth Wilson had both been killed in a car accident in 1985 then the structure of home-ownership on certain Kent new-build estates (and in particular the share owned by leveraged investors) would be very similar to how it actually is. If the Wilsons hadn't made those leveraged bets, someone else would have made them. People responded rationally to the incentives as they understood them. The incentives were there, the lending was available so the borrowing occurred.

True, but others did not, even if they had the means to do so.  Many people I know are satisfied with owning one home, would never do BTL, and they have nothing good to say about those in BTL; the BTL landlords.

It's ALL upon the people who did make their BTL choices, seeking to choose rentierism and financial speculation on homes.  Just because finance was available to do it, is not an excuse for all those individuals who chose to do it (BTL).  If S24 affects them (or HPC) - if ever - it's all on them.   Priced out renting tenants didn't make them be BTLers.

Quote

You: with the occasional pepper of FUD (see above).

The BTLers and BTL VI have frequently made the argument that more solvent BTL types will buy up the properties of BTLers who sell up.   Or that financial institutions will buy individual houses from them, and my understanding is that actually happened in the USA from 2008 onwards.  Then sold into REITs on the US stock market.   

Quote

You: (Wednesday 22/08/18)

I feel no rancour towards you. I don't think that the fate of the nation turns on these conversations. It's just a fun place for informed people to shoot the breeze. If you despise me, you despise me. I don't know you so I don't know what to make of what you think. I think that housing matters.

There's nothing I can do if you want to use low tactics that I am 'despising' you and play the victim that way.  I have no rancour to you either.  Even with your ignore outburst, I told you didn't want to report it, just sought assurance you would not do it to any other person. 

What people use the forum for and get out of the forum is for them to decide.    Someone else recently told you that you don't get to decide what the forum is about, and also told you the issues and the conclusions from discussion actually matter to them in different ways that it seems they matter to you. 

By your logic you could say your book doesn't matter either, but you set you your position and put time into it for your conclusions.

Seems to me you think housing matters, but when it comes to the conclusions you want to be your way.   I simply care about the issues.   I called out some of your conclusions as very weak. 

I know the conversation here does little to change anything, and that offers me some hope for in reality HMRC will do whatever needs to be done with Section, even if it's to a homeowner BTLer ,who bought at 3 bed semi in 2014 at £400,000 with 75% LTV to rent out at £1,200 pm.   

"Mainstream sir? Didn't think? To gift your son a home when he reached 25 years of age?"

Just keep me on ignore if you want, and I will do same for you.   I won't pull you up on your weak BTL conclusions either, 'none of it matters' and 'all fun' attitude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/08/2018 at 01:24, Neverwhere said:

 

Ah yes Neverwhere.  That image is from BTVS (Buffy The Vampire Slayer) and the spooky entities which take the voices from people. 

Neverwhere, I notice you're quite active and insistent on labelling me a troll on another part of the forum, during the last few days. 

That doesn't trouble me very much, because you continue to also make informative, balanced and honest conclusion posts about BTL and BTLers that I entirely agree with.

My HPC honest and pure intentions will shine through eventually to most readers, as I keep plugging away with good contributions in the future - or as and when I have time to be active to read and post on the forum.   And hopefully shine through to you as well. 

You could give me the benefit of the doubt for a while, and be less eager to label me a troll.  I am just a HPCer who dislikes everything about BTL, BTLers, housing financialisation...... and false-equivalence maneuvering and unfair/dishonest conclusions.  

Below is just in fun for it's also from BTVS.  It would be the wildest coincidence if and name similarity to yours... Betty/Buffy, for I don't know anything whatsoever personal about you, and would certainly not/never post anything even if I did.  It's only about the housing financialisation/BTL/BTLers issues for me.

  Reveal hidden contents

iMepvIM.png
Spike & Buffy - [HUMOR]
As in 2:25 to 2:32 on the timeline.

or/and 

Buffy and Spike - Hot 'n Cold (Funny Moments 1)
As in 2:53 to 3:00 on the timeline. 

 

Edited by Mossie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mossie said:

My HPC honest and pure intentions will shine through eventually to most readers, as I keep plugging away with good contributions in the future - or as and when I have time to be active to read and post on the forum.   And hopefully shine through to you as well. 

(Emphasis added)

That's a bit of a mess grammatically. Are you trying to suggest that you have been "plugging away with good contributions" in the present and the past and that you intend to continuing making high quality contributions in the future? If that is what you mean, well - it doesn't make any sense because heretofore you've been making a very low standard of contributions. So you must mean that in the future you'll be plugging away with good contributions?

I'm glad you're planning to change it up and make some good contributions in the future. If you'd started off in that lane then there wouldn't be so many people reckoning that you're either outright moody or driving along the line that separates the moody from the not moody.

Anyway, welcome to the basement. It's fun here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mossie said:

That image is from BTVS (Buffy The Vampire Slayer) and the spooky entities which take the voices from people. 

What is this? Meme with the boomers? It's like watching telly with an old person who chimes in when they've recognised one of the actors from something else they were in.

Edited by Bland Unsight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Bland Unsight said:

If that is what you mean, well - it doesn't make any sense because heretofore you've been making a very low standard of contributions. So you must mean that in the future you'll be plugging away with good contributions?

Yeah well, that's just like your opinion man.   And a few other grouchy types who don't understand the deeper issues and didn't see what I was seeking to push back against, on a thread where they expect to read BTLers being trippy about all things S24.  I have to hold that other people understand my position on many a point I held the line on.

Low standard of contributions?  This from someone who believes that BTL Regrouping thread is only to criticise and have fun about BTLers with 10+ BTLs.

And who has special excuses for those BTLers who have recently gone hard into BTL for 1 property, at big high prices and big BTL debt, to join in the awful rentierism.  

BTL as 'Mainstream' & 'Didn't think' & 'Totally normal people' such BTLers.   You really could be a spokesperson for the National Landlords Association with all this.

The belief the BTL Scum Regrouping & on The Offensive thread is to be only about 10+ BTLers is a corruption inside your own head imo. 

It's about all the BTLers who are complaining about S24 and their positions in it, including BTLers who bought took BTL debt out on just 1 property in the last few years.  

It's the BTLer's £400K or whatever BTL mortgage, and it's all on them as a BTLer.  At least HMRC won't be accepting any "mainstream, didn't think and totally normal people," when they come to collect tax on these BTLers.   Gen Rent is full of totally normal people as well, and the BTLers choices are intrinsically linked.

Tell me more about Ireland eh in connection with BTLers in UK in 2018 and new peak prices reported.   You do realise here in UK we had QE and prices up and up again, with more BTLers buying up houses.  Gen Rent is not responsible for the positions taken by each BTLer over two decades.

Edited by Mossie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/08/2018 at 17:39, Mossie said:

Yeah well, that's just like your opinion man.   

I don't want you to be needlessly typing stuff that I'm not necessarily going to read.

When I invited you down here to row I clearly wasn't inviting you to discuss either:

  1. whether or not a buy-to-let mortgage is a mainstream lending product (it is), or;
  2. whether people who have taken out buy-to-let mortgages are personally responsible for their choices (they are).

As we agree on the second point there is nothing to discuss there. We seem to disagree on the first but that's where I lose interest - you have made quite a song and dance about the fact that you, an anonymous forum contributor, and I, another equally anonymous forum contributor, disagree about whether or not buy-to-let mortgages can be properly called 'mainstream' financial products. I honestly don't care at all about this point. I also find it very difficult to imagine a reasonable basis for you caring so much.

Hence I find you more than a little moody on the facts, but of course the facts are absolutely not the thing that prompts me to spend any time 'dealing' with you.

The real issue is that you are clearly impersonating Venger and studiously ignoring all opportunities to deal honestly with that matter.

The reasonable cause of action for a new poster if mistaken for a returning veteran poster would be to address the matter directly. In fact, when I joined back in 2011 somebody flat out asked me if I was @Tired of Waiting (on account of a similarity they perceived in our posts) so I just posted words to the explicit effect of "No, I am not @Tired of Waiting".

Consequently, let me be clear. I didn't invite you down here to discuss any substantive matter regarding house prices or my views on personal responsibility. There is only one topic I have in mind to discuss:

GIVEN THAT YOU ARE NOT VENGER, WHY ARE YOU PRETENDING TO BE VENGER?

Edited by Bland Unsight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bland Unsight said:

We seem to disagree on the second but that's where I lose interest - you have made quite a song and dance about the fact that you, an anonymous forum contributor, and I, another equally anonymous forum contributor, disagree about whether or not buy-to-let mortgages can be properly called 'mainstream' financial products. I honestly don't care at all about this point. I also find it very difficult to imagine a reasonable basis for you caring so much.

You've called me out as one of the main-name BTLers from another forum.  Then one of the other BTL contributors from another BTL forum.

I only care about the housing/BTL issues.   Not any BTLer.  I don't own a home and never have.  BTLers have bought so many houses I have gone to view down the years, to turn into rental properties with them as landlords.  Buying at prices beyond my budget and renting the houses out.

On the thread in question (BTL Scum Regrouping And On the Offensive) you were slipping in theories about BTLers as 'mainstream' and BTLers "not thinking" about what they do.  Just mainstream and no one needs to think abou this BTL lark for recent BTL buyers with their rentierism.   I disputed those conclusions, although it wasn't the best thread to do it on.

You lean towards only the BTLers with multiple BTLs as being worthy of criticism, but you have special excuses for those BTLers with 'only' 1 or 2 BTLs, as having just bought BTL as 'mainstream' and 'not thinking'.   You also put out there that BTL was advertised as 'low-risk' when it comes to the BTLers.   And you seem to worry about these BTLer's situation into Section 24.   The suggestion you were making about Ireland in 2008 I found objectionable, if you mean that GenRent should be guilt tripped for hardships and possible dire consequences for some BTLers into Section 24.  Gen Rent has its own issues.  The BTLers made their choices. 

I challenged the view that BTL as 'mainstream' for it is not mainstream for Generation Rent.  They are captured by housing financialisation.  So many are badly priced out of buying.  The average BTL landlord is 50 year old+ homeowner.   Each person has to think things over about what they do with housing, at these prices, and about what they are seeking to do with a housing crisis for Gen Rent.   Those who have been BTLing are responsible for their own choices, and whatever is ahead for them with S24.

You made a big-song-and-dance about having me on Ignore and I was fine about it.  

You then continued to call me out as a BTLer and I responded I was not, and you posted a lot more that I responded to on this thread, where you invited me to, to answer other points you made to me (including Ireland).  I then told you to keep me on Ignore and I will Ignore you.   I disagree a lot with your conclusions about BTLers and BTL, and that's all there is to it.   I certainly don't know if Section 24 is going to cause any significant lowering of house prices.

I hold that it's only housing/BTL issues that are of any interest to me.  Keep me on ignore.  I want to ignore you.  I called you out on your theories and conclusions you were slipping into a 'party' thread about mainstream/don't think, and the thread itself being only for criticism of landlords of multiple BTLs.  I don't agree with your conclusions on many matters about housing nor BTL and BTLers, and that's all there is to it.

I am myself on a forum with a username, trying to positive contribute to getting better understanding of housing market/BTL issues.  For a while that also included challenging your theories and conclusions, but you keep to those conclusions if you want.  I don't need the hassle.  Some people seem to want to obscure what has happened with the housing market for their own VI.  

Quote

I don't have to tell you anything more about myself.  I am here for the housing issues discussion and that is all.

  

Edited by Mossie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mossie I see you've posted again. I'm basically done reading your twaddle so could you post once if you've answered my question and twice if you haven't. I'll count the posts and open your response if there's just one (which is the agreed code for you answering the question).

Peace out! :)

 

Edited by Bland Unsight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, whoever the hell you are, you've earned your place on this thread:

Five million properties bought by "BTL landlords". It's ignorant idiocy. I can't @rsed to give you the links to the EHS and the CML sources, but IIRC the PRS goes from about 2m the mid-1990s to about 5m today and over the same period of time there are about 2m BTL  mortgages added to the lenders' mortgage books.

The claim that "BTL landlords" have "bought up over 20 years" fully "5 million properties" shows that you simply have no idea about even the most rudimentary elements of what you think you're talking about. That makes you a bullsh!tter, plain and simple.

giphy.gif

There's more to this lark than just having a go at people who phrase things in a way that doesn't sit well with your prejudices. See you around. If you've quit under the @Mossie username, you'll be back under another. 

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • 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.