Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged

[Venger]

7 hours ago, Toast said:

I fully agree: in the service industry, you can make a choice as to how much the customer is king, and you can draw the line at rudeness. There is a balance of power, like any normal human relationship, and both sides can choose to walk away if they don't like the deal. My point was about the special relationship that exists between those in authority and those under authority, which (in my eccentric view) is an essentially evil situation (albeit sometimes a necessary evil); and what is needed to make it more tolerable.

As far as this particular letter-writing campaign to hmrc is concerned, I think they've made their stand for human dignity, and can get on with being taxed to death and ignored.

Eh, I thought you were pushing for the right to be rude?  (Below)

Here's Contractor UK with load of APN notices threads for some of the schemes that have been scrutinised... go tell them about mean authority.  

http://forums.contractoruk.com/hmrc-scheme-enquiries/

There are HPCers who are contractors who refused to use any schemes (to save tax) for many reasons, incluing ready to pay their share / felt it might get blown apart by HMRC in future.

Why make 'power/authority' such a big cause on HPC, and this thread about BTLers many of us expected a turn on, especially?

As you can see from that HM Treasury letter, from earlier this month, on previous page... very polite response.  

A letter to inform that their questions had been passed to relevant department.

There's a line and if you want to be rude... be rude.  Just don't expect it to always work out for you.  It may or may not have some sort of result for Bosher.

 All this authority lark began when you took one of the big BTLers up as your 'authority' cause, after the latest letter she received had the authority (who gave explanations many times over, and indulged some BTLers with a lot of correspondence and explanation) consider the matter between them and her 'closed'.   We read her demands of questions to be answered.  

Many of the same questions imo, just pitched in a different way, and also telling them their work was not honourable.   There are different reality views, and I accept the reasoning of HM Treasury on the matters.

On 4/29/2017 at 11:08 AM, Toast said:

Perhaps Rosalind Beck is not a great poster-child for the view I'm about to express here, but I'm actually happy she feels free to mouth off to the powers that be, because this should be true for all of us.

It is an important principle of democracy that the institutions of government exist for, and are at the service of, "we the people". There should be no penalty for being rude, nor objecting the policies or behaviour of some authority, if someone feels they are being mistreated; and I think it is a mark of self-sufficiency and human dignity to object in just this way.

Now, obviously, many (ideally all) of the politics and institutions of this land, such as the police, and (arguably) hmrc, exist by consent, in order to make sure we do not damage or exploit our fellow man, and that we contribute something to the fabric of our common society.

In that case, it is of course right that the actions of the institution should not be influenced, one way or the other, by us being rude and objectionable - provided we do, if only under sufferance, comply. If I am arrested by a police officer, I believe I should be able to call him an ass without suffering for those words, but not that I should be able to resist arrest. In that sense, good for them that they are writing to politicians.

Where my admiration for the letter-writing campaign falters, is the content of what they are trying to achieve. They have managed to make an independent living, without being pushed around by some boss in a company. I admire the quest for that freedom, and I can see that this self-determination has bred a proper sense of dignity and wishing to remain an independent agent. I wish this level of dignity upon everyone. Unfortunately, the buy-to-let demographic have mostly achieved this through taking away the dignity and life-options of other people; hence of course the general sentiment on this thread that when they catch fire (due to S24) we would rush across the road to their side ... but only to warm our hands.

My ambivalent attitude extends to hmrc equally. In some sense, it's nice having a lion asleep in the back-yard, who will occasionally wake up and eat passing buy-to-let landlords, or other people we don't like. Once it's finished eating those people though, we still have a lion in our back yard - and although I would behave properly towards it even were it only a sheep, I do not enjoy living in fear that I might accidentally kick it as I pass. I am particularly disturbed by the tightening net of information cast around us by the online hmrc systems, which seem uniquely efficient for government infrastructure. I don't believe I have ever under-paid my taxes (and I have certainly never intended to do so), but if we are going to have a ruthlessly efficient tax system, it's got to be extraordinarily clear and simple, so that you cannot screw up by mistake. If we don't, we'll be in the situation that everyone might fear they are an inadvertent criminal, and democracy will be dead.

Top line: All authority is evil. Occasionally it is a necessary evil - but much less often than you might suppose.

By the way, sorry for interrupting the flow of this celebratory thread: I just meant to write a couple of words rather than an essay. Just carry on and ignore me!

By buying up homes to act as authority to others as landlords....

Some authority can be treated as a kind of neutral.   

Lady of Justice is often depicted blindfolded, with her scales and sword.   I am glad we have different Moderators on HPC forum... for in a multi Trillion pound real estate market full of vested-interests, and housing forum can be a rough place.  To keep forum balance, fairness, and to action those going across the line.  Authority. 

Quote

 

Since the 16th century, Lady Justice has often been depicted wearing a blindfold. The blindfold represents impartiality, the ideal that justice should be applied without regard to wealth, power or other status. The earliest Roman coins depicted Justitia with the sword in one hand and the scale in the other, but with her eyes uncovered.[5] Justitia was only commonly represented as "blind" since about the end of the 15th century. The first known representation of blind Justice is Hans Gieng's 1543 statue on the Gerechtigkeitsbrunnen (Fountain of Justice) in Berne.

....The last distinctive feature of Lady Justice is her sword. The sword represented authority in ancient times, and conveys the idea that justice can be swift and final.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice

 

Authority and power exists.

Quote

 

The ultimate law is the law of the jungle.  It is the law that says that what is yours by right and justice, is yours so long as you - or someone - can protect it.

Even more troublesome and confusing to many people is the fact that the chief deterrent to crime and predatory violence is the threat of still greater force, sufficient force to insure that crime and violence will not pay. This is the paradox of violence...  .... To achieve peace, a society must find ways to muster enough force to suppress predatory crime and violence and curtail the incentives to use it.

 

 

7 hours ago, DrBuyToLeech said:

Landlords are an authority, as far as their tenants are concerned.

That's the essentially evil situation.    

Central government is elected and can claim to be a legitimate authority.

Landlords cannot. 

Exactly.  Good good post.    

Toast... why are you making it such a cause on this thread?  BTLers - vs - the Authority, and 'you could be next.'   

You're creating a situation where you fear HMRC will tip into honest people with no liability, and no power to prevent them.  Maybe there's something in that, but it's not for this thread, and there are processes involved.   That's been the case for decades, for been tapped myself, but I got it sorted out.... I did owe the tax (oversight/misunderstanding my side) so I paid it.  And if you get tapped you can seek assistance from other professionals in the market... accountants, chartered tax-accountants, solicitors.  There is one HPCer who does it for clients... dealing with POCA and many other HMRC taxation demands on his clients.  

6 hours ago, Phil321 said:

I think the fundamental point is the letters are so undignified and unprofessional that it is funny. It should be laughed at....ranty letters to HMRC, super idea. I think she should write to a police man and ask them to arrest the tax man because S24 illegal. 

I am with Dr Leech in this.  We know in reality there is bandwidth in attitudes of both tenants and landlords but on a forum we generalise. We need to. 

There are some LLs out there who feel they are the 'all knowing' authority on housing and are so 'entitled' they have lost complete balance. 

They are absolutely entitled to write the letter, have their say and others are entitled to mock them for the completely unprofessional, illogical and repetitive child like nature of said letters. 

I am sure a LL will exist who has sent a coherent view regarding the impact of S24 and may well have an equally coherent acknowledgement. (Dismissive or otherwise) 

When a letter starts in such an aggressive, repetitive and patronising tone it must take all the efforts not to reply back in a similar manner. 

Lets see if "they leave it here....and now get taxed to death". Or as I suspect...more ranty letters. 

I am a LL and honestly believe much more is on its way. And not least because these 118'ers are ensuring LLs and their entitled attitudes, poor business plans and willingness to evict/increase rents to serve their cause puts them 'front and centre'. Interest only next and quite rightly....otherwise they will be all 'entitled' at the end of the mortgage terms and look for someone to compensate their positions.

Then the political threats. I bet the Tory's are shaking in their boots about losing the 4% of LLs vote who might agree with the 118'ers. Laughable....

S24 is so carefully designed that it is completely avoidable and hits (in the main) the crazy leveraged, double down, I own lots of property, individual. It also stems 2m LLs buying 10 houses each (ie 90% of the housing stock). At 0.25% and tax relief...that was the direction of travel until S24

I agree they can write to an MP. But the manner of the letters is threatening and irrational. So if it's okay I will laugh at them....and it would be funnier if the author didn't have the power of housing over so many families. 

Freedom of speech and giving it to the man is fair enough. As is my freedom to laugh at their letter writing babble. 

Political threats...

And what about all the other instances some BTLers are projecting themselves as the authority/power in all of this... including BTLers wanting to organise mass Section21 days (get weepy tenants on television news), and sell up emasse threat, all to try and get Gov to back down on S24.   What about that Toast?  Just keep championing Bosher's letters (latest one was a mind-spin for me) if it makes you feel good about standing up to Authority.    

https://www.property118.com/property118-campaign-team-demolish-treasurys-ill-conceived-arguments/97367/

 

Quote

 

It's Gish Gallop and utterly mad.

As with most trolling this tactic is primarily a play to the audience. It's resoundingly pointless if the person whose opinion the Galloper is intent on swaying is the same individual whose ability to respond they are trying to drown out with nonsense. Taken together with the frequent insults and denigrating remarks it speaks to a remarkable lack of interest in actually convincing anyone on the receiving end of such correspondence of anything at all.

(h/t Pumpkin Muad'Dib for the gif )

 

BTLers vs 'evil authority'.

Then all the 'Pity the Homeowner' position you have..... if there is ever any HPC.  Read it for 10 years pal.  You stepping in with any Pity on the £100K+ rent outlay tenants against new peak prices, and no certainty of any HPC.  It's a market out there.  We each take our adult positions in it as buyers or renters.  Owners or sellers.  BTL landlords to Tenants.

[Venger]

On 4/29/2017 at 11:08 AM, Toast said:

Perhaps Rosalind Beck is not a great poster-child for the view I'm about to express here, but I'm actually happy she feels free to mouth off to the powers that be, because this should be true for all of us.

It is an important principle of democracy that the institutions of government exist for, and are at the service of, "we the people". There should be no penalty for being rude, nor objecting the policies or behaviour of some authority, if someone feels they are being mistreated; and I think it is a mark of self-sufficiency and human dignity to object in just this way.

Now, obviously, many (ideally all) of the politics and institutions of this land, such as the police, and (arguably) hmrc, exist by consent, in order to make sure we do not damage or exploit our fellow man, and that we contribute something to the fabric of our common society.

In that case, it is of course right that the actions of the institution should not be influenced, one way or the other, by us being rude and objectionable - provided we do, if only under sufferance, comply. If I am arrested by a police officer, I believe I should be able to call him an ass without suffering for those words, but not that I should be able to resist arrest. In that sense, good for them that they are writing to politicians.

Where my admiration for the letter-writing campaign falters, is the content of what they are trying to achieve. They have managed to make an independent living, without being pushed around by some boss in a company. I admire the quest for that freedom, and I can see that this self-determination has bred a proper sense of dignity and wishing to remain an independent agent. I wish this level of dignity upon everyone. Unfortunately, the buy-to-let demographic have mostly achieved this through taking away the dignity and life-options of other people; hence of course the general sentiment on this thread that when they catch fire (due to S24) we would rush across the road to their side ... but only to warm our hands.

My ambivalent attitude extends to hmrc equally. In some sense, it's nice having a lion asleep in the back-yard, who will occasionally wake up and eat passing buy-to-let landlords, or other people we don't like. Once it's finished eating those people though, we still have a lion in our back yard - and although I would behave properly towards it even were it only a sheep, I do not enjoy living in fear that I might accidentally kick it as I pass. I am particularly disturbed by the tightening net of information cast around us by the online hmrc systems, which seem uniquely efficient for government infrastructure. I don't believe I have ever under-paid my taxes (and I have certainly never intended to do so), but if we are going to have a ruthlessly efficient tax system, it's got to be extraordinarily clear and simple, so that you cannot screw up by mistake. If we don't, we'll be in the situation that everyone might fear they are an inadvertent criminal, and democracy will be dead.

Top line: All authority is evil. Occasionally it is a necessary evil - but much less often than you might suppose.

By the way, sorry for interrupting the flow of this celebratory thread: I just meant to write a couple of words rather than an essay. Just carry on and ignore me!

 

 

 

It's a tweak to tilt the advantages away from BTLers and back toward would-be-owner-buyers, and still leaves the BTLers at some advantage (imo).

Where many BTLers have an issue with it, is those who danced in to debt, laying claim to moar and moar homes, with their own view that the tax-tilt would always be tilted with such advantages to them.

Go support their right to question (I support it to), but power and authority exists.  These BTLers made their own unregulated BTL debt claims on multiple home choices.

AND, the BTLers act as an authority, to others in the market... their tenants.   They've laid claim to a home to rent out.

 Authority runs through the system and structure of life, and I can tell you for a fact that BTLers have been rude/controlling to tenants down the ages.   Reminded of many a post on HPC (tenant side).

This authority A-OK ?  Lording it, and leaning on the tenant and his family to participate in a lie? 

Quote

8YI - Posted 05 August 2014 - 12:49 PM

For the past 2 years, I have seen people continue to be bailed out for their balls out risk-taking, mocked for my risk aversion to the extent that I was openly mocked by BTLers as a poor man from a poor family* who do not understand what it takes to become rich (and by 'what it takes to become rich' they meant buy as much property as highly leveraged as you can), seen myself priced out of a market where houses are bought for cash and then rented out the day after completion at sub 3.5% yields (these are 3% stamp duty properties too), seen people pay more in stamp duty than I paid in rent for 3 years who are now sitting on £150k+ of 'profit' and lastly have a landlord who despite buying the house I live in for under £60,000 in the late 90s contacts me to say that he needs to show a rental income of £800+pm (way above what I'm paying) so that he can re-mortgage onto a better deal.

You do the math, I'd guess current value is around £240-250k but anything is possible in this market but not all early market entrants are sitting pretty and this sort of BTL activity has pushed up rental prices in the area to upwards of £1000pcm for a small family home and garden.

 

Yes you/we can admire people who want to be free to be their own boss, but those most affected did it via unregulated BTL debt, laying claim to other homes.  

Just a tax tweak, and history shows the rules can be tweaked many times over, and often affects those who have been most greedy.   Complain if they wish, but Section24 is a reality.  The reasoning has been explained by authority and it's been a long time coming imo.   HM Treasury indulged one BTLer and now consider the matter closed.  That's their right to do so.  They have politely explained time over to individual BTLers, and draw a line, when the individual BTLers keep coming back with spew of same questions, wanting the answers they want to hear.   So one has taken the Complaint Proceedure.  Choices. 

BTLers could have been boss in other sectors, where there is not a constraint on supply (and supply constrained because of so much BTLer activity), and where they could be productive in really creating some sort of needed supply for the market (not taking it to rent out).

If you have an issue with all authority (evil), then balance it around... rather than BTLers being the worthy cause to use for it.

 

[Venger]

9 hours ago, DrBuyToLeech said:

Landlords are an authority, as far as their tenants are concerned.

That's the essentially evil situation.    

Central government is elected and can claim to be a legitimate authority.

Landlords cannot. 

Such a good post.

[Lambie]

Here's something I don't think I've seen mentioned anywhere.

HMRC no longer allowing accountants to deal with tax queries from 1st May - http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/hmrc-refuses-to-give-pay-details-to-tax-agents

I wonder what those roaming charges are going to be like in Malta..

Edited May 8, 2017 by Lambie

[doahh]

23 minutes ago, Lambie said:

Here's something I don't think I've seen mentioned anywhere.

HMRC no longer allowing accountants to deal with tax queries from 1st May - http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/hmrc-refuses-to-give-pay-details-to-tax-agents

I wonder what those roaming charges are going to be like in Malta..

There is a comment under the article that suggests there is an alternative but it is not yet in place:

Quote

Hmm, that is incredibly unhelpful. So between May and October (and probably well beyond) we cant access pay details for clients, so as a result there will be a considerable rise in the number of corrections made by HMRC, especially for things like P11Ds.

Why cant the alternative methods be put in place BEFORE the current method is stopped.

 

[Lambie]

1 hour ago, doahh said:

There is a comment under the article that suggests there is an alternative but it is not yet in place:

 

Hopefully by the time it gets consulted on, tested and formally released (in line with standard civil service practice should take 18 months) BTL and HMRC will have had a number of direct introductions to each other's ways of working which will go as well as expected.

http://gif-finder.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Fire-hose-vs-Flamethrower-Rematch.webm

[Toast]

On 07/05/2017 at 5:52 PM, Venger said:

You're creating a situation where you fear HMRC will tip into honest people with no liability, and no power to prevent them.  Maybe there's something in that, but it's not for this thread

Yes, I mostly agree with this, but the thread had taken a turn towards talking about authority, so it didn't feel entirely out of place to chip in (parenthetically).

23 hours ago, Venger said:

  On 07/05/2017 at 10:13 AM, DrBuyToLeech said:

Landlords are an authority, as far as their tenants are concerned.

That's the essentially evil situation.   

I definitely agree with this. It is not as extreme an example of authority as government agencies, in that you only have to move house, rather than change country, to avoid it, but it's the same in essence. St Paul might have said that love of money is the root of all evil, but I think he would have been better in that context to denounce the desire to control other people's lives.

On 07/05/2017 at 5:52 PM, Venger said:

All this authority lark began when you took one of the big BTLers up as your 'authority' cause

A bad "poster child" for the argument, as I said. However, I was trying to express a principle, rather than a preference. In the same way, it is a much cleaner argument in favour of free speech to defend the right of someone to say things I disagree with than things I support.

[Digsby]

On 04/05/2017 at 9:09 PM, DrBuyToLeech said:

Originally, landlords were armed thugs who controlled territory by force in order to extract resources from the populace.  

Changes since amount to little more than a PR exercise.  The violence is outsourced from the minor landlords to the chief landlord - the state - but most people have been so hoodwinked by centuries of propaganda that actual violence is unnecessary.  

So it's true that modern landlording, in the west at least, is much more of a confidence trick than the bloodbath it was 200 years ago, but the principle is the same: Control territory, farm people, extract rent.

It's quite clear that landlording should be abolished.  It's an undemocratic relic of the feudal system and landlords are nothing but a burden on the society that is required to support them.

Due to this long history of landlording, our economy remains tied to the notion that landowners somehow provide the rest of us with land.  In reality land - exclusive use of a location - is a service provided by the population to the landowner.   

Without the threat of violence, your claim to this field or that river has to be negotiated with everyone else, and people aren't going to hand you everything in return for nothing.  You'd simply be ignored.   

Once you recognise that basic fact, you can come up with any number of ways of efficiently and fairly allocating space. 

The key principle is that land users should pay for what they are using.  Even renting out houses is fine if you are actually paying society for the area you are taking up, it just ceases to be very profitable.

Instead we allow landowners to externalise their costs, and then wonder why we have an hour long commute to work and our kids can't leave home. 

Absolutely.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism

[anonlymouse]

This belongs far more in anecdotals but have just returned from three viewings in Highbury & Islington and Stoke Newington, each one with different estate agents. So a quite attractive, well connected part of Inner London/Zone 2, which attracts solicitors, accountants and the like and has rents to match.

They all said that where their btl clients are selling up (and the number is increasing), these are not being picked up by other landlords as they used to be as S24, lowering rents and the now receeding prospect of further capital gains has kicked the legs out from under the market.

[Digsby]

On 06/05/2017 at 1:36 PM, DrBuyToLeech said:

Both your response and dugsbody's suggest, I think, that you have both read too much into what I said.  

I haven't proposed a radical change in society, or state involvement in the land market.   I didnt really mean to propose anything.

I simply described the facts as they are.  There are many ways of responding to those facts, some involve the state, some don't, some are radical, some aren't.   

It's a really interesting topic but Venger's right its a bit OT for this thread (except I thought that dugsbody's original question was perfectly reasonable).  

Feel free to start a thread and I'll give a better answer. 

 

[Ah-so]

10 hours ago, anonlymouse said:

This belongs far more in anecdotals but have just returned from three viewings in Highbury & Islington and Stoke Newington, each one with different estate agents. So a quite attractive, well connected part of Inner London/Zone 2, which attracts solicitors, accountants and the like and has rents to match.

They all said that where their btl clients are selling up (and the number is increasing), these are not being picked up by other landlords as they used to be as S24, lowering rents and the now receeding prospect of further capital gains has kicked the legs out from under the market.

Friend of mine who has a studio flat attached to his property revealed that he has had to drop the rent by £50 p/m. He noted that this is lower than the rent 5 years ago. This is consistent with what is being reported across London. 

Just at a time when p118 is encouraging landlords to increase rents. 

[Blod]

26 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Just at a time when p118 is encouraging landlords to increase rents. 

If they can encourage other LLs to try raising rents then the resulting voids will help clear a few more of their competitors from the market. Remember, in their world it's a dog eat dog world. In the cesspool of BTL they are the lowest of the low.

[hi5lo5]

https://www.property118.com/camden-council-licencing-prosecution-can-stop-sale/98478/

Amateur running a HMO. How on Earth he found a buyer?

[Confusion of VIs]

2 hours ago, hi5lo5 said:

https://www.property118.com/camden-council-licencing-prosecution-can-stop-sale/98478/

Amateur running a HMO. How on Earth he found a buyer?

Beggers belief. I suspect the valuation will stop the sale going through without any help from the council.

[mrtickle]

6 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Beggers belief. I suspect the valuation will stop the sale going through without any help from the council.

From the comments
 

Quote

Ingrid Bacsa says:Read about me on my member profile

09/05/2017 at 15:59

I have no idea. The councils have too much power, make their own rules and do whatever they like.

You could just buy a licence – on line perhaps – and keep writing “sorry I made a mistake , I didnt intend to cheat. ”

False, and ignorance is no defence.

Quote

Ingrid Bacsa says:Read about me on my member profile

09/05/2017 at 15:59

 

Licences are quite new and they make the rules up as they go along ! I’m sick of the whole business . 

Well get the f**k out then, Ingrid. Sell now, Sell everything.

and some balance! Bet this comment won't last long on 118:

Quote

Harlequin Garden says:Read about me on my member profile

09/05/2017 at 16:24

I’ve had a lot of dealings with Camden in many departments and I know for sure that they don’t move their stumps unless someone is really rattling their cage. I don’t know how long you’ve been running this flat but if Camden wrote to you 3 months ago you have to take some responsibility for this – and I’ll put money on someone having made a complaint and kept at if for a long time prior to this. Camden are the laziest council (Lambeth not far behind). If they are after you – someone else is too, like a disgruntled neighbour or even one of the tenants.

 

 

Edited May 9, 2017 by mrtickle

[mrtickle]

Oh, even better.

Quote

Robert Mellors - Choice Housing Ltd says:Please view our official business sponsor profile

09/05/2017 at 18:44

I don’t know Camden’s rules, but in my area, you wouldn’t get a HMO licence as the property does not meet the minimum HMO licence conditions for 5 residents. Even if you have all the correct fire doors, thumb turn locks, fire alarm systems, protected escape route, right sized rooms, etc, and the property meets all other HMO requirements and is in excellent condition throughout, you still won’t get a licence as you need to provide at least two toilets if five residents living there (number of people living there, NOT number of rooms, i.e. if one room is let to a couple then that is six residents, so then you have to provide another bathroom, not just an extra toilet).

As you are about to be prosecuted, for a serious breach of HMO regulations, I also imagine that the Council will not grant you a licence as they may not consider you to be a fit and proper person.

I would suggest that you need to sell this property quickly. If you want to carry on running it as a HMO then you would need to reduce down to four residents only (or install an extra toilet or bathroom), and bring the property up to the HMO standards in all other ways. I would suggest that you obtain a copy of the Council’s HMO standards (my local council produce a guidance booklet), and study it carefully so that you know what the requirements are for a HMO and for a landlord to obtain a HMO licence.

I don’t think the Council could stop you from selling the property, but they can continue to prosecute you. They could also issue a rent repayment order, which basically means that you would have to repay all the rent you have received (repay to the tenants, or to the Housing Benefit Dept), so this could cost you a huge amount (plus you could be fined as well).

You need to get some specialist legal advice, and get it straight away. If your finances are already stretched then you may also need to seek some advice about bankruptcy (and don’t forget to include your s24 tax liability, which HMRC won’t even ask for until next year, but the liability is already building up).

Quote

H B says:Read about me on my member profile

09/05/2017 at 21:11

 

One other thought – it sounds like you have a near 7 figure mortgage on the property. Are you in breach of any of the conditions? A conviction for running an unlicensed HMO might make the mortgage immediately repayable, so again, I would suggest selling quickly.

[Byron]

6 minutes ago, mrtickle said:

From the comments
 

False, and ignorance is no defence.

Well get the f**k out then, Ingrid. Sell now, Sell everything.

 

Help!

I feel an attack of over gloating coming on. Must find my tablet's.

[Lavalas]

Good old Ros. She can now add Henry Pryor to her list.

 

[Blod]

Quote

Faiza Alia says:Read about me on my member profile

10/05/2017 at 12:12

 

Hello everyone thank you so much for all your help and comments. Yes i’m in serious situation here, The falt itselft is clean and tidy and the rooms are ALL doubles – but yes there is 1 bathroom WC – 1 toilet WC, but a friend also suggested that I can put a SHOWER unit and take out the bath in the toilet which will allow a TOILET to be installed in the bathroom so in effect 2 toilets.. Also yes i’m in breach with lenders hence why i’m selling quickly as I’ve made arrangements with them and now know that I just cannot afford this to keep this flat which was our family home for 26years. We’ve only been renting it since 2013. As a HMO for 17months. In anycase what more can I say people YES I’ve messed up big time. My plan is to sell this and clear up all my debts and just think that maybe one day i’l look back and think how could I I have got myself into this situation in such a mess.

I will inform the lenders that i’m selling this flat – (is this a good idea) as I may struggle to pay the coming months payments. One of the lenders who has a second charge on the flat previously threatened to appoint a LPA RECEIVER when the other non-paying tenant drove all my other tenants out and I was left receiving no rent. I fell into arrears of 2months with them and thus cleared that but now again i’m going to struggle going forward. Lender is Together. Oh gosh what a mess. Thank you all and if someone can recommend a solicitor who is good at dealing with HMO non-licencing cases I would appreciate it. I will apply for the licence today and see about the extension in anycase.

Thank you all.

Quote

Faiza Alia says:Read about me on my member profile

10/05/2017 at 14:46

 

Hi also, can anyone advise me on how much my CGT will be on this.

This was my main home from purchase 1995-2012. From then its been rented out. It was purchased under the Right to buy scheme back in 95 where it was jointly owned – but throughout the years, it has been a case where I’ve bought out my parents share, my brothers share etc. Now I own it. It is valued at £650. borrowing of £366k. My income this year is £24k from other properties. I manage my own properties full time and have no other source of income. The flat was originally bought for £75k back in 95.

Any advice would be appreciated it.

Oh dear, mewed out all the equity for her portfolio and has only now discovered the evil CGT. Another one for the bankruptcy courts.

[Dyson Fury]

And they are actually losing money on a monthly basis even now..

Quote

Im paying £3.6k a month in payments...The rent being received is £3k.

although there are inconsistencies in the story as posted - £3.6k a month in IO payments on a borrowing of £366k would mean an interest rate of 11.8%.  But maybe that's correct, as the "lender is Together" who are more a bridging finance firm:

https://togethermoney.com/personal-lending/mortgages/consumer-buy-to-let/

[jiltedjen]

We always knew there were millions of these morons out there. One big free money tree, no tax, no job, no laws, no reality. Just 'bubble dwellers' who have somehow survived an incredibly long period of time. 

Its absolutely gorgeous watching  these morons finally face up to the real prospect of bankruptcy, one realisation/issue at a time. 

and it still early days yet.

speaking to a BTL'er the other day, saying the banks are actually checking details now, wanting proof of stuff. they are starting to get their ducks in a row looking forward to actually being forced to check details.

A lot of stuff will be found out as toxic, stuff which was originally at the racier end of lending will now be utterly toxic due to the tax changes.

in one fell swoop the tax man trumps the bank's first charge. 

they will call in plenty of loans, banks will want as much of their money back ASAP

[Lavalas]

46 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

speaking to a BTL'er the other day, saying the banks are actually checking details now, wanting proof of stuff. they are starting to get their ducks in a row looking forward to actually being forced to check details.

 

I posted something the other day from a HMO Facebook group. A mortgage broker was saying that some Landlords who have gone for tax schemes (BICT and the like) were finding it difficult to remortgage as their tax position doesn't match their income.

I'm sure this is very stressful for them but I think it's absolutely hilarious.

[Bland Unsight]

51 minutes ago, jiltedjen said:

We always knew there were millions of these morons out there.

This is almost certainly wrong. The best numbers in the public domain are the sample in the December 2016 CML report and they suggest that there are about 1 million leveraged landlords. Millions is a huge exaggeration. Somewhere slightly north of 2 million UK BTL mortgages on the UK lenders books.

Clearly quite a few overseas nationals using mortgages from non-UK banks to take property punts on UK property, but I am unaware of any well-sourced credible estimate of how many.

[jiltedjen]

million of these morons could just be referring to morons in general, but fair point. Even 'just' one million leveraged landlords would have power over a huge amount of housing. 

9 minutes ago, Lavalas said:

I posted something the other day from a HMO Facebook group. A mortgage broker was saying that some Landlords who have gone for tax schemes (BICT and the like) were finding it difficult to remortgage as their tax position doesn't match their income.

I'm sure this is very stressful for them but I think it's absolutely hilarious.

It was always going to be this way, you don't mess with laws as a business. As criminal as the banks are, why would you risk your lending for the sake of someone else benefiting?  of course the banks will happily break laws and destory society but that DOES benifit them. Bankrupt morons trying to find a way out serves no purpose for the banks, if anything you would want to chase them away with s***y stick 

[spyguy]

10 minutes ago, Pumpkin Muad'Dib said:

This is almost certainly wrong. The best numbers in the public domain are the sample in the December 2016 CML report and they suggest that there are about 1 million leveraged landlords. Millions is a huge exaggeration. Somewhere slightly north of 2 million UK BTL mortgages on the UK lenders books.

Clearly quite a few overseas nationals using mortgages from non-UK banks to take property punts on UK property, but I am unaware of any well-sourced credible estimate of how many.

What about the liars?

I reckon 2m btl ll is around the mark.

And id guess there are 4m btl ptoperties.