Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged

[Wahoo]

They're pretty much interchangeable at this point I think. BTL protection is HPI protection, HPI protection is BTL protection. It would be pretty hard to have one without the other.

+1

This has distorted the economy beyond measure, through earnings extraction via spives.

[Ah-so]

What I have loved about the Property118 campaign is that no matter where they turn, they come up against a fairly single wall of opinion. They have tried civil servants, Labour MPs and conservative MPs, but the message back is the same - this is just and levels the playing field. No matter how many times Ros raises the "unintended consequences" sword of Damocles, the response is the same. This actually surprises me given that a quarter of MPs have BTL properties apparently and the Telegraph is backing Property118.

Anyway, the latest is to lobby the Lords on a couple of points in the Bill:

http://www.property118.com/budget-2015-landlords-reactions/76164/comment-page-560/#comments

Ros . says:Read about me on my member profile

08/11/2015 at 14:47

Okay everyone. Here we go again. We are now invited to write submissions for the Lords with regards to the Committee on the Economics of the Housing Review. It includes questions on what effect C24 will have on rents and also on the issue of rent caps. This is an opportunity to have our voice heard – as I have a feeling that the Lords will take more seriously the fact that when submissions are made they should be read. Here is the link:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/economic-affairs/Economics-of-the-UK-Housing-Market/Housing-Call-for-evidence-FINAL.pdf

And this is what it says regarding c24:

a. ‘Will the reduction of tax relief available to private landlords announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 2015 Budget increase the cost of privately rented accommodation?

b. Will the current trend of a decline in home ownership and an increase in private renting continue? How can the Government encourage a stable long term rental culture?

c. What are the advantages and disadvantages of restricting rent increases in the private sector?’

Their main line of attack will be that it will raise rents. It is our job to balance this out and explain logically why this will not happen. Can anyone put something articulate together for submission to counteract the obvious 118 arguments?

[Wahoo]

Inland Revenue are very clear about business and risk. If you register a new business they ask if it involves property. You can benefit from tax allowances if you carry business risk. Property does not satisfy this demand. It's a similar situation to IR35.

This sums up BTLs delusions:

http://www.property118.com/budget-2015-landlords-reactions/76164/comment-page-560/#comments

Quote from Hansard by David Gauke from the Third Reading of the Finance bill 2015 on 26-Oct15

“I turn now to the support that the Bill will provide to business. We want to provide certainty to businesses, increase investment and improve our infrastructure, because that will drive growth and job creation in the coming years. First, it is clear that we need a business tax regime that is stable, competitive and fair.” (my emphasis).

Two faced B********RD!!!!

They see themselves as businessmen taking business risk.

[Wahoo]

This LL comes over rather stressed:

"Reply to the comment left by “Barry Fitzpatrick” at “06/11/2015 – 09:45“:

Two faced? He is 2 million faced B*****d!

That sort of cu**s only learn a lesson when they fall flat on their face!

I hope he rots in hell with Osborne. "

[Wahoo]

I am puzzled as to why my lender (Mortgage Express) has just sent me a letter wanting to see tenancy agreements for two of my properties which I bought back in 2008.

Just wanted to know if anyone else has had this experience and also why would they be asking for these documents.

Many thanks

Zar

Mortgage express’s first priority is to get as many of the outstanding loans repaid as fast as possible.

What they are likely looking for with this request to you is to see if you have broken any mortgage conditions, which I hope you haven’t, but if that is not the case they will most likely call in the loans.

Zar – It’s the thin edge of the wedge. My bank did this to me just before they foreclosed on my mortgages and appointed LPA Receivers which resulted in me losing everything including my home and left me with a debt of £328,000. BE VERY CAREFUL – DON’T GIVE THEM ANY INFORMATION WITHOUT KNOWING WHY MX ARE ASKING FOR IT.

Apologies if discussed before, but looks like lenders are getting nervous and don't want to be holding lower valued propertis this time.

[Blod]

I've already pointed out the mention request for information here,

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/205642-btl-scum-regrouping-and-on-the-offensive-merged/page-145#entry1102821293

Hpcers face the same problem of TL;DR when trying to explaining the issues in housing. (Too Long; Didn't Read).

The bottom line is that we are "marks" for the banking sector as it is they that ultimately benefit as housing steals an ever greater slice of the nations earnings.

Increases in the interest charged on housing by the banks has out stripped increases in earnings.

This is the largest theft in history, so large in fact that 99% of us can't even comprehend it.

[mattyboy1973]

Their main line of attack will be that it will raise rents. It is our job to balance this out and explain logically why this will not happen. Can anyone put something articulate together for submission to counteract the obvious 118 arguments?

I think the answer is simply that rents won't rise for exactly the same reasons as rents didn't fall when interest rates got cut to historic lows, and so with them the mortgage costs for landlords. Which is to say, rents are set according to market forces and are not based on the simplistic formula of "costs + my_profit". It's the same for any business, actually, and if you can't make the numbers work then you go under.

[bobbo]

I think the fact that a number of MPs are landlords will probably help the bill as they can only agree that it is an investment not a full time business. Also I'd say they are more likely to be unencumbered and at least well advised.

[Venger]

I've already pointed out the mention request for information here,

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/205642-btl-scum-regrouping-and-on-the-offensive-merged/page-145#entry1102821293

Hpcers face the same problem of TL;DR when trying to explaining the issues in housing. (Too Long; Didn't Read).

The bottom line is that we are "marks" for the banking sector as it is they that ultimately benefit as housing steals an ever greater slice of the nations earnings.

Increases in the interest charged on housing by the banks has out stripped increases in earnings.

This is the largest theft in history, so large in fact that 99% of us can't even comprehend it.

We can understand enough of it - and feel the extreme prices. See the BTL competition in the market against us (for so many many years).

I've annoyed HPCers with this 'astonishment' quote (below) for years and years. When BTLers have stuck their heads in, including Mark118, they should have taken note of it... instead some added another 50 properties to their portfolios between 2009-11, and maybe more after that. Things change. Who do these people think they are, and their own choice if they've done it for pension of pensions.

Not the banks alone whatsoever. Not that easy to award innocence to the BTLers/homeowners. If there is HPC ahead then many older owners should be selfishy taking decisions to sell to downsize, to lock in lottery style wins. Go read some Wallyat about the massive HPI to come... or read that stuff any number of other places. Banks are just a mirror for all that; their views and decisions. Some decide to buy more houses, to capture Generation Rent Forever.

A lot of bankers did benefit, it's just that plenty of other people also benefitted and benefitted more in many cases.

There are plenty of people who have made more through the housing bubble than they have ever earned in their lives. For landlords and London homeowners or anyone with an inheritance the amounts are similar to lottery wins - hundreds of thousands or millions - largely untaxed.

Those people wanted the banks to inflate the bubble, and they wanted the bailout. They may even be the reason there was a bailout, but none ever holds them responsible.

People love to blame banks for what happened, but millions of people were complicit. Most obviously the banks didn't get any criticism when the damage was actually happening. They only get blamed for stopping it.

Even now the British middle aged middle classes

Are clamouring to go back to the days when the crisis was still looming, so they can play at being property developers.

Daily Mail

Average UK house price to hit £780,000 by 2040, says leading think tank

September 2014

Kilo Charlie, My World, 9 hours ago

We purchased a property in 1983 for £72,000.........today it's worth £650,000 plus. It's certainly possible and quite likely.

Sam, Bucks, 3 hours ago

Bought house in ,74 for 16k added extention about £8k now valued at £480k you do the maths?

If the new bankers/shareholders gained from Bubble 1.0, then bubble-bailout invite the BTLers in to shift bad stock at higher prices reflation... followed by HPC and fresh lending, with higher steady 1980s transaction levels, then so be it. So will younger generations and their families and the system as a whole, instead of so much money going to landlords and into dead property. Can only point to the stress test banks have been under, for years now, for ever harder HPC/recession as they've danced into buying more houses/buying high prices.

There is much evidence that human expectations tend to be linear. Most of the time, most people expect current conditions to continue for the indefinite future. Wherever prosperity exists, it is natural for people to expect prosperity to continue. For this reason, much of the history of human society is a record of astonishment.

Time and again, people have marginalised their affairs, rendering themselves increasingly crisis-prone. They have gone into debt, extending claims on resources to an extreme that could be supported only if current conditions were sustained uninterrupted into the future. Time and again these hopes have been disappointed.

By 1929, the Connecticut suburbs of New York were already so jammed with commuters who had grown rich in the bull market that choice properties were selling for as much as a million dollars. As Jim Grant points out, this was actually the top of the market for that type of suburban property. The million-dollar houses in Greenwich of 1929 "changed hands for as little as $75,000 in the 1930s."

[Wahoo]

All assets are gonna get trashed when the next global conflict errupts. They're too stupid to think the unthinkable.

[Dorkins]

Let the Grand Correction commence:

Edited November 8, 2015 by Dorkins

[gf3]

You and 35 years old professional couples with 3 kids who should be in their parents box room 100 miles away from where they work... does my head in gf3. 'Climb in to bed' complicity with the BTLers when little real choice. Grrr.

It's true the portfolio landlords have done that at auction and in wider market, to create two losing situations, but no one forces anyone to buy. Some of the HPCers have bought homes at the lower side of the market (to reduce debt risk), where without the bubble they would have been able to buy better homes. Point is, some of us stay renting waiting for the HPC, and many more younger people coming through into system vs house price bubble.

Isn't it time for another of your equity release posts, where bankers print money from nowhere, that they should give you a big chunk of capital-equity out of your own home for 0.5% rate? Maybe you can then get your boiler fixed.

All I can do is apologies I was using flawed logic I can now see my mistake now.

I thought I could pair up the tenant and the LL as an economic unit and say it was the same as an OO buying a house.LL acting as middle man

I could see the corrosive effect the relationship would have on the tenant but as you say we all make our own choices.

However I was wrong.

After the crash in the early 90's The wisdom I came away with was when house prices reached a level where FTB couldn't afford them they were in a bubble phase and would come back down. This wisdom I thought I could use for life so I was amazed when house prices stayed up.

BTL has changed all that. it's got nothing to do with what FTB can afford now.

A house now is worth what it's rent can borrow with a IO mortgage.All HPI being thrown into the next house This doesn't just effect renters it effects everybody BLT has changed the whole dynamics of the housing market.

I am even starting to wonder if the liar loans being thrown at the OO was done just so the OO could compete. (but that would mean that the banks did these loans with good intentions )

[Venger]

[...]We can understand enough of it - and feel the extreme prices. See the BTL competition in the market against us (for so many many years).

[...]Can only point to the stress test banks have been under, for years now, for ever harder HPC/recession as they've danced into buying more houses/buying high prices.

Although it has been big fun for many BTLers. To blame bankers alone when many are sat on top of long wave fortunes in HPI+ equity (and not tempted to sell with inventory on market so low), and BTLers with multiple properties... for pension-of-pensions, in a housing supply/affordability crisis - vs - position of renter-savers. No way.

Let the BTLer financial-oblivion begin.

Lenders are to undergo extreme stress testing by the Bank of England

Published on 29/04/2014

The Bank of England (BoE) is preparing to test eight UK lenders to see if they can absorb sharp falls in the housing market and rises in interest rates.

The test is to see if the lenders can withstand a 35% fall in house prices and an interest rate rise to 5%.

[.......]

--------

comments:

Mark Alexander

29/04/2014 at 18:07

I also agree with A.Hosker, this will be music to the ears of the conspiracy theorists. It will also certainly give the pundits over on the HousePriceCrash forum something to talk about for many months if not years to come. One day, some their predictions may even come true! lol

http://www.property118.com/lenders-undergo-extreme-stress-testing-bank-of-england/65327/

And most of the major banks passed...

16 December 2014

Five major banks passed the test.

The results show that the banking system is "significantly more resilient", said Bank of England governor Mark Carney, and that the "growing confidence in the system is merited".

"This was a demanding test," he added.

Stress test scenario

Sterling falls by about 30%

House prices fall by 35%

Bank rate rises to 4.2%

CPI inflation peaks at 6.6%

Unemployment rises to nearly 12%

GDP falls by 3.5%

Share prices fall by 30%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30491161

Three Truths for Finance – speech by Mark Carney (Governor of The Bank of England)

Remarks given at the Harvard Club UK Southwark Cathedral dinner, London.

21 September 2015

‘…Moreover, when next time proves no different, the financial intermediaries at the core of the system will be on a substantially stronger footing. Their capital requirements have already increased ten-fold and their liquid assets are up four-fold. Their trading assets are down by a third and intra-bank exposures by two-thirds.’

Edited November 9, 2015 by Venger

[Si1]

Mark Alexander's unintended consequences - that the market may actually clear without government supported finance. Oh the humanity. Lol indeed.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Si1

[Neverwhere]

All I can do is apologies I was using flawed logic I can now see my mistake now.

I thought I could pair up the tenant and the LL as an economic unit and say it was the same as an OO buying a house.LL acting as middle man

I could see the corrosive effect the relationship would have on the tenant but as you say we all make our own choices.

However I was wrong.

After the crash in the early 90's The wisdom I came away with was when house prices reached a level where FTB couldn't afford them they were in a bubble phase and would come back down. This wisdom I thought I could use for life so I was amazed when house prices stayed up.

BTL has changed all that. it's got nothing to do with what FTB can afford now.

A house now is worth what it's rent can borrow with a IO mortgage.All HPI being thrown into the next house This doesn't just effect renters it effects everybody BLT has changed the whole dynamics of the housing market.

I am even starting to wonder if the liar loans being thrown at the OO was done just so the OO could compete. (but that would mean that the banks did these loans with good intentions )

I, for one, really appreciate that gf3.

I think that there is potentially a good argument for your last point, although I would slightly adjust it and say that I think that this may have been a factor in offering endowment-policy-less interest only loans to owner occupiers. It doesn't really require the banks to have good intentions. They like lending money, they make a profit on it, and owner occupiers tend to be lower risk than investors because they will generally throw everything they have at keeping their homes if it comes to it, and will have lower overall exposure to the market simply through only having the one property instead of a portfolio of them.

Additionally, OOs who engaged in this kind of speculative behaviour - because in order to think that an interest only loan is a good idea they have to be either speculating on wage rises, to fund an eventual switch onto a repayment mortgage, or house price increases, so that they could eventually downsize and pay of the loan, or at the very least on an inheritance which they have yet to receive - are only in a good position if their speculation pays off. If the market falls and they wind-up in negative equity on an interest only loan then that could be very bad for them indeed, and they are unlikely to look back on the banks lending it to them as a kindness (though they should of course take full responsibility for their own speculative decision to borrow it, I remain to be convinced that many actually will).

I think the key thing to remember is that bankers are just other people. They can get swept up in a bubble mentality - believing that house prices can only ever go up, that it really is different this time - as much as anybody else can, and they can be as ignorant of the cumulative impacts of their actions as much as anybody else can. Some may argue that it's their job to know about these things but for the majority of them that simply isn't true - they have limited personal remits and targets that don't include critical analysis of the bigger picture - and even where it is true they are both as fallible as everybody else and bound to consider the behaviour of their competitors by the need to compete with them for custom.

I'm not saying this to excuse the banks or the bankers. I just think that lenders and borrowers both hold responsibilty for the amount of money that is lent between them, and for the terms it is lent on (borrowers always being able to say no to interest only financing and walk away from the loan if they so choose), and that bankers embody the entire scope of human fallibility in the same way that everybody else does. That includes greed (and no doubt we have seen enough of that from BTLers and others to demonstrate that this is a condition not limited to bankers) but it also includes lack of foresight, wishful thinking, uncritical analysis, outright stupidity and all the other flaws that we are all party to on occasion, to one extent or another. Venger's quote is as much true of them as it is of anybody else:

There is much evidence that human expectations tend to be linear. Most of the time, most people expect current conditions to continue for the indefinite future. Wherever prosperity exists, it is natural for people to expect prosperity to continue. For this reason, much of the history of human society is a record of astonishment.

Time and again, people have marginalised their affairs, rendering themselves increasingly crisis-prone. They have gone into debt, extending claims on resources to an extreme that could be supported only if current conditions were sustained uninterrupted into the future. Time and again these hopes have been disappointed.

[long time lurking]

All I can do is apologies I was using flawed logic I can now see my mistake now.

I thought I could pair up the tenant and the LL as an economic unit and say it was the same as an OO buying a house.LL acting as middle man

I could see the corrosive effect the relationship would have on the tenant but as you say we all make our own choices.

However I was wrong.

After the crash in the early 90's The wisdom I came away with was when house prices reached a level where FTB couldn't afford them they were in a bubble phase and would come back down. This wisdom I thought I could use for life so I was amazed when house prices stayed up.

BTL has changed all that. it's got nothing to do with what FTB can afford now.

A house now is worth what it's rent can borrow with a IO mortgage.All HPI being thrown into the next house This doesn't just effect renters it effects everybody BLT has changed the whole dynamics of the housing market.

I am even starting to wonder if the liar loans being thrown at the OO was done just so the OO could compete. (but that would mean that the banks did these loans with good intentions )

This has been blindingly obvious sine 09/10 around my way .i also thought the same as you up until that point FTB wages would set the floor the thing that opened my eyes to the fact BTL was setting the floor under prices was the fact i knew quite a few who had fallen into the liar loan trap on the OO side pre 07/08 and most were bailout by BTL also everyone i know who were in a position to move up also sold to BTL some who held out long enough actually made a little money on what i thought were extreme bubble prices

It has also been pretty obvious that the" middle wave" of borrow to let`ers (bought 04/07) had started to see the writing on the wall in the early part of 2014 after owning for the best part of a decade with little to no HPI in sight they started off loading to what i hope are the greatest fools (i hope as i thought that was the title of the ones before them but was wrong)

The way i see it it was FLS that realy lit the fire under the latest round of borrow to let, as financing costs initially dropped yields went up this lead to HPI and yields falling which to me is a zero sum game and we are now close to zero ,and this is before any tax changes have taken effect add to that possible tightening of financing due to basel 3 and whatever the BOE pulls out of the hat the tipping point must be close

Edited November 9, 2015 by long time lurking

[Venger]

BTLers: 'But at the time, it looked fabulously easy. And there lays the problem, being a landlord just looks too damn easy. How difficult is to put down a deposit and then get a conveyor belt of 9-to-5 sweatshop monkeys paying off the mortgage over the course of 20 odd years? We’re really onto something here. Rinse and repeat. Easy.'

Very productive not; now the BTLers have the positions, and BTL debt, they wanted - to capture other people's incomes/ housing opportunity. I wouldn't buy someone else's home, to rent-farm them, if prices were back to early 80s and I had my savings of today. So BTLers who've been paying these prices of today, in a supply and affordability crisis, have positioned themselves for these taxes/BoE new powers/Basil-Beast III.

The central bank and government as directed by the US are directing thousands of savers into BTL in the full knowledge that interest rates are going to rise and property prices will collapse in the very near future.

They are achieving this by keeping savings rates at a record low whilst increasing inflation in food, energy and assets via the derivative markets. The government is keeping wage inflation down by allowing lower cost labor to enter the country.

This differential on savings returns and inflation is pressurizing savers to take their money from relatively save savings account and gamble it in the BTL mortgage market. This process is being enabled by the governments Funding for Lending scheme.

Whats more infuriating is that the US and UK establishment know that interest rates are beginning to rise and that there is absolutely nothing that they can do about it.

We are in the final throws of a last ditch attempt to keep money flooding into property and keep asset prices propped up. Once this round of coercing savers into speculating in property is over there will be nobody left to prop up the Ponzi housing market and at that point all of the good money will have been sucked in and leveraged the maximum it can be.

Mark Carney came up with forward guidance as they knew the credibility of low interest rates remaining was under pressure, they knew it would buy them some extra months before the Carnage arrives, interest rates rise and the savers who have been conned into property market up in 2012/2013 will lose all their savings.

The banks, central bank and government are in the process of conning the general public out of their savings.

A warning for the older crowd "They stole your pensions and now they are after your savings". Do not let them suck you into buy to let.

http://www.independent.co.uk/money/spend-save/mark-dampier-buytolet-may-be-no-shelter-for-your-cash-8782929.html

They have a choice. The are being conned into putting everything at risk via BTL? Too many of them love it btw. They dive into it, with heads full of visions of big profits. They don't value all the fantastic gains they've had in property-wealth on their own homes. They want more and more and more. Even when their own adult children refuses to buy because house prices are hyperinflated and tells them as much.

Hi all,

This is my first post on the main forum after years of lurking (and one or two posts when struggling with renting situations). I just wanted to get this off my chest...

I'm thoroughly fed up with the whole of UK PLC. to the point of depression.

I'm in my early thirties, been working around the London area for 8 years, saving what I can, and refusing to buy into overpriced houses despite most of my peers buying. I see how unsustainable the whole thing is. I don't need to repeat the arguments stated on here for the last decade... I won't go into house prices being based on affordability linked to mortgage rates, or the fact that rates are at an all time low... like I say, its all been said before.

I'm now in a position where friends with little savings are getting 50k loans from parents for deposits to buy houses which I consider overpriced. But the fact is, with their salaries, they can actually afford them even if one person is out of work (for a child for example) and rates go up to 10% (I can't be sure of this, but I've talked in detail with a good friend before he bought and told me figures that convinced me it was feasible).

But this isn't what I'm fed up of. If they want to buy into a falling market then so be it. What I'm fed up of is this 'government' trying their utmost to prop up this house of cards. I voted against labour to try to change this mess, but all I see is that its getting worse (not to say it wouldn't have got worse under labour, but it certainly hasn't reversed).

But even this lousy government isn't what has got me most annoyed. What has really got me wound up is the fact that I had a full blown argument with my mum about her now wanting to sink all their life savings into property development. This is based on a friend of hers who got into the game decades ago and now has hundreds of properties, a multitude of grants from the council, and drives around in an Aston Martin, with his wife driving a Range Rover. This guy got in the game early and has made a killing - I know its hard to stomach, but there are people that did it.

When I talk with my parents though, I really come across as jealous about this guy, and they continually spout the same nonsense about property only ever going up in price over the long run. They also tell me that their saving are making 0% in the bank (true, because I've seen that they can't be bothered looking for a decent return), but when I suggest that there are alternatives between the two extremes of 0% in a bank or invest in property, and even suggest shares, I'm met with "people like us don't know about things like that".

Personally, I'm lucky enough to have been offered a position overseas with the company I work for, and am glad I'm getting out of here. But I'm so fed up with this mess, I really cannot wait for it to come crashing down. And if my own parents get taken down with it then so be it - I tried to warn them. For now, I just feel so helpless watching a car crash happen in front of my eyes.

Anyway, I know I'm moaning and repeating what everyone has said a miilion times before, but just thought it was time to contribute and get it off my chest. Bottom line is that I'm fed up

It has to be that way. They have to go down hard for their avarice. They need to be brought into the real world, where they will realise just how good they had it in the first place vs priced out renter savers.

Once this round of coercing savers into speculating in property is over there will be nobody left to prop up the Ponzi housing market and at that point all of the good money will have been sucked in and leveraged the maximum it can be.

Mark Carney came up with forward guidance as they knew the credibility of low interest rates remaining was under pressure, they knew it would buy them some extra months before the Carnage arrives, interest rates rise and the savers who have been conned into property market up in 2012/2013 will lose all their savings.

Good. I hope the mood changes, fast-track repos become the way of things on the older property investors who risked their homes, and if they don't comply, the bailiffs pull them out of their homes by their ears if needs be.

[Venger]

These greedy types are going to help banks absorb the HPC. They deserve to go down. It has to be that way.

Have a listen to the Radio 4 Moneybox Buy to Let episode from last Saturday: http://www.bbc.co.uk...rammes/b0631nq3TBH I'm surprised I haven't seen anything on the forum about it

This will give you an idea of who is paying these ridiculous prices. E.g. late middle aged couple paid £490,000 for a one bedroom flat, with stamp duty and furnishings that must be at least £510,000 outlay. They receive £1300 pcm rent, net after service charge etc. That's 3% yield gross! they seem to be happy about probably losing money month to month on the rent because they are in it for the long haul and the massive capital appreciation that will undoubtedly materialise over the next couple of decades. After all, the lady being interviewed bought her own flat in the area for £107,000 which is now worth £650,000!

There will be no price correction until these types of people have been well and truly scared away from BTL

£490,000 1 bed flat. £1,700pm ... after service charge we get around £1,300pm, which covers the mortgage at the moment. Fixed rate mortgage that goes up in 2 years.

Bought her own flat decades ago.

'And I've lived in his area for 25/26 years. When I bought my flat it was £107,000. ' It went down to £82,000 and the mortgage rate went from 7% to 15%. Now my flat is worth about £650,000 and I feel reasonably confident it's a good investment.

Husband went "Oh" - with a disappointed groan when heard about the Budget, but it's swing and roundabouts and long term investment.

[Si1]

Swings and roundabouts investment?

The magic roundabout. Anyone got a suitable image or animation?

[Venger]

Swings and roundabouts investment?

The magic roundabout. Anyone got a suitable image or animation?

They want/wanted the world. Never enough for them... no downsizing and cashing in that £600K value, but doubling down.

Buy-To-Regret

Started by repetitive bleats, Apr 06 2015 04:49 PM

A one stop shop for Boomers who might try to do their own research.

Anything more you'd add to this?

they will still buy , they only know HPI

[Neverwhere]

Swings and roundabouts investment?

The magic roundabout. Anyone got a suitable image or animation?

[Neverwhere]

Ros 09/11/2015 at 18:42

Hi all.

Can someone who lives in Boris Johnson’s constituency copy and send this email to him for me – obviously in your name, as mine has bounced back as I am not his constituent? If anyone does do this, can they let me know? I headed the email ‘How to make George Osborne a laughing stock.’

Thanks.

Dear Boris

(or whoever reads this on your behalf)

I have not written to you before, but I believe you will be interested in what I have to say.

At the moment it is very fashionable – almost compulsory – to blame private landlords for everything under the sun. I know that you are a man who cuts through that kind of nonsense and it is for this reason that I am hoping you can have a think about opposing George Osborne’s Clause 24 of the Finance Bill, against landlords. It has been described as a ‘lunatic tax,’ and I will provide a few more links to articles which explain why this is so.

Taking on this issue could set you apart as someone who exposed a terrible anti-business, unfair and illogical tax (stolen by George Osborne from the Green Party Manifesto and opposed by the IFS among others) and one which will see rents sky rocket. You could basically make George Osborne a laughing stock (as he should be) if you could demonstrate how truly insane this policy is.

I am pasting some article below which set out some of the issues.

All the best.

These are some articles by a respected Telegraph financial journalist which points out why Clause 24 of the Finance Bill is lunacy:

[snip.]

Kathy Miller 09/11/2015 at 19:38

Reply to the comment left by “Saeef Khan” at “09/11/2015 – 15:59“:

From: DAVIES, Philip

Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 6:07 PM

To: kathymiller

Subject: Re: Finance Bill 2015 stealth tax hits millions of low paid and vulnerable Tenants

Dear Ms Miller

Thank you for your email. I have every sympathy for the points you make.

If you would be good enough to email me with your full postal address in the Shipley constituency I will take this up for you with the Minister and send you his response as soon as I receive it.

I hope to hear from you again soon.

Best wishes

Philip Davies MP

Please if any landlord is in the Shipley constituency can you email your MP

[long time lurking]

Quote

Ros 09/11/2015 at 18:42

Hi all.
Can someone who lives in Boris Johnson’s constituency copy and send this email to him for me – obviously in your name, as mine has bounced back as I am not his constituent? If anyone does do this, can they let me know? I headed the email ‘How to make George Osborne a laughing stock.’
Thanks.

Dear Boris

(or whoever reads this on your behalf)

I have not written to you before, but I believe you will be interested in what I have to say.

At the moment it is very fashionable – almost compulsory – to blame private landlords for everything under the sun. I know that you are a man who cuts through that kind of nonsense and it is for this reason that I am hoping you can have a think about opposing George Osborne’s Clause 24 of the Finance Bill, against landlords. It has been described as a ‘lunatic tax,’ and I will provide a few more links to articles which explain why this is so.

Taking on this issue could set you apart as someone who exposed a terrible anti-business, unfair and illogical tax (stolen by George Osborne from the Green Party Manifesto and opposed by the IFS among others) and one which will see rents sky rocket. You could basically make George Osborne a laughing stock (as he should be) if you could demonstrate how truly insane this policy is.

I am pasting some article below which set out some of the issues.

All the best.

These are some articles by a respected Telegraph financial journalist who`s balls deep in IO BTL mortgages which points out why Clause 24 of the Finance Bill is lunacy:

[snip.]

That`s more like it

[mrtickle]

Natalie Wilmot says:

Read about me on my member profile

09/11/2015 at 13:23

Just wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on contributing say £100 each towards a fighting fund to take a class action against the government on this new bill? (based on say 20,000 contributors – that gives us 2mill).

This bill completely destroys our business and pension!

PMSL!

I can hardly breathe I'm laughing so hard

[mrtickle]

KATHY MILLER says:

Read about me on my member profile

09/11/2015 at 19:34

Reply to the comment left by “Saeef Khan” at “09/11/2015 – 15:59“:

I agree we still should write to the Lords, I have for most of the day.

Its correct that they cannot reject it but they might help with an amendment.

Please can everyone write to at least 3 members (there are 800)

Stand by, oh Lords, for 800 illiterate rambling ranty letters!