Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 13.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dont really know either, but PT seems like one of the more responsible BTL news-info sites, and forums - in very murky world of property.    There are many property vested interests on murkier si

Although all that 'creating personal brand' pushing many of the BTLers are into... / have been into for years and years. It's used by many other sectors in a similar way - there's a lot in self-p

Previous video in the link below (Landlord 29 years 'experience / greatness'), for anyone who didn't see it first time around + latest round of other BTL comments, although I skipped the ones by PB.

Posted Images

8 hours ago, elephant said:

I particularly like the professionalism in point 4 - “What the hell are the politicians playing at?” :D  Great “plan” that!  And there are muppets supposedly queuing up to throw money at this guy :D  

The DSS doesnt pay doleys grocers direct. Or the offy, or the leccy/gas.

Why should it pay the LL direct?

Its called business risk and knowing your customer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this shelter £60m budget stuff is really rather simplistic, and it's also a complete misunderstanding of the scale of the problem. 

Shelter's £60m annual budget, whilst looking rather impressive when seen in the bank account of your average person, is approx 0.25% of the housing benefit spend of £23.4bn.

Literally, a tiny drop in the ocean. Why do landlords get representation (RLA, all those letting agents) when tenants don't?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't give a monkey's about whether what they say about Shelter makes sense. They just want to find a stick to beat it with and this is what comes to hand. They don't think that people should have access to decent advice, even though often it would be in their own interests for that to be the case.

On the plus side I see that they've put a link to my blog on Property118 and described me as an anti-landlord spin doctor. Thanks for the compliment and all the extra traffic guys, I'm touched. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

They don't give a monkey's about whether what they say about Shelter makes sense. They just want to find a stick to beat it with and this is what comes to hand. They don't think that people should have access to decent advice, even though often it would be in their own interests for that to be the case.

On the plus side I see that they've put a link to my blog on Property118 and described me as an anti-landlord spin doctor. Thanks for the compliment and all the extra traffic guys, I'm touched. 

Apparently you must be worried by the Landlords Alliance to have written that blog.

You don’t strike me as being worried to be honest. I guess the thing to remember is that Busta is a moron. Others, whilst still fairly moronic, will read with interest. Some might even post, we’ll see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is why anybody would incorporate the actual buildings themselves?

 

Just setup a "Management Company" - Let to the "Management company" for the monthly interest costs only, then the company sublets.

Then there is no personal tax to pay only corporate tax on the profits the management company makes, but you get to keep the assets in your name???

This totally avoids the change of ownership, while allowing the company to pay tax on the profits instead of the individual. Am I missing something???

This is the kind of crap google and co. are doing.

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

Apparently you must be worried by the Landlords Alliance to have written that blog.

You don’t strike me as being worried to be honest. I guess the thing to remember is that Busta is a moron. Others, whilst still fairly moronic, will read with interest. Some might even post, we’ll see.

Busta's recent revelation that he is a follower of Man of Kents blog suggests to me that he is a regular visitor to this fine website.

 

Edited by Exiled Canadian
removing typos
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TryingToWin said:

What I don't understand is why anybody would incorporate the actual buildings themselves?

 

Just setup a "Management Company" - Let to the "Management company" for the monthly interest costs only, then the company sublets.

Then there is no personal tax to pay only corporate tax on the profits the management company makes, but you get to keep the assets in your name???

This totally avoids the change of ownership, while allowing the company to pay tax on the profits instead of the individual. Am I missing something???

This is the kind of crap google and co. are doing.

The landlord is receiving rent from the "Management Company" and would be liable for the same personal taxes as if they were receiving rent from any other tenant.

Edited by Dorkins
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lavalas said:

Apparently you must be worried by the Landlords Alliance to have written that blog.

You don’t strike me as being worried to be honest. I guess the thing to remember is that Busta is a moron. Others, whilst still fairly moronic, will read with interest. Some might even post, we’ll see.

Yeah, I read that. I don't know why I'm supposed to be worried by a guy with a barely-literate twitter feed pretending to be important. I don't want people to be taken in by them, but apart from that I think they're hilarious. At the risk of blowing my own trumpet, their reaction suggests they're the ones who are worried. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Yeah, I guess it's fair that I should be blacklisted by all landlords for being critical of a tiny organisation that even many of them don't like. Stay classy, guys. 

These people are Leveraged Masters of the Universe and the creme de la menthe of the UK's entrepreneurial class.  If they want to criticise a well respected housing charity based on flawed information and vested interest they will; woe betide any oik that points out the lunacy of their position.

The law doesn't apply to these people (in their heads anyway) so best that you know your place.

Edited by Exiled Canadian
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.



×
×
  • 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.