XswampyX Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Bloody hell they just do not get it do they? Tenants and landlords are not a voting block, they have opposing interests. They don't appear to get it? What a bunch of narcissistic b'stards. Do they think we were all born just to give them admiration for shafting us and half our wages? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverwhere Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 They don't appear to get it? What a bunch of narcissistic b'stards. Do they think we were all born just to give them admiration for shafting us and half our wages? Tenant's aren't quite human apparently, they don't have natural human desires like wanting security of shelter for their families. More like pets that shouldn't be kicked... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XswampyX Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I feel owned. Would sexual favours to my landlord be acceptable if I agree to vote the way they want me to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbo Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Bloody hell they just do not get it do they? Tenants and landlords are not a voting block, they have opposing interests. I particularly like how this chap thinks corporate landlords will cherry pick. Because of their exposure, corporate landlords can afford to house higher risk, higher yielding tennants without fear of going underwater if they encounter issues. Corporate landlords will also have standardised rules regarding home use and maintenance and procedures to complain or request repairs etc. The mind boggles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
long time lurking Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Bloody hell they just do not get it do they? Tenants and landlords are not a voting block, they have opposing interests. What ever they are on there's their next money making scam..as it must be good shit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 There would be no naming and shaming of landlords, just a website to help make it easier for the general public to inform HMRC about landlord tax evading practices. Help with filling in forms, reasons and information to why we should inform authorities about such negative social practice. I completely agree Bland Unsight that this can be seen from space and HMRC might be going after BTLers in due course, a website like this would just give the taxman an encouraging hand and I'm guessing once a report has been filed an investigation will take place? There's a form for informing about tax evasion on the HMRC's site https://online.hmrc.gov.uk/shortforms/form/TEH_IRF?dept-name=TEH&sub-dept-name=&location=39&origin=http://www.hmrc.gov.uk The sites dual job would be to provide negative sentiment about amateur landlords negative effects on community with a BIG social media push. If amateur landlords thought that remaining under the radar was less likely to happen and they were going to make a loss, could be a good deterrent and damaging to BTLers sentiment. I like the idea. People mostly won't be aware of that obscure HMRC dob-a-tax-evader form, but a well-publicised website with easy to understand bullet points on how to check whether your accidental landlord or btl magnate is paying the right tax on their newfound income would be a winner, imo. I wondered about this myself in my past rental place:owned by 2 teachers who were taking a "gap year" off with their young daughter to go travelling. How lovely for them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) However, two million voting landlords and their five million tenants is a huge chunk of the population for one man to dictate to in terms of livlihoods and their homes. That's a standard ploy when the likes of landlords are in difficulty to try to pretend that their interests are aligned with tenants. In fact they try to pretend that their interests are aligned with the entire country - with current crazy house prices those days are long gone (if they ever were so aligned) Edited July 21, 2015 by billybong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snugglybear Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 There should be some way of shopping, I know a few who are letting to people on benefits when they know the mortgage doesn't allow this. Wonder what would happen if they find out? If the lender finds out? The Halifax says in its FAQs "What if I let without your permission? If you let your property or we believe you have, we can: charge you interest on top of another rate you're paying so that there is an added rate; or make you pay a regular additional payment. We can also backdate the extra interest or additional payments to when you originally let your property, or to when we believe you did so." So that would make BTL even less financially attractive. Trouble is, they have to find out first. The CML needs a dobbing-in facility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Is it just me or is finding out that banks actually ban letting to people on benefits a) a surprise and disgusting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Oops - that smiley was meant to be a 'b)' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Is it just me or is finding out that banks actually ban letting to people on benefits a) a surprise and disgusting? I'm pretty sure that the banks are only bothered about it being let out without permission, against the terms of an oo mortgage, rather than whether it is being let to benefit recipients or not, but nothing would surprise me these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snugglybear Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I'm pretty sure that the banks are only bothered about it being let out without permission, against the terms of an oo mortgage, rather than whether it is being let to benefit recipients or not, but nothing would surprise me these days. The Rentify website https://www.rentify.com/resources/landlords-and-housing-benefits says "You should always check the conditions of your mortgage as some lenders do not allow landlords to let to tenants on Housing Benefit. In fact Nationwide and Lloyds have recently lifted blanket bans on landlords letting to Housing Benefit tenants. Restrictions may still apply elsewhere and you should be especially vigilant if you are a new landlord." Don't know how reliable the website is, mind. Appears to offer services to landlords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 That would explain why some adverts say 'sorry the landlord is unable to let to htb claimants'. I thought it was just because they were a##holes. Beyond belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Having a bad day. Hb, not htb. Though come to think of it they are both being stuffed so whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bland Unsight Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 That would explain why some adverts say 'sorry the landlord is unable to let to hb claimants'. I thought it was just because they were a##holes. Beyond belief. It's a sweet day when you can fix your posts. "If you will it, it is no dream" In a delightful irony, at some point between now and 2020 some of those landlords will become hb claimants. Leverage is a bitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkins Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 That parasite118 forum post about the 2 million landlords and 5 million tenants being a voting bloc is hilarious. How can anybody not get the fact that taking 30-50% of somebody's wages off them every month is not the way to win a popularity contest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverwhere Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 That parasite118 forum post about the 2 million landlords and 5 million tenants being a voting bloc is hilarious. How can anybody not get the fact that taking 30-50% of somebody's wages off them every month is not the way to win a popularity contest? Love it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeTrader Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Chaos is a ladder. There's been a few good 'There is no ladder' posts over the years - one for example. Die ladder. The ladder is a metaphorical construct designed to sucker FTBs on to the "first rung". That boomers have been able to trade up over their lives to bigger and better properties does not mean that there is a ladder there for subsequent generations to climb, nor that there should be one. HPI has made the rungs too far apart and in some instances the ladder has been pulled up away from the average FTB altogether as boomers recycle their equity to their offspring to give them a leg up (the levitating ladder).If there ever was a ladder it was during a period when boomers were expanding the economy and marching onwards and upwards in a demographic bulge. The economy is no longer doing that and for most people their first property may be their last.My late grandfather, a machine tool maker in the North East, bought his first and only house in the '30s. He never moved, his first house was adequate for family needs (he had 4 children and his wife did not work). He was not wealthy by any objective measure but by today's standards he seems to have been, which shows what a nonsense the UK property market has become.JY 118 and Tribes last few days. Claiming renters can afford more.. just have to give up their mobile phones and treats. Renters don't want to buy and refuse to save.. too many holidays and nice car. Landlords haven't outbid FTBs. Favourite one is at 118 with an old geezer saying BTLers are the cause for all the newbuilds/apartments last few years, and therefore the new supply, and the tax-relief is a betrayal on their entrepreneurship; "should be rewarded not punished". Tough luck granddad - HPC on all your houses - you into bankruptcy and rented, and your own home goes to a family at much lower price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giesahoose Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 That would explain why some adverts say 'sorry the landlord is unable to let to htb claimants'. I thought it was just because they were a##holes. Beyond belief. I've read threads on landlord forums where they talk about not letting to people with children and even kicking people out of they have the gall to get pregnant. But apparently it's all just business Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blod Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Could we have a sticky with links to all the relevant sites to report LLs for their crimes. I think it's the least we should be doing to eradicate these vermin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) "highly geared investment model" "business model based on current tax system" These muppets deserve to go bust. That said, I want to see an appropriate supply of homes of all tenures to meet demand and since c 40% of households rent & Osbourne seems determined to eradicate social housing provision and since a high proportion of new properties do appear to be for btl I'm not entirely sure who he imagines will be the provider of rental housing in his future private sector dreamworld. Unless he has some incentive coming down the road for the big boys? (Insurance cos, pension, investment firms etc). Forcing everyone to take out a mortgage to buy their own home is equally non-sensical (apart from those who are able & wish to). We also need a healthy private & social rental sector. Edited July 22, 2015 by R K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little fish Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) "highly geared investment model" "business model based on current tax system" These muppets deserve to go bust. That said, I want to see an appropriate supply of homes of all tenures to meet demand and since c 40% of households rent & Osbourne seems determined to eradicate social housing provision and since a high proportion of new properties do appear to be for btl I'm not entirely sure who he imagines will be the provider of rental housing in his future private sector dreamworld. Unless he has some incentive coming down the road for the big boys? (Insurance cos, pension, investment firms etc). Forcing everyone to take out a mortgage to buy their own home is equally non-sensical (apart from those who are able & wish to). We also need a healthy private & social rental sector. http://www.newham.gov.uk/Pages/News/Topping-out-ceremony-celebrates-construction-of-first-Red-Door-Ventures-homes.aspx "Red Door Ventures was set up last year to deliver a large programme of private rented homes for residents. Over the next 10 years, Red Door Ventures will build at least 3,000 new homes in Newham. All the homes will be available for residents at market rent or below with some of the homes offered at affordable rent subsidised by the council. The majority of the affordable units will be family sized homes." Company owned by Newham Council. IMO just about anything would be a better alternative to the current system. Edited July 22, 2015 by little fish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venger Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 http://www.newham.gov.uk/Pages/News/Topping-out-ceremony-celebrates-construction-of-first-Red-Door-Ventures-homes.aspx "Red Door Ventures was set up last year to deliver a large programme of private rented homes for residents. Over the next 10 years, Red Door Ventures will build at least 3,000 new homes in Newham. All the homes will be available for residents at market rent or below with some of the homes offered at affordable rent subsidised by the council. The majority of the affordable units will be family sized homes." Company owned by Newham Council. IMO just about anything would be a better alternative to the current system. Can't work out how these schemes would fare in a wider hpc. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/rogers-teams-up-with-london-council-on-flatpack-homes-for-rent/5067673.article Where did they get the name from? Red doors have been 'on-trend' in California last couple of years. A lot of people associate them with all the Chinese money that's been buying up Cali housing, and hipsters and flippers. - Red doors are VERY ‘Chinese’ — as exactly that tone of Red is considered to confer life. (Think new-borns/ long life). Whereas, Gold is considered to confer good luck/ wealth. These two get entirely over done in the Forbidden City, becoming garish in the process. - I read a list of house-selling tips on Truila. One tip actually said to paint your front door red, that even a drab house suddenly looks brighter with a red door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bomberbrown Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 A key milestone in the construction of the first private sector homes built by Newham Council owned company Red Door Ventures, was marked with a topping out ceremony. first private sector homes built by Newham Council owned company Isn't that an oxymoron? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.