Ed Miliband

[turbobloke]

mph1977 said:

Rovinghawk said:

98elise said:

A tenant that pays the rent and wants to stay for years is a landlords dream. I reward that with not raising rents. My longest tenant has just going into their 5th year with no rent rise.

I do 'stay as long as you like if all's well'; no rent increase on first anniversary, inflation or thereabouts after that. My longest is just coming up 6 years.

Today I dropped decorating materials to one tenant & tomorrow I drop gardening stuff to another.

Why must politicians (especially socialists) interfere with stuff that's not a problem & thereby make one?

becasue you are part of a tiny minority of landlords who aren;t either out to make a profit or an amateur BTL property tycoons trying to cover the mortgsge and get their promised second income ...

There are private BTL landlords who are out to make a loss? That would be wonderful for them and their tenants. They could both become tentants over time.

Presumably these shining lights use their great sense to vote Labour as well.

[Rovinghawk]

mph1977 said:

becasue you are part of a tiny minority of landlords who aren;t either out to make a profit

Of course we're all out to make a profit; only Marxist imbeciles wouldn't do so, and they tend not to have any money to get into BTL.
Thanks for the implication that I'm not a bd, though.

mph1977 said:

or an amateur BTL property tycoons trying to cover the mortgsge and get their promised second income ...

What's wrong with investing money for the purpose of getting a reward?

Your comments imply that all but a tiny minority are basically robbing gits oppressing the tenants. Could you please show any evidence in support of this suggestion?

[Pan Pan Pan]

Rovinghawk said:

mph1977 said:

becasue you are part of a tiny minority of landlords who aren;t either out to make a profit

Of course we're all out to make a profit; only Marxist imbeciles wouldn't do so, and they tend not to have any money to get into BTL.
Thanks for the implication that I'm not a bd, though.

mph1977 said:

or an amateur BTL property tycoons trying to cover the mortgsge and get their promised second income ...

What's wrong with investing money for the purpose of getting a reward?

Your comments imply that all but a tiny minority are basically robbing gits oppressing the tenants. Could you please show any evidence in support of this suggestion?

Getting qualifications, to in turn get a job, is investing ones time and money for the purposes of getting a reward. (The only ones who don't do this, are those who want all the rewards, without the nasty bit of having to get a job and actually having do some work) so how is investing in and renovating a BTL property any different in principle.
Many in business risk all to start that business, and make it a profitable one (employing others and giving others a living in the process) so why should there not be a reward for doing so.
The ones who really p*ss me off, are those who don't want to work, but expect to be given (for nothing) the same (or better) lifestyle as those who work.

[johnfm]

audidoody said:

The thing that Miliband doesn't understand is that being a Landlord is not a compulsory occupation. Property is an investment. And, like any other investment, once it ceases to become attractive people remove it from their portfolios.

Thus property investors will just exit the sector. Result? A crash in the supply of rented accommodation. And even those who still want to get into BTL will be thwarted by a reduction in finance availability as lenders also run for the exits as they envision a three-year battle for the LL to evict non-paying tenants.

And let's not forget the net reduction in stamp duty revenue to the Treasury from falling transaction levels.

"But" (I hear you say). "That will mean a collapse in house prices. Which is surely a good thing?"

Yes it is. for cash buyers. Anyone seeking a mortgage will have to stump up a deposit North of 25 per cent as lenders reduce their exposure on a falling asset class.

So more people forced into renting. Whoops.

Good old Milly. He really is the Patron Saint of Unintended Consequences.

I don't really buy your analysis. Who are the landlord's who exit the sector selling their portfolios too? Are they posting the flats overseas or eating them or something? I can't see it leading to restricted supply of rental property.

If it makes BTLing less attractive, that's a good thing. The country would be far better off without armchair landlords. I'd suggest that it is the armchair landlord, having watched a glut of Homes Under the Hammer that have created a lot of the problems in the sector - driving up prices, delivering poor properties and poor services.

Why would there be a 'collapse' in houses prices? Rather than merely a 'reduction'?

Not sure why this country is obsessed with home ownership anyway - doesn't seem to be that big an issue on the continent.

[Cobnapint]

audidoody said:

Good old Milly. He really is the Patron Saint of Unintended Consequences.

...and bullsh*t. He said on the Marr show that there have been no such problems in Ireland with rent capping that is in place there.

Big fat wrong. Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics had been doing some digging - there is NO rent capping system in place in Ireland. What they have is an arbitration arrangement where rent disputes between LL and T are sorted out.

[Slaav]

Cobnapint said:

audidoody said:

Good old Milly. He really is the Patron Saint of Unintended Consequences.

...and bullsh*t. He said on the Marr show that there have been no such problems in Ireland with rent capping that is in place there.

Big fat wrong. Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics had been doing some digging - there is NO rent capping system in place in Ireland. What they have is an arbitration arrangement where rent disputes between LL and T are sorted out.

Once again that gets away with 'half truths'

Utter !

[Guybrush]

Rovinghawk said:

98elise said:

A tenant that pays the rent and wants to stay for years is a landlords dream. I reward that with not raising rents. My longest tenant has just going into their 5th year with no rent rise.

I do 'stay as long as you like if all's well'; no rent increase on first anniversary, inflation or thereabouts after that. My longest is just coming up 6 years.

Today I dropped decorating materials to one tenant & tomorrow I drop gardening stuff to another.

Why must politicians (especially socialists) interfere with stuff that's not a problem & thereby make one?

I believe Labour know full well that what they propose will harm the people they pretend to help (in this case tenants); this always happens. I know of a number of Landlords who, as a result of Labour's proposals to appeal to the envious and resentful as well as tenants, will raise rents year after year rather than freeze them (for long term tenants) as they have been doing. The reason being that they would not want to be 'trapped' charging too low a rent that they may not be able to raise to a realistic level at a later date should the need arise. Plus they will be far stricter with whom they have as tenants if they are to provide 3 year minimum terms. 'Unintended' consequences? I'm not so sure.

[wildoat]

PorkInsider said:

What's really worrisome is the sheer number of hard-of-thinking people who will actually vote this fkwit into power next year.

Indeed.

[2.5pi]

I'm a landlord and I like to think a good one, I view tenants as valued customers and in some cases friends, I buy and redevelop properties but always look to get longer term tenants by producing the best spec property of a standard I'd be happy to live in myself. Other landlords look at at me and shake their heads , "wtf does he need to put granite work tops into a 2 bed victorian terrace b2l for etc etc".

But it works for me, I price my product and am happy with the control I have over my financial future, for the last 6 months everything has been on hold , I will not take the risk of doing business in an environment where I can't control costs but some Chavez wannabe can control my revenue.

My reaction is not going to improve the supply of rental property in any way..quite the reverse but it is logical.

Ed Milliband is an idiot...at best.

[davepoth]

Quite. I'm not quite sure where this policy goes. "Generation Rent" is not a problem in most of the places that Labour will do well in. In London this will just up the churn rate of properties - what incentive is there for landlords to keep a tenant on for any longer than the minimum period when they can just chuck them out and get some new people in?

If you are doing rent control you need to do it properly and remove any possibility of dodgy landlords loopholing their way to piles of money. As it stands this will probably make things more st for everyone involved. Bravo.

[MarshPhantom]

davepoth said:

Quite. I'm not quite sure where this policy goes. "Generation Rent" is not a problem in most of the places that Labour will do well in. In London this will just up the churn rate of properties - what incentive is there for landlords to keep a tenant on for any longer than the minimum period when they can just chuck them out and get some new people in?

If you are doing rent control you need to do it properly and remove any possibility of dodgy landlords loopholing their way to piles of money. As it stands this will probably make things more st for everyone involved. Bravo.

Labour do pretty well in London - I know it fit doesn't fit with the narrative all Labour voters are idiotic dole scum.

[grumbledoak]

MarshPhantom said:

Labour do pretty well in London - I know it fit doesn't fit with the narrative all Labour voters are idiotic dole scum.

Poor immigrants are almost twice as likely to vote Labour than their old working class voter. That is why Labour opened the doors and sent invitations far and wide.

As I am quite sure you know.

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

davepoth said:

Quite. I'm not quite sure where this policy goes. "Generation Rent" is not a problem in most of the places that Labour will do well in. In London this will just up the churn rate of properties - what incentive is there for landlords to keep a tenant on for any longer than the minimum period when they can just chuck them out and get some new people in?

If you are doing rent control you need to do it properly and remove any possibility of dodgy landlords loopholing their way to piles of money. As it stands this will probably make things more st for everyone involved. Bravo.

Labour do pretty well in London - I know it fit doesn't fit with the narrative all Labour voters are idiotic dole scum.

Nobody said all.

Champagne socialism is alive and well.

Take the 'dole scum' part out and there's another category.

Add in 'my dad voted Labour' and you're well on the way to a full house.

[groucho]

My Dad has always voted Labour and still does. Would I? No fking way!

[speedy_thrills]

grumbledoak said:

Poor immigrants are almost twice as likely to vote Labour than their old working class voter.

Isn't that in line with most voters of that social class? I can't see why why immigrants would vote Conservative anyway, after all they tend to be younger people looking to do a bit of graft and make a decent life for themselves. Maybe save some money to start a little business and make sure the kids get a decent education. They're not going to be interested in Conservative policies.

That said about immigrants voting left I read a little section on the BBC saying 50% of voters in ethnic minorities (which I'll use as a very lazy proxy for immigrants) wanted a tougher line on immigration in the UK. If UKIP shakes it's image maybe one day they'll be tempted to vote for a right wing party?

[turbobloke]

groucho said:

My Dad has always voted Labour and still does. Would I? No fking way!

Fine, it's not compulsory after all though such independence of thought is by no means widespread in tribal enclaves.

[MarshPhantom]

grumbledoak said:

MarshPhantom said:

Labour do pretty well in London - I know it fit doesn't fit with the narrative all Labour voters are idiotic dole scum.

Poor immigrants are almost twice as likely to vote Labour than their old working class voter. That is why Labour opened the doors and sent invitations far and wide.

As I am quite sure you know.

Quick look at the MPs map of London shows Labour does best in expensive Central London and The Tories do better in cheaper outer London, where I presume these poor migrants live too

[Asterix]

groucho said:

My Dad has always voted Labour and still does. Would I? No fking way!

Out of curiosity - what reasoning does your dad follow to vote Labour?

[Asterix]

grumbledoak said:

MarshPhantom said:

Labour do pretty well in London - I know it fit doesn't fit with the narrative all Labour voters are idiotic dole scum.

Poor immigrants are almost twice as likely to vote Labour than their old working class voter. That is why Labour opened the doors and sent invitations far and wide.

As I am quite sure you know.

Next thing, they'll come up with the idea of allowing 16 year olds to vote to help broaden their base!

Oh, wait...

[grumbledoak]

Asterix said:

Next thing, they'll come up with the idea of allowing 16 year olds to vote to help broaden their base!

I think most who live through a Labour government don't want them back, but there is a near limitless supply of people who have not.