Saturday, Jul 22, 2006

Live and let buy

Citywire: Live and let buy

Some MPs and local authorities are calling for controls on what they see as the damaging buy-to-let market. However, the mortgage industry has hit back hard to counter this stance. The recent call by MPs for more controls on buy-to-let, claiming that it is distorting the property market, forcing up prices and crowding out local buyers, caused something of a flutter in the mortgage and property market.

Posted by bobed @ 05:41 PM (2988 views)
Add Comment
Report Article

7 Comments

1. Indiablue19 said...

OK, let me get this straight. There is no problem in BTLers monopolizing the low end of housing for their so-called pension investments because they are renting the premises to students at exorbitant rates, causing government student loans to expand to meet the rents and leaving Uni graduates in such enormous debt they can't buy a modest home until they are thirty or forty years of age anyway. It therefore follows that the BTLers may as well have free scream on the low end of the housing market and snap up as many property as possible without limit and with low-interest mortgages to boot.

As a parent of two Uni students, I suggest that if this is the kind of rationalising that wide spread University education has created among housing experts, we close the Universities down and go back to farming.

I can't wait to hear how they intend to justify the multitudes of second home owners in rural areas, who squat with their bottle of wine twice annually, while the young born there are being driven away from roots and family.

Saturday, July 22, 2006 06:35PM Report Comment
 

2. Paolo88888 said...

As a tenant, I certainly don't want their to be controls or extra costs. With rental yields being low the extra costs would have to be passed on to the end consumer; i.e. me!

By restricting BTL, the would be tenants will have to take out mortgages and buy the properties rather than rent them. Now if the price of houses is too high at the moment, then there will eventually be a correction and the forced buying will have been a bad decision. If prices continue to rise, then it shows that it wasn't BTL that was driving the prices up. The MPs who are concerned about BTL - do they think the wrong people are living in the houses, or is it just the financial arrangements for their occupation that they don't like? (Second home owners are a different issue.)

Saturday, July 22, 2006 08:18PM Report Comment
 

3. Paolo88888 said...

As a tenant, I certainly don't want their to be controls or extra costs. With rental yields being low the extra costs would have to be passed on to the end consumer; i.e. me!

By restricting BTL, the would be tenants will have to take out mortgages and buy the properties rather than rent them. Now if the price of houses is too high at the moment, then there will eventually be a correction and the forced buying will have been a bad decision. If prices continue to rise, then it shows that it wasn't BTL that was driving the prices up. The MPs who are concerned about BTL - do they think the wrong people are living in the houses, or is it just the financial arrangements for their occupation that they don't like? (Second home owners are a different issue.)

Saturday, July 22, 2006 11:09PM Report Comment
 

4. Wannabemigre said...

As far as I can see BTL is no better than spread betting. You need very little capital, you can make a lot of money and you can lose a lot of money, or am I wrong in thinking this?

Sunday, July 23, 2006 03:52AM Report Comment
 

5. Northern Lad said...

too right! This government has buggered the future!

Sunday, July 23, 2006 10:52AM Report Comment
 

6. Time To Raise Petrol Prices said...

Nothing at all wrong with spread betting - doesn't affect the underlying market, doesn't hurt anybody, unlike BTL.

Sunday, July 23, 2006 01:51PM Report Comment
 

7. Indiablue19 said...

Paolo 88888 --

If any of this had been anticipated at all, you could be the one with the low interest loan and reasonable appreciation on an investment. No doubt, you wouldn't have been adverse to such a "risk" either. Is it better for one person to have six such arrangements and let them out, or for six additional families to have a home and investment in the Nation.? As it is, all of this accrues to the benefit of a few at the expense of others.

It is the type of society you are endorsing when you advocate for this run-away BTL mentality that I find objectionable. Rather than having many secure and a nominal appreciation for each, we have only a few with assets and the many in your position, enslaved to the fluctuations of the rent market, with no hope their own home, except if the whole nasty scheme collapses. And meanwhile we have caused such a lack of available housing that prices are naturally pushed sky-high for the future.

And what does driving up prices improve? It improves the amount of revenue as property tax, and every other taxable expense, gets driven up with it. Suddenly, those who bought a home years ago for 20,000 pounds are pensioners with a modest plot in Tax Band G. And now we reduce the inheritance threshhold --et voila! Instant goldmine for the government! If in fact the civil service is being cut, we have poor health care, poor public transport, poor educational results -- where on earth is all of this cash going?

You may believe that second home owners are in a different position. In name only. In fact, they have driven many of the younger members of rural communities away since nothing, including rental, is affordable to them. And of course much of this housing inventory in rural places is devote to "self catering," which stands empty a majority of the time and is often maintained in a decaying state. And we keep this luxury on hand for holidays, all so that those of disposable wealth can enjoy their sunbathing, riding, shooting, and wine parties. The fact that a few have all and the rest have nothing at all, is certainly a return to a survivalist rationale that predates any sense of civilization.


Sunday, July 23, 2006 02:28PM Report Comment
 

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Username  
Admin Password
Email Address
Comments

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies