Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
jiltedjen

Btl 'dream' Is Over.

Recommended Posts

New, tighter lending criteria set to be enforced as early as this autumn by the Bank of England will lock large groups of savers out Britain's rental market, and limit it to an elite club of wealthy investors only.

In other words, limit it to those who can actually afford it without having to take a leveraged punt. If you said the same about investing in shares, the response would be "So what?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle class buy-to-let dream is over.

Mortgage lenders have announced an intention to close the much loved massive Ponzi scheme to new entrants.

Mr. Smee, bosun to Captain Cook and Chief Executive of the Can't Sell of Mortgage Lenders stated that, "It's not that we've run out of willing mugs, it's more that the Bank of England and the Treasury are BTL buzzkills with hard-on for f**king up portfolio landlords". Responding to claims that existing participants in the long-running Great British Buy-to-let Ponzi are about to be f**ked, Smee added, "Well, probably, but they've had a good run. If they've spunked away their gains on Range Rover leases that's their problem not mine, just as every bum's lot in life is their own problem and not mine."

Raymond 'The Lunchbox' Bulger, mortgage broker and omnipresent property gobshite commented, "For buy-to-let investors who are already strapped in, it's not so much that the dream will end and more that it's about to turn into a total f**king nightmare".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New, tighter lending criteria set to be enforced as early as this autumn by the Bank of England will lock large groups of savers out Britain's rental market, and limit it to an elite club of wealthy investors only.

Not read the article in full yet, but that reads quite resentful, and a very slanted view of what they expect to happen. Also BTL investors needing leverage are not savers imo. Investors. 'Plucky BTL would-be savers (requiring ever larger deposits 40% and rental cover) vs meany wealthy investors.' - sheesh - No; owner occupier buyer at lower prices.

Picked out of a document from last month, that Ghost Bird linked up to the other day.

Sir John Cunliffe, Deputy Governor of the Bank of England (Financial Stability)

Sir Jon Cunliffe: The other thing that has come in increasingly over the last 15 years is not owners occupiers but buy to let. Virtually all the growth in mortgages over the last few years has come from buy to let, not owner occupier.

..Sir Jon Cunliffe: A lot of the growth that we have seen has been because this has looked to be an asset that gives relatively good return at a time when many other assets - pensions or otherwise - are not giving a good return.

- re long passage on BTL / not knowing how BTLers-landlords would react / different opinions OBR vs Council of Mortgage Lenders and others =

..Sir Jon Cunliffe: Of course, you also need to estimate whether, if a number of buy-to-let landlords with mortgages exit the market and the flow of new buy-to-let mortgages goes down because of the extra stamp duty, that means more first-time buyers coming into the market because there is a slowing in house-price growth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Middle class buy-to-let dream is over.

Mortgage lenders have announced an intention to close the much loved massive Ponzi scheme to new entrants.

Mr. Smee, bosun to Captain Cook and Chief Executive of the Can't Sell of Mortgage Lenders stated that, "It's not that we've run out of willing mugs, it's more that the Bank of England and the Treasury are BTL buzzkills with hard-on for f**king up portfolio landlords". Responding to claims that existing participants in the long-running Great British Buy-to-let Ponzi are about to be f**ked, Smee added, "Well, probably, but they've had a good run. If they've spunked away their gains on Range Rover leases that's their problem not mine, just as every bum's lot in life is their own problem and not mine."

Raymond 'The Lunchbox' Bulger, mortgage broker and omnipresent property gobshite commented, "For buy-to-let investors who are already strapped in, it's not so much that the dream will end and more that it's about to turn into a total f**king nightmare".

Smee! Captain Cook!!!!!

Hook!!!! birdy.

Cook was Whitbys 2nd finest export after me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah 'savers' what saver needs a 80%+ mortgage??

How about 'New lending requirements save thick people from their own stupidity'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smee! Captain Cook!!!!!

Hook!!!! birdy.

Cook was Whitbys 2nd finest export after me

Oops! A typo, I assure you. My sincere apologies!

I remember an interview where Mike Myers claimed that his father wouldn't eat pineapple because of the fate that befell Whitby's second finest son at the hands of the angry Hawaiians at Kealakekua Bay

Edited by Ghost Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tele is just a laughing stock these days. Not only have senior personal finance hacks backed the BTL horse but now senior consumer affairs types are wading in too.

The vast majority of people didn't dream the BTL 'dream'. The vast majority of people see it for what it is- at best a risky enterprise, at worst an obnoxious gamble. A very small minority of people are involved in BTL, yet their detrimental impact on everyone else is wholly disproportionate. It's obvious they need a bashing, it's increasingly obvious they'll be getting one, it's very plainly the right thing to do, and it ought to be obvious to the Tele that burning whatever reputation they have in order to defend the indefensible is a moronic charade.

Edited by The Knimbies who say No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tele is just a laughing stock these days. Not only have senior personal finance hacks backed the BTL horse but now senior consumer affairs types are wading in too.

The vast majority of people didn't dream the BTL 'dream'. The vast majority of people see it for what it is- at best a risky enterprise, at worst an obnoxious gamble. A very small minority of people are involved in BTL, yet their detrimental impact on everyone else is wholly disproportionate. It's obvious they need a bashing, it's increasingly obvious they'll be getting one, it's very plainly the right thing to do, and it ought to be obvious to the Tele that burning whatever reputation they have in order to defend the indefensible is a moronic charade.

The other day, responding to a gentle prod from parties who will remain nameless, Dick D of the BTLegraph deigned to rise from his traditional aloof quietude on the twitters to claim that he's been "warning against BTL as a low-yield high-risk asset class for years".

The whole industry (lenders, brokers and journos) never say word one about the only reason mug punters lap up the BTL madness - the expected capital gains, (and the implicit supposed certainty that there will never be any capital losses).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tele is just a laughing stock these days. Not only have senior personal finance hacks backed the BTL horse but now senior consumer affairs types are wading in too.

The vast majority of people didn't dream the BTL 'dream'. The vast majority of people see it for what it is- at best a risky enterprise, at worst an obnoxious gamble. A very small minority of people are involved in BTL, yet their detrimental impact on everyone else is wholly disproportionate. It's obvious they need a bashing, it's increasingly obvious they'll be getting one, it's very plainly the right thing to do, and it ought to be obvious to the Tele that burning whatever reputation they have in order to defend the indefensible is a moronic charade.

A correction is required to knock some sense into so many VI. Hopefully with younger minds replacing VI heads in the newspapers. The dropping of all this view of BTLers as 'plucky savers' laying claim to homes (as just another investment class), outbidding would-be OO along the way, simply to rent back to those who can't afford/refuse to pay such high house prices. And the excuses that BTL is their 'pension'. I noticed Sir John Cunliffe (BoE) chose his words carefully; '..this has looked to be an asset that gives relatively good returns...'

BTLers and BTLer housing portfolios: A strategy based on nothing other than a reverence of money, and a complete disregard for the havoc wreaked on the lives of others, both by running a very precarious business based on a neverending supply of cheap money to corner a precious resource, and also by completely discounting the potential for upheaval in tenants' lives if (when?) the money runs out.

BTLers ought to be utterly ashamed of their overt avarice and the sooner insolvent BTL chancers are systematically bankrupted, the better we will be as a nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are certainly going after peoples pensions with this!

BTL was never going to be anybody's pension.

How that ridiculous idea became a commonplace is one of the most mysterious things about the whole sorry mess, as far as I am concerned. I can see how a shit ton of income generating assets owned outright might represent a pension, and when you got too old to manage the assets in property you could sell up and shift them into securities, but a string of shit houses with a shitload of debt against them - how the f**k was that ever supposed to be a pension?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTL was never going to be anybody's pension.

How that ridiculous idea became a commonplace is one of the most mysterious things about the whole sorry mess, as far as I am concerned. I can see how a shit ton of income generating assets owned outright might represent a pension, and when you got too old to manage the assets in property you could sell up and shift them into securities, but a string of shit houses with a shitload of debt against them - how the f**k was that ever supposed to be a pension?

Collect the rent pay the mortgage`s skim the differenc die and let the kids/banks sort out the mess ..was always the best possible outcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vicar bought at auction. Outbidding experienced builders, developers and property professionals.

Methinks he might be having second thoughts about his rental bargains...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Collect the rent pay the mortgage`s skim the differenc die and let the kids/banks sort out the mess ..was always the best possible outcome

But there is nothing skimmed! Once the costs are paid out, there's nothing left. BTL finance has murdered gross yields on residential property, (when construed as the rent to the asset price) and if you're a late entrant and leveraged, your net yield is probably exactly nothing, and nothing leveraged is still nothing.

BTL is a money pit. If you're lucky it washes its face on the net cash flows. You then assume capital gains magic beans will make it all worthwhile, but given the pittance you're leveraging and the gains you'll need to provide a decent pension, it's all just total b0llocks. It won't work. A stupid bet on a shit house won't make a poor man rich and it won't magic a pension out of nothing.

The same idiocy repeated six or seven times and then labelled a portfolio will serve you no better. The whole f**king business is a crock of shit.

Edited by Ghost Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vicar bought at auction. Outbidding experienced builders, developers and property professionals.

Methinks he might be having second thoughts about his rental bargains...

Indeed.

"Bargains" <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boomers who rail against BTL regulation, yet "hands off the NHS". Need a lesson in logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   59 members have voted

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


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

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.