Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
overlander

Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Close.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4907264/Landlords-35-men-live-squalor-DOCTORS.html

See other thread - Why are so many BTLers Drs.

Indians too. Double surprise!

Hang on. It looks like we may have a rent-to-rent innovator.

Also I'm not seeing any evidence of a mortgage or a portfolio. The landlords haven't done anything yet to earn our respect. Let's see some leverage and twenty crappy flats before we start handing out the plaudits.

However, if the landlords' story about a tenant getting busy bringing in other tenants is to be believed then I'm less impressed. Sure, the rent-to-rent guys understand pwoperdee and know how to jack up the rents, but where's the leverage? Anyone who thinks they are in The Game but doesn't have a couple of million of interest-only mortgages is just kidding themselves. Proper entrepreneurs are drowning in leverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Beary McBearface said:

I wonder if The Mail might have spun this as being a story about unwitting landlords being stitched up by the proverbial 'tenant from hell' if the landlords were white British.

They could have; lets see f it gets redrafted

Share this post


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

Hang on. It looks like we may have a rent-to-rent innovator.

Also I'm not seeing any evidence of a mortgage or a portfolio. The landlords haven't done anything yet to earn our respect. Let's see some leverage and twenty crappy flats before we start handing out the plaudits.

However, if the landlords' story about a tenant getting busy bringing in other tenants is to be believed then I'm less impressed. Sure, the rent-to-rent guys understand pwoperdee and know how to jack up the rents, but where's the leverage? Anyone who thinks they are in The Game but doesn't have a couple of million of interest-only mortgages is just kidding themselves. Proper entrepreneurs are drowning in leverage.

If you get 10 in a room and few under a tarpaulin in garden ... why bother with a portfolio?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More utter tedium from Ros Becks latest angle  on Conservative Home. It's so dull I wouldn't even bother clicking the link. A few of her pals are agreeing in the comments, the rest think it's a load of sh*t. I'm only posting it to highlight where their 'campaign' is at and just how toothless and unremarkable it all is...

Https://m.facebook.com/groups/371572042862286?view=permalink&id=1682288678457276&ref=content_filter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/09/2017 at 12:51 PM, oatbake said:

The Axe The Tenant Tax Facebook group has recently been coming across as increasingly shrill and desperate. A post today suggests that they are moving into the 'depression' stage of loss:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1616240785085586&id=1077700412272962

I imagine falling prices will sort out the problems with yields... Although I reckon that won't be good news for them either!

I liked this gem of a comment also "Not only that, void periods are starting to increase".

How are those rent rises going for you guys? 

Makes a change from the usual "we told you so" posts about rents being forecast to rise (usually  of the back of some report by an organisation with a blatant vested interest in selling houses / mortgages). 

 

Piece from Daniel Farey-Jones on those rent rises ?

https://medium.com/@danfareyjones/the-btl-crackdown-is-restraining-rents-1cbe7bfaaad

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Spirit said:

Piece from Daniel Farey-Jones on those rent rises ?

https://medium.com/@danfareyjones/the-btl-crackdown-is-restraining-rents-1cbe7bfaaad

 

Charts of rent falls do not show the biggy, which is left unrecorded - voids.

Rents are falling as places are sat, unlet, for a substantial time.

Getting ~£50/m less is less important then the loss of ~£900/m rent payments for 2 to 3 months.

Voids kill (leveraged) LLs way before falling rents do.

Joe IOBTL will be repo is he misses 2 months BTL payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spyguy said:

Charts of rent falls do not show the biggy, which is left unrecorded - voids.

Rents are falling as places are sat, unlet, for a substantial time.

Getting ~£50/m less is less important then the loss of ~£900/m rent payments for 2 to 3 months.

Voids kill (leveraged) LLs way before falling rents do.

Joe IOBTL will be repo is he misses 2 months BTL payments.

True about voids but the repo will take longer - banks do not recognise 2 months arrears as default but rather a warning sign, even on BTL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

True about voids but the repo will take longer - banks do not recognise 2 months arrears as default but rather a warning sign, even on BTL.

Not sure.

Btl is unregulated, not consumer lending. Banks will repo asap or force a consolidation. Banks will not ignore 2months of missed payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ah-so said:

True about voids but the repo will take longer - banks do not recognise 2 months arrears as default but rather a warning sign, even on BTL.

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Banks will repo asap or force a consolidation. Banks will not ignore 2months of missed payments.

On this subject who else reads this quote from NatWest's senior economist as an attempt to push to dilute the rules governing how much time lenders can wait before repo'ing BTLs? It's garbled, but he seems to be saying that he thinks they shouldn't have to move so quickly in future. 

As the private rental sector grows Burnside said the UK needs to rethink its repossession strategy with private landlords who fail to keep up with their mortgage payments.

Currently banks are more lenient with homeowners than landlords and Burnside felt this needs to change.

He added: “As a private sector landlord if you stop paying that’s a matter of months [before the property is repossessed], not years, and that’s ‘okay’ if you’re talking about people who are fleet of foot and can move easily.

“It’s less obviously okay from a society perspective if you’ve got kids at school and ties with the community and we haven’t changed the way that works since the 70s.

“It doesn’t feel to me that just keeping everything the same and just carrying on is a very sustainable solution.”

Source

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patient London FTB said:

On this subject who else reads this quote from NatWest's senior economist as an attempt to push to dilute the rules governing how much time lenders can wait before repo'ing BTLs? It's garbled, but he seems to be saying that he thinks they shouldn't have to move so quickly in future. 

As the private rental sector grows Burnside said the UK needs to rethink its repossession strategy with private landlords who fail to keep up with their mortgage payments.

Currently banks are more lenient with homeowners than landlords and Burnside felt this needs to change.

He added: “As a private sector landlord if you stop paying that’s a matter of months [before the property is repossessed], not years, and that’s ‘okay’ if you’re talking about people who are fleet of foot and can move easily.

“It’s less obviously okay from a society perspective if you’ve got kids at school and ties with the community and we haven’t changed the way that works since the 70s.

“It doesn’t feel to me that just keeping everything the same and just carrying on is a very sustainable solution.”

Source

 

RBS NatWest still part-nationalised?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patient London FTB said:

On this subject who else reads this quote from NatWest's senior economist as an attempt to push to dilute the rules governing how much time lenders can wait before repo'ing BTLs? It's garbled, but he seems to be saying that he thinks they shouldn't have to move so quickly in future. 

As the private rental sector grows Burnside said the UK needs to rethink its repossession strategy with private landlords who fail to keep up with their mortgage payments.

Currently banks are more lenient with homeowners than landlords and Burnside felt this needs to change.

He added: “As a private sector landlord if you stop paying that’s a matter of months [before the property is repossessed], not years, and that’s ‘okay’ if you’re talking about people who are fleet of foot and can move easily.

“It’s less obviously okay from a society perspective if you’ve got kids at school and ties with the community and we haven’t changed the way that works since the 70s.

“It doesn’t feel to me that just keeping everything the same and just carrying on is a very sustainable solution.”

Source

 

Thats not so much not repoing. Its what you do with the tenants.

You could make a case that, where the BTL is occupied, the tenant can stay there for 6 months will the bank has possession.

My understanding is that banks are very keen to repo BTL. And Id guess most repos will come about then the property is empty, or where the tenant has stopped paying rent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Patient London FTB said:

On this subject who else reads this quote from NatWest's senior economist as an attempt to push to dilute the rules governing how much time lenders can wait before repo'ing BTLs? It's garbled, but he seems to be saying that he thinks they shouldn't have to move so quickly in future. 

As the private rental sector grows Burnside said the UK needs to rethink its repossession strategy with private landlords who fail to keep up with their mortgage payments.

Currently banks are more lenient with homeowners than landlords and Burnside felt this needs to change.

He added: “As a private sector landlord if you stop paying that’s a matter of months [before the property is repossessed], not years, and that’s ‘okay’ if you’re talking about people who are fleet of foot and can move easily.

“It’s less obviously okay from a society perspective if you’ve got kids at school and ties with the community and we haven’t changed the way that works since the 70s.

“It doesn’t feel to me that just keeping everything the same and just carrying on is a very sustainable solution.”

Source

 

The problem with this line of thinking is that a BTL Landlord heading for Repossession will usually end up there one way or the other - the Lender's do not want to repossess at all, so payment plans will be arranged, and the repo delayed and delayed; but typically it will end up happening. (have some stats somewhere, but generally is like a ship starting to sink, might survive a few near misses to give a bit of hope but tends to end up sinking in the end)

I think this is because an individual with a personal mortgage has options to try and change their life over and keep to a repayment plan, whereas BTL is a business that has hit the rocks and is difficult to turn around.

It's not like the Landlord can manage by just cutting their personal consumption, they have to make a failing asset become revenue generating, and its a house which is not exactly the most dynamic business asset.

I would suggest that for tenanted BTLs then there should maybe be a process where the Lender and Tenant work something out without repossessing to kick the Tenant out - but otherwise pandering to borrowers who cannot pay their mortgage is usually just a stopgap that will make the problem worse. (as brutal and unfortunate as that might be)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, london_thirtythree said:

The problem with this line of thinking is that a BTL Landlord heading for Repossession will usually end up there one way or the other - the Lender's do not want to repossess at all, so payment plans will be arranged, and the repo delayed and delayed; but typically it will end up happening. (have some stats somewhere, but generally is like a ship starting to sink, might survive a few near misses to give a bit of hope but tends to end up sinking in the end)

I think this is because an individual with a personal mortgage has options to try and change their life over and keep to a repayment plan, whereas BTL is a business that has hit the rocks and is difficult to turn around.

It's not like the Landlord can manage by just cutting their personal consumption, they have to make a failing asset become revenue generating, and its a house which is not exactly the most dynamic business asset.

I would suggest that for tenanted BTLs then there should maybe be a process where the Lender and Tenant work something out without repossessing to kick the Tenant out - but otherwise pandering to borrowers who cannot pay their mortgage is usually just a stopgap that will make the problem worse. (as brutal and unfortunate as that might be)

If the tenant is on an AST then they still have the term of that AST, don't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patient London FTB said:

On this subject who else reads this quote from NatWest's senior economist as an attempt to push to dilute the rules governing how much time lenders can wait before repo'ing BTLs? It's garbled, but he seems to be saying that he thinks they shouldn't have to move so quickly in future. 

[snip]

Good find. You didn't see anything like this when BTL landlords were using the threat of section 21 notices to push up rents <_<.  Quite striking to find them talking openly about managing a flood of BTL repossessions given the current level of the relevant stats.

image.png.83aab7c43ff8e89eb238d2f9c8d724f6.png

Source: Mortgage and Landlord Possession Statistics in England and Wales, April to June 2017 (Provisional)

There are consequences for capital adequacy ratios if the banks start holding large volumes of non-performing loans on their balance sheets

 

Share this post


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

The problem with this line of thinking is that a BTL Landlord heading for Repossession will usually end up there one way or the other - the Lender's do not want to repossess at all, so payment plans will be arranged, and the repo delayed and delayed; but typically it will end up happening. (have some stats somewhere, but generally is like a ship starting to sink, might survive a few near misses to give a bit of hope but tends to end up sinking in the end)

I think this is because an individual with a personal mortgage has options to try and change their life over and keep to a repayment plan, whereas BTL is a business that has hit the rocks and is difficult to turn around.

It's not like the Landlord can manage by just cutting their personal consumption, they have to make a failing asset become revenue generating, and its a house which is not exactly the most dynamic business asset.

I would suggest that for tenanted BTLs then there should maybe be a process where the Lender and Tenant work something out without repossessing to kick the Tenant out - but otherwise pandering to borrowers who cannot pay their mortgage is usually just a stopgap that will make the problem worse. (as brutal and unfortunate as that might be)

Why not give tenant the option to buy the house for the value of the o/s mortgage (provided they are not in default on the rent).  Good outcome for all - tenant gets to stay in home, bank gets money back, landlord personal assets not at risk from lender.

Share this post


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

No idea. Good question though.

I think there's a key difference between one scenario in which banks expect the landlord to go under due to the tougher borrowing climate but the tenants to stay in situ with healthy finances, and another scenario in which the tenants lose their jobs and can't pay the rent. Maybe NatWest guy is imagining the first will happen and trying to think of ways to amend regulations to ensure they keep the rental payments stream and don't have to sell the property?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patient London FTB said:

I think there's a key difference between one scenario in which banks expect the landlord to go under due to the tougher borrowing climate but the tenants to stay in situ with healthy finances, and another scenario in which the tenants lose their jobs and can't pay the rent. Maybe NatWest guy is imagining the first will happen and trying to think of ways to amend regulations to ensure they keep the rental payments stream and don't have to sell the property?

Agreed.

The entry of £225bn of leverage into the PRS in the last twenty or so years changes the consequences of rents adjusting down when the economy falters. It will hit bank balance sheets in a way that it would not have previously; previously only trouble in the owner-occupier sector eventually bled through into defaults on lending.

The leverage represents a commitment for rents to operate at this level. If they adjust down, it's ugly in a way it simply wasn't prior to the entry of all the mug leverage.

Nice over-arching story about can kicking here. The rise of consent-to-let and then buy-to-let from 1996 onwards is at least in part a response to the lenders experience of the aftermath of the 1989 bust. The dramatic fall in interest rates post-2008 means that the buy-to-let sector has not yet been crash tested. The only market view we have on buy-to-let was the wholesale money markets closing to Bradford & Bingley in 2008.

One to watch, but for the time being at least the idea of the banks sitting on a million or so home to postpone acknowledging some lending losses is too far into the dystopian/conspiracy theory realm for my tastes at present. The banks can take the hit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Exiled Canadian said:

Why not give tenant the option to buy the house for the value of the o/s mortgage (provided they are not in default on the rent).  Good outcome for all - tenant gets to stay in home, bank gets money back, landlord personal assets not at risk from lender.

Few if any BTL mortgages are on repayment terms so they would hope to be facing the original amount borrowed. It might work for some but I would hazard a guess that most repoed BTL properties will have been mewed and so the tenant would struggle on a repayment mortgage. It is that discrepancy in repayments that haunts the banks. Those repoed BTL properties are facing the reality that there are too few OOs able to fund repayment mortgages on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ros Becks latest assault in her war against intelligence is going to be an article on the measures we can take to make it easier for FTB to get on the housing ladder...

https://m.facebook.com/groups/371572042862286?view=permalink&id=1684863798199764&ref=content_filter

I'm going to stick my neck out and predict that repealing S24 will be one of the main things the government should do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lavalas said:

Ros Becks latest assault in her war against intelligence is going to be an article on the measures we can take to make it easier for FTB to get on the housing ladder...

https://m.facebook.com/groups/371572042862286?view=permalink&id=1684863798199764&ref=content_filter

I'm going to stick my neck out and predict that repealing S24 will be one of the main things the government should do.

Great spot...and I have a sneaky feeling you may be right. Although there might be more adds: 

Remove ALL tax from LLs and reduce all the regulation and red tape. Then the LLs can charge tenants less (yes, even less than the massively under charging already taking place by many benevolent 118'ers) and then the tenant can save for a deposit...sorted.

Any overall tax loss will be made up with all the extra BnQ sales (only LL's shop at BnQ) and that generates tax. And if the government needs more tax they can always ask fireman, nurses and the workers to pay a bit more...they contribute so little to the UK.

Vote Ros....the home provider and housing champion. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

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


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



×
×
  • 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.