Landlords View

[sleepwello'nights]

I purchased some properties to rent out a few years ago. Yes I am a buy to let landlord.

I am amazed at some of the resentful emotions expressed by some contributors, obviously tenants. When I was a child my family and lots of others lived in rented council accommodation. But then the general economic environment was socialism and moving more and more towards the now discredited communist system. You can guess that I don't like state control. As I recall we could not even decorate the house, redecoration was done by the council on their schedule. As I recall we could choose from one of a few wallpaper patterns for the sitting room.

If I and others like me did not provide the housing that is available for you to rent who would pay and provide it for it? And if you answer the state, think where will they get the capital from?

Whether you rent or buy is a rational decision you choose to make. If you can afford to and you think it will benefit you you will buy. If you can't afford to or you think it is in your best interests to rent you will rent. It's the same decision process we use whenever we make a decision on how to utilise our resources. Whether its the purchase of supermarket own brand or a premium product, a secondhand car or a new car, whether you stay in and watch TV or go out and pay for your seat at the Cinema. Your money your choice.

The arithmetic of BTL is not currently very favourable, but I purchased in the expectation that rents would rise in line with average wages over the medium to long term. As a business it would provide a steady income stream and hopefully some capital appreciation if I sold the house.

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

[cartimandua51]

As another BTL landlord (student lets) I salute your courage in sticking your head above the barricades! Now I will cower down in expectation of the barrage from, (among others) renterbob (who is remarkably sane on most subjects outside BTL which is obviously his bête noir), and BXLONDONMAN (who usually isn't).

Good luck - most of the posters accept (sometimes reluctantly) the need for a rented sector, though there are some diehards of the "all property is theft" breed.

Trouble is, it only takes one bad experience to taint ones view of "the other side", so LL and tenants' positions have a tendency to become ones of entrenched hostility. Don't tell me you have never had a crap tenant!

Edit : typo

Edited October 26, 2008 by cartimandua51

[Paddles]

I purchased some properties to rent out a few years ago. Yes I am a buy to let landlord.

I am amazed at some of the resentful emotions expressed by some contributors, obviously tenants. When I was a child my family and lots of others lived in rented council accommodation. But then the general economic environment was socialism and moving more and more towards the now discredited communist system. You can guess that I don't like state control. As I recall we could not even decorate the house, redecoration was done by the council on their schedule. As I recall we could choose from one of a few wallpaper patterns for the sitting room.

If I and others like me did not provide the housing that is available for you to rent who would pay and provide it for it? And if you answer the state, think where will they get the capital from?

Whether you rent or buy is a rational decision you choose to make. If you can afford to and you think it will benefit you you will buy. If you can't afford to or you think it is in your best interests to rent you will rent. It's the same decision process we use whenever we make a decision on how to utilise our resources. Whether its the purchase of supermarket own brand or a premium product, a secondhand car or a new car, whether you stay in and watch TV or go out and pay for your seat at the Cinema. Your money your choice.

The arithmetic of BTL is not currently very favourable, but I purchased in the expectation that rents would rise in line with average wages over the medium to long term. As a business it would provide a steady income stream and hopefully some capital appreciation if I sold the house.

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

Do you think this is like Alcohol Anonymous? "Hi, my name is SleepwellO'nights and I'm a BTL landlord".

There's several types of landlord. I've personally got no problem with the ones who run it as a proper business and in the main use their own capital.

I do, however, take extreme exception to heavily-leveraged "punters" who bought the Property Ladder (et al) line about making profit on property. Basically, what they did was borrow money to go to the bookies. That would be considered the height of irresponsibility if you took a poll on the subject. Change the bet from horses to houses and you'd get a totally different result.

If you have personally got lots of equity and your cash flow can cope with the challenges inflation, recession and tighter borrowing will throw at it, then best of luck. If not, I'm not wishing to gloat but that was your choice taken without coercion and you must live with the consequences.

Edited October 26, 2008 by Paddles

[renterbob]

I purchased some properties to rent out a few years ago. Yes I am a buy to let landlord.

I am amazed at some of the resentful emotions expressed by some contributors, obviously tenants. When I was a child my family and lots of others lived in rented council accommodation. But then the general economic environment was socialism and moving more and more towards the now discredited communist system. You can guess that I don't like state control. As I recall we could not even decorate the house, redecoration was done by the council on their schedule. As I recall we could choose from one of a few wallpaper patterns for the sitting room.

If I and others like me did not provide the housing that is available for you to rent who would pay and provide it for it? And if you answer the state, think where will they get the capital from?

Whether you rent or buy is a rational decision you choose to make. If you can afford to and you think it will benefit you you will buy. If you can't afford to or you think it is in your best interests to rent you will rent. It's the same decision process we use whenever we make a decision on how to utilise our resources. Whether its the purchase of supermarket own brand or a premium product, a secondhand car or a new car, whether you stay in and watch TV or go out and pay for your seat at the Cinema. Your money your choice.

The arithmetic of BTL is not currently very favourable, but I purchased in the expectation that rents would rise in line with average wages over the medium to long term. As a business it would provide a steady income stream and hopefully some capital appreciation if I sold the house.

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

Hi

Firstly, I'd like to echo Paddles comments.

Good post and welcome to the board.

My name is Renterbob and I am a renter. I understand you are in the BTL to make money. That is your motive and guides your decisions regarding rental prices/repairs etc.

I am astounded at your deliquent comment regarding state control. In some aspects state control in a truly democratic society is a good thing - people will vote for those who treat them decently and kick the others out. The problem is corruption. This is true for communism and capitalism.

The same problem of corruption has infiltrated the housing system you have decided to participate in the UK, and around the world. You now wish to transfer power from the state to yourself regarding the most fundamental basis of a civil society - a roof over ones head. This has been done all over the UK using massive corruption, liar loans, forcing the prices of rents up over the last 10 years. I see this as nothing short of profiteering.

Why you believe, in your blatant arrogance, that you would make a better landlord than the state, any state, when you are simply in this business to make money, indeed as much money as you can, is frankly laughable. Anyone with a liar loan, no education, an arrogant 'I am a God landlord and will do as I wish attitude' can do this, and have done so in their millions. Your failure to understand the genuine anger of renters and those who refuse to apply for liar loans (we could have - but chose not to) which has forced us to pay well over the odds for rental properties is common amongst those who are blinded with 'house prices only ever go up and I'm gonna be rich' mentality.

You have made money, and now you should be prepared to lose money. Alot of it. BTL landlords should sell up now. Or not, that is a rational decision for you to make.

You should be aware of the real anger we have towards BTL. I'm afraid those such as yourself will have to pay the price for what you have introduced in this society.

Edited October 26, 2008 by renterbob

[Wad]

The arithmetic of BTL is not currently very favourable, but I purchased in the expectation that rents would rise in line with average wages over the medium to long term. As a business it would provide a steady income stream and hopefully some capital appreciation if I sold the house.

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

First of all - welcome to HPC. It would be nice to see a few more professional landlords (LLs) like yourself on here.

I have been a long term tenant with various LLs for over 25 years and never owned a house but feet no animosity to LLs. Indeed, most LLs I have had I have been very happy with and they have been very happy to have me as a tenant and let me stay for as long as I liked with reasonable rent rises and at an overall cost which was far far cheaper than the cost of buying. Leting agents have been the bigger problem - very unprofessional in some cases but very good in others.

A few months back I did write a rather similar post to yours asking why so many people on HPC express such extreme and resentful posts about LLs. In particular, I took issue with people who seem to have the view that screwing the LL for every penny they could get is the right thing to do. I also took issue with people who seem to think that all tenants are absolutely blameless. I have looked at many rental properties where the tenants deserved to have the deposits kept. Indeed I am renting a flat at the moment in a very nice quiet secure development with many retirees as permanent residents. The flat is owned by a lawyer but who had previous tenants that were removed after an ASBO was served on them. They deserved to be removed from what I have heard.

There are bad LLs and bad tenants and there is a residential rental market and a residential property market. As you say, the choice to rent or buy is a rational decision and the prices and rents are transparent to all.

I hope you come back now and again and give us your views on the rental market and what other BTL LLs are thinking.

[renterbob]

First of all - welcome to HPC. It would be nice to see a few more professional landlords (LLs) like yourself on here.

I have been a long term tenant with various LLs for over 25 years and never owned a house but feet no animosity to LLs. Indeed, most LLs I have had I have been very happy with and they have been very happy to have me as a tenant and let me stay for as long as I liked with reasonable rent rises and at an overall cost which was far far cheaper than the cost of buying. Leting agents have been the bigger problem - very unprofessional in some cases but very good in others.

A few months back I did write a rather similar post to yours asking why so many people on HPC express such extreme and resentful posts about LLs. In particular, I took issue with people who seem to have the view that screwing the LL for every penny they could get is the right thing to do. I also took issue with people who seem to think that all tenants are absolutely blameless. I have looked at many rental properties where the tenants deserved to have the deposits kept. Indeed I am renting a flat at the moment in a very nice quiet secure development with many retirees as permanent residents. The flat is owned by a lawyer but who had previous tenants that were removed after an ASBO was served on them. They deserved to be removed from what I have heard.

There are bad LLs and bad tenants and there is a residential rental market and a residential property market. As you say, the choice to rent or buy is a rational decision and the prices and rents are transparent to all.

I hope you come back now and again and give us your views on the rental market and what other BTL LLs are thinking.

The 'professional' landlords like the OP don't mew, they take 'unsecured loans'.

Shame

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...=93174&st=0

[sleepwello'nights]

Thank you and hello RenterBob, it was some of your comments that prompted me to post. If I may answer your assertions:

I'm not sure what you mean by "deliquent comment". I accept that the state has a function in a society, but the argument is what is that function? When I grew up the state controlled far more than they do now. Choice was limited and economic performance fell below that achieved by other countries. Now I see a return to state control and very serious erosion of personal liberty. But this is an argument for another political forum.

I see nothing wrong with providing accommodation to those who choose to rent. I don't see that it is a transfer of power. Yes there has been profiteering, but is it the landlords who gained the most or other parties involved such as politicians and financiers. My decision was predicated on rental values increasing in line with average wages. Other factors that reinforced my decision were the past performance of housing, i.e what I've seen since the1960's and the claims of a housing shortage in the UK. In the 1950's young couples' first home was often rented rooms in a house occupied by another family. As we have become more prosperous we can afford better accommodation. The provision of homes by the private rental sector does not deprive anyone of a roof over their head. Indeed the massive influx of financial loans into housing increased the supply of housing dramatically. Just as the withdrawal of finance is resulting in a dramatic reduction in house building. I firmly believe that "the market" not "the state" is better placed to decide on the allocation of resources.

I am not arrogant in my belief that I make a better landlord than the state. I've seen how the state behaves as a landlord first hand. Have you? I have heard anecdotal evidence of how housing associations treat their tenants that might cause you to reconsider your opinion. Where did I compare myself to God? (Alright I realise it was a typo and i think you meant good ) I can't do as I like, besides being constrained by legislation there are other self imposed codes of behaviour that are exercised in a civil society. Sure I'm in it to make money, that's why I go out to work; well I would if I could find a job. But I've saved in the past and put aside resources to tide me over should the need arise. I'm puzzled why that makes you angry. Can you provide evidence that rents have increased so much that tenants are forced to pay over the odds. From what I see rents have risen generally in line with average wages and at the moment are falling.

I take your point but I did not come into this as a get rich quick scheme. I don't need to account for the value of my properties on the "mark to market" accounting standard. I view it as a business and I will make commercial decisions based on rational analysis.

I would suggest that your anger would be better directed towards those that have damaged the financial system and the contraction of our economy rather than landlords in the private rented sector

Edited October 26, 2008 by sleepwello'nights

[Nutter]

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

You personally? not sofar...

However, the landlord / tenant relationship is not an equal relationship. The landlord typically has more power. When was the last time a tenant received a deposit to protect themselves incase the landlord did not do repairs in a timely maner? Over recent years there have been a large number of inexperienced unprofessional landlords. The essential qualification seemed to have been the ability to sign a mortgage aplication form (not even to fill it in accurately and honestly).

The result has been a large number of landlords abusing imaginary powers, with tenants getting shafted...

I take no pleasure in landlords being bankrupted by the current change in the market, but it a shame that professional landlords with several properties may well be the most exposed rather than the large numbers of ******wit landlords that have done so much damange over recent years.

[JohnnyB]

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

Why do I deserve your opprobrium?

If that's how you run your business then most here have no problem with you. However, my general experience is that most landlords are chumps who do not know that they are providing a service to people (the most essential service they need no-less) and treat their customers very badly. I know a lot of people who rent and only a few don't have any problems with their LL. Over the years only my current and first LL have been any good, and the rest have been awful or have contracted out to awful lettings agents who don't get things done.

The boom in buy-to-let has given us a bunch of amateurs who thought they could use the power of leverage to make a small amount of money into a ridiculous amount of money. They could have been investing their money more wisely, and sending cash to economically beneficial businesses, but they saw a way to make loads of cash really quickly and with no real effort involved and choose that instead. There wasn't exactly a drought of rented property for those who needed it in the mid-90s, and prices were cheap enough that you could buy a place on an average wage when quite young. The boom in BTL has had no benefits for our society, and probably quite the reverse.

The rental sector needs far more regulation, as it is in other parts of Europe, to give tenants proper secure tenure and controlled rents.

[renterbob]

Thank you and hello RenterBob, it was some of your comments that prompted me to post. If I may answer your assertions:

I'm not sure what you mean by "deliquent comment". I accept that the state has a function in a society, but the argument is what is that function? When I grew up the state controlled far more than they do now. Choice was limited and economic performance fell below that achieved by other countries. Now I see a return to state control and very serious erosion of personal liberty. But this is an argument for another political forum.

I see nothing wrong with providing accommodation to those who choose to rent. I don't see that it is a transfer of power. Yes there has been profiteering, but is it the landlords who gained the most or other parties involved such as politicians and financiers. My decision was predicated on rental values increasing in line with average wages. Other factors that reinforced my decision were the past performance of housing, i.e what I've seen since the1960's and the claims of a housing shortage in the UK. In the 1950's young couples' first home was often rented rooms in a house occupied by another family. As we have become more prosperous we can afford better accommodation. The provision of homes by the private rental sector does not deprive anyone of a roof over their head. Indeed the massive influx of financial loans into housing increased the supply of housing dramatically. Just as the withdrawal of finance is resulting in a dramatic reduction in house building. I firmly believe that "the market" not "the state" is better placed to decide on the allocation of resources.

I am not arrogant in my belief that I make a better landlord than the state. I've seen how the state behaves as a landlord first hand. Have you? I have heard anecdotal evidence of how housing associations treat their tenants that might cause you to reconsider your opinion. Where did I compare myself to God? (Alright I realise it was a typo and i think you meant good ) I can't do as I like, besides being constrained by legislation there are other self imposed codes of behaviour that are exercised in a civil society. Sure I'm in it to make money, that's why I go out to work; well I would if I could find a job. But I've saved in the past and put aside resources to tide me over should the need arise. I'm puzzled why that makes you angry. Can you provide evidence that rents have increased so much that tenants are forced to pay over the odds. From what I see rents have risen generally in line with average wages and at the moment are falling.

I take your point but I did not come into this as a get rich quick scheme. I don't need to account for the value of my properties on the "mark to market" accounting standard. I view it as a business and I will make commercial decisions based on rational analysis.

I would suggest that your anger would be better directed towards those that have damaged the financial system and the contraction of our economy rather than landlords in the private rented sector

Good post.

It must have been tough for you to grow up in Poland.

Bless.

[sleepwello'nights]

I didn't realise you were Polish RenterBob. My remarks must be very resonant for you.

God Bless

[Paddles]

SleepWellONights,

Just so we can all work out which side of the proper business model/totally insane leveraged speculator dividing line you sit, could you give us an idea of how leveraged you are please?

To save time, don't bother doing the usual trick of telling us how much equity you have vs. August 2007 prices; simply tell us what LTVs you bought the properties in your "portfolio" at and what years and whether you took any more equity out.

[sleepwello'nights]

But what relevance does my leverage or lack of have to do with the resentment that some posters feel towards private landlords?

[porca misèria]

I purchased some properties to rent out a few years ago. Yes I am a buy to let landlord.

I am amazed at some of the resentful emotions expressed by some contributors, obviously tenants.

Look carefully at the targets of that. It's not you (if you're a decent landlord). It's the system, which offers you fantastic profits, and then charges you a small fraction of the tax I pay for what I earn by hard work. The system that taxes you less for inflating the price of houses than for investing in the productive economy (e.g. shares). The system that dished out huge amounts of money to whoever was prepared to lie for it to get rich in a pyramid scheme, and which we're all now having to pay for. The system whereby I get to pay three times over for your wealth (see for example here), even before the bailouts.

As an individual, you didn't make the corrupt system. You just saw it and took advantage. If in doing so you've always acted ethically, then good luck to you.

As a group, you have perpetrated a massive fraud on society. You have sucked money out of the productive economy. You have priced honest FTBs out of the market, and left others with massive debt. You have colluded with others in creating a whole new generation of slums. And you have been a major part of the biggest pyramid scheme in living memory, for which we're all now going to suffer.

Hence a soupcon of Schadenfreude when we hear of some BTLers in trouble.

to When I was a child my family and lots of others lived in rented council accommodation. But then the general economic environment was socialism and moving more and more towards the now discredited communist system. You can guess that I don't like state control. As I recall we could not even decorate the house, redecoration was done by the council on their schedule. As I recall we could choose from one of a few wallpaper patterns for the sitting room.

Do your tenants get that kind of choice? Don't you charge them for damage if they put up a wall light above the bed? A picture on the walls? Bookshelves in the alcove? You man not, but many landlords do.

I know I treat my tenants well and afford them the respect they deserve as individuals. The houses I let are relatively new, they are all well maintained, repairs are carried out promptly and I comply with all the statutory regulations that exist and are being introduced at an ever increasing rate.

That sounds like a basic minimum (except for the new houses bit, but that's a matter of taste: I prefer old). May I take it you also make the same kind of investments as in your own home regarding things like energy efficiency? After all, tenants are on average much poorer than you, and don't need to be hit by high bills. Do you never ever make tenants lives a misery by, for example, objecting to them bringing bicycles inside where there's no secure outdoor storage? Do you permit tenants to make improvements, and offer at least a contribution to the cost in cases where the property benefits?

Just a few thoughts on how tenants are not free, and their landlords can unthinkingly create problems and hence resentment. Of course that works both ways, and some tenants are better than others too. But for you that's part of running a business; for the tenant it's their home, and just a little thoughtlessness can severely impact their lives.

[Paddles]

But what relevance does my leverage or lack of have to do with the resentment that some posters feel towards private landlords?

It tells me whether you're a tulip-maniac or a sober-minded business person. I can't comment on other people's reactions. "L'enfer, c'est les autres".

Don't answer if it's embarrassing. It's a 7 step programme and we're only on the 1st, after all.

Edited October 26, 2008 by Paddles

[renterbob]

I didn't realise you were Polish RenterBob. My remarks must be very resonant for you.

God Bless

Grade:

F -

Comments:

Need practice.

[eastleighfan]

Welcome to the forum ,sleepwell .

To be honest , my main gripe isn't with private landlords as such , merely the fact that we are at their mercy .

If a private landlord takes a dislike to you , he/she has the right to evict you from your home at the end of the tennancy (most tennancies are for a fixed term nowadays )

There is no security of tenure at all .

My last landlord was basically ok ,but never bothered to do basic repairs . My girlfriend was once locked in the bathroom , with no windows, because of a faulty door . I phoned my landlord and it took me to threaten to break the door down for him to take interest . Eventually 2 big guys came in and managed to get the door offf . The landlord never even said "sorry" .

I had a broken window catch that threatened my security again the landlord did nothing . Could I complain ? In theory yes ,but in practice it would have meant me being blacklisted ,and getting somewhere to live would have been almost impossible .

Maybe you are a decent landlord , if so , then you are in the very small minority .

I accept that there are bad tennants ,and this cannot be excused , but being a landlord carries large responsibilities , and most only want the money , and couldn't care less .

Once again , welcome to the forum . I think it's good to have a counter view on here . Personally I welcome honest debate !

[Paddles]

The OP isn't answering my earlier question about his/her level of leverage. They were logged on and viewing this thread after I wrote it so I can only assume the answer is an embarassing one.

My signature remains extant.

[sleepwello'nights]

Hello nig,

Thanks for your reply. There are some useful insights into the resentment felt against Landlords (LL’s). By the way Paddles I find your AA comparison and your irrelevant questions about gearing rather juvenile. I don’t have the inclination to come up with a more humorous response.

Thinking more deeply about nig’s response it seems to me that what you are railing against is human nature itself. Unfortunately despite the attempts of masters such as Jesus (Christianity), Mohammed (Islamism), Siddhartha Gautama (Budhism) and Guru Nanak (Sikhism) it cannot be overcome. So we’ll skip the philosophy and accept that Darwinism (survival of the fittest or luckiest) is dominant.

Our species have devised two ways of controlling ourselves: economics and politics. The issues you raise have come about because neither method has brought about a solution that satisfies everyone, nor will they ever.

The first target is that LL’s have inflated property prices and are taxed less. It has never been in a LL’s interest to overpay for a property. What inflated property prices was the bankers willingness to lend, the propaganda disseminated by the media about property being as safe as houses and the lower returns on other asset classes relative to property. The demand was and still is there, if the statistics about household growth and property supply are true. As regards taxation rental income is taxable as is the capital gain when a property is sold. National Insurance contributions are lower but then with CGT at 40% any benefit there is well and truly wiped out. That also seems to me to negate the argument that property owners benefited because they are subsidised by the taxpayer. As LL’s are taxed we are also long suffering taxpayers. I’ve looked at your link and I disagree with its arguments which I consider spurious.

By the way this hoary tale that Northern Rock has cost taxpayers up to, what is it £100 billion, is total nonsense. Yes if every Northern Rock mortgagee didn’t make any more repayments and not only was the house the loan secured on demolished, but the ground it stood on disappeared – then yes it might cost the taxpayer that much. But that is a ridiculous and implausible scenario.

The next point that we fraudulently sucked money out of the productive economy. Economists distinguish between investment and consumption. To invest in productive capacity is good to consume is wasteful. I’ve always seen this as a chicken and egg situation. We have to consume to live, there is no point in generating capacity if it is not to satisfy consumption. And then Money itself is just a concept, even gold has little intrinsic value; you can’t eat it and there are other superior alternatives for any other material uses it has. The fiat currency we use has broken the link with gold. There is a short video that gives an easily assimable explanation of the fractional reserve banking system. http://www.moneyasdebt.net/ . The wealth that money represents has not disappeared, in reality nothing has changed – the sun rises in the east, night turns to day, what has really changed? Nothing except the monetary value placed on an asset. The fact is that as economic activity declines the vast majority of us will be less wealthy, there will be fewer jobs and fewer opportunities to generate wealth and savings. A few will prosper but most of us will suffer.

Read the Grapes of Wrath by Steinbeck to get an inkling of how obscene I think the present economic situation is. We’re all in trouble and I hope our leaders are strong enough to get us through this quickly.

Your next point is how the tenant’s freedom is impinged by LL’s. In most cases the tenants freedom is not constrained any differently from the way we are all constrained by the need to be considerate to others. Sure they have to look after the LL’s property but that applies to anything that other people have a right to. The basic premise is that when you no longer need it it is returned to the condition it was in when you started to use it. If I lent somebody a book say, I would be annoyed if it was returned with pages torn out, parts were annotated and some pages coloured in, I see renting a property exactly the same way. I also see it as in the LL’s interest to keep their property in good repair. I’ve found from experience that if something is in good condition to start with it tends to be looked after better than if it was in poor condition. The house I live in is built and maintained to the same standard as the houses I rent out.

What I’m trying to do is to provide for myself and my family now and in the future. One of the ways I’ve chosen is to purchase some houses and to rent them to others. Why do some people resent me for that?

[Paddles]

Thanks for your reply. There are some useful insights into the resentment felt against Landlords (LL’s). By the way Paddles I find your AA comparison and your irrelevant questions about gearing rather juvenile. I don’t have the inclination to come up with a more humorous response.

The fact that you think that the question about gearing isn't relevant to the discussion tells me everything I needed to know.

The level of gearing you have is an excellent indicator as to whether you are a victim of irrational exerburance or a rational investor with a sound business plan. But you understand that's why I ask the question, don't you? You just don't like what your answer has to be.

[renterbob]

Hello nig,

Thanks for your reply. There are some useful insights into the resentment felt against Landlords (LL’s). By the way Paddles I find your AA comparison and your irrelevant questions about gearing rather juvenile. I don’t have the inclination to come up with a more humorous response.

Thinking more deeply about nig’s response it seems to me that what you are railing against is human nature itself. Unfortunately despite the attempts of masters such as Jesus (Christianity), Mohammed (Islamism), Siddhartha Gautama (Budhism) and Guru Nanak (Sikhism) it cannot be overcome. So we’ll skip the philosophy and accept that Darwinism (survival of the fittest or luckiest) is dominant.

Our species have devised two ways of controlling ourselves: economics and politics. The issues you raise have come about because neither method has brought about a solution that satisfies everyone, nor will they ever.

WTF does that mean? Do you mean 'our species' control themselves or 'our species' controlling others of 'our species' or just some of 'our species'? Or perhaps you have no idea what you mean hence why you're a BTL investor.

If so, there are more than two ways to control populations you daft Muppet.

I suspect you are a lizard and are infiltrating the HPC.

ps Do you eat children after hunting them down in the middle of some dark dingy forest?

[sleepwello'nights]

No rational argument then just degrading to personal abuse. that tells me all I need to know about you!

[renterbob]

No rational argument then just degrading to personal abuse. that tells me all I need to know about you!

Are you on drugs?

I asked you simply - WTF you meant, you wrote incoherent nonsense 'our species' blah blah blah....

You are a Troll.

As for rational arguments, you failed to answer Paddles succinct questions and I suspect you have simply come here to cause trouble.

Edited October 27, 2008 by renterbob

[The Wicked Landlord]

Are you on drugs?

I asked you simply - WTF you meant, you wrote incoherent nonsense 'our species' blah blah blah....

You are a Troll.

As for rational arguments, you failed to answer Paddles succinct questions and I suspect you have simply come here to cause trouble.

Surely thats your job renterknob whoops renterbob

[Guest anorthosite]

If I and others like me did not provide the housing that is available for you to rent who would pay and provide it for it?

The average BTLer provided nothing.

A builder built it.

A banker paid for it.

A tennant paid the banker.

The average BTLer then skimmed a little off the top, either in direct profit, or (back in ye olde days before the credit crunch) in capital gains.

They didn't invest hard earned money. They borrowed cheaply during a credit bubble on the basis there would be no more boom and bust ( ).

So what contribution do you actually make?

P.S. Sub prime, collapse of the global economy, etc, etc...