Gone very quiet
Discussion
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Portia5 said:
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Or is it an unintended consequnce????Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Id suggest otherwise. It clearly benefits a small number or larger players, many of whom are, "chums". Or actual MP's
Demonising small landlords is a vote winner, with most voters to stupid to see the consequences coming. By the time they do, much money will have been trousered, by chums and the likes of yourself.
Id say its a pretty clever bit of politicking.
Great if you are in that postion to take advantage of course.
Wont be good for the country at large however.
Portia5 said:
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Not sure I follow this.Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
I do know that I am facing an extra £900k tax bill when I sell one of my developments in July due to the latest budget. I'm clearly doing something wrong.
ben5575 said:
Portia5 said:
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Not sure I follow this.Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
There is therefore a massive shortage of supply of private sector properties and coupled with an increasing demand, the inevitable result is extreme upward pressure on rent.
Postie Pat, has bought Mrs 105.4 a new wagon, https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... things must be on a up.
Portia5 said:
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Most legislation favours larger ventures over small, not least because any single piece of additional overhead or admin sits far more heavily on an SME.Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
It is exactly the same with every single piece of faffing f
kery they have enacted with pay, wages, pensions (fking Stinkholder, NEST etc. etc.) holiday entitlements etc. etc. etc. etc. because no one in politics or civil service understands how the SME economy works or, most worringly, why it is extremely important to the UK.Portia5 said:
In detail it would take a book to explain it, but the short explanation is that quite a number of landlords have chucked it for a variety of reasons but all linked to silly UK and SG legislative measures perceived as "anti landlord".
There is therefore a massive shortage of supply of private sector properties and coupled with an increasing demand, the inevitable result is extreme upward pressure on rent.
Ah right. Sorry I picked up on your last paragraph about HMG interventions meaning more profit.There is therefore a massive shortage of supply of private sector properties and coupled with an increasing demand, the inevitable result is extreme upward pressure on rent.
Yes there has been an upward pressure on rent, but there has also been a significant impact on institutional yields due to the various government interventions. So good news for existing, bad news for new, which of course means more pressure on rents.
monkfish1 said:
Portia5 said:
I cannot lie, the unintended consequences of the Scottish and UK Parliaments' frankly ridiculous 'anti-landlord' legislation has enormously enhanced the profit for property businesses which are for whatever reason unaffected negatively by them.
Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Or is it an unintended consequnce????Much of it is about benefitting from the exodus of landlords who ARE negatively impacted by their nonsense.
Every further piece of nonsense they produce pushes profitability up more and more. Strangely, it's slightly worrying. Premonition of doom.
Id suggest otherwise. It clearly benefits a small number of larger players, many of whom are, "chums". Or actual MP's
They are driving out ordinary people who owned a rental property or two to try and earn a return unavailable elsewhere and that will inevitably lead to greater profits for corporate landlords.
Digga said:
Most legislation favours larger ventures over small, not least because any single piece of additional overhead or admin sits far more heavily on an SME.
It is exactly the same with every single piece of faffing fkery they have enacted with pay, wages, pensions (fking Stinkholder, NEST etc. etc.) holiday entitlements etc. etc. etc. etc. because no one in politics or civil service understands how the SME economy works or, most worringly, why it is extremely important to the UK.
You missed out the bit of employment law which makes it borderline impossible to dismiss staff if they have the mitigation or protective status of a MH diagnosis. We have a situation rumbling on, taking time, energy & money to resolve in a way that does not lead to a discrimnation claim in a tribunal.It is exactly the same with every single piece of faffing f
kery they have enacted with pay, wages, pensions (fking Stinkholder, NEST etc. etc.) holiday entitlements etc. etc. etc. etc. because no one in politics or civil service understands how the SME economy works or, most worringly, why it is extremely important to the UK.Best i say no more on a public forum until we have resolution, but the employee MH topic is a hell of a rabbit hole. Reading some of the tribunal cases is liitteraly terrifying if you employ staff at all, even more so if they are unsupervised in a demanding H&S / hazardous product type role.
The adjoining rabbit hole is insurance. An employee can keep MH conditions private if they chose. If an employee does so, how do you tell your insurance? ( vehicles, employer & public liability) and if you do not….and the worst happens……is the policy going to pay out?
I think this particuar bit of legislation came into existance during civid - without parliamentary debate or oversight.
Have a seach for ‘employer wins mental health discrimination tribunal’
I managed to find just one such case !!
JagLover said:
They are driving out ordinary people who owned a rental property or two to try and earn a return unavailable elsewhere and that will inevitably lead to greater profits for corporate landlords.
Which is a shame because the smallest landlords are often the best (as well as the worst). Portia5 said:
JagLover said:
They are driving out ordinary people who owned a rental property or two to try and earn a return unavailable elsewhere and that will inevitably lead to greater profits for corporate landlords.
Which is a shame because the smallest landlords are often the best (as well as the worst). Zj2002 said:
Portia5 said:
JagLover said:
They are driving out ordinary people who owned a rental property or two to try and earn a return unavailable elsewhere and that will inevitably lead to greater profits for corporate landlords.
Which is a shame because the smallest landlords are often the best (as well as the worst). skwdenyer said:
Zj2002 said:
Portia5 said:
JagLover said:
They are driving out ordinary people who owned a rental property or two to try and earn a return unavailable elsewhere and that will inevitably lead to greater profits for corporate landlords.
Which is a shame because the smallest landlords are often the best (as well as the worst). The homes don't just disappear. If they leave the rental market they enter the sale market. If more holes enter the sale market, the price pressure on purchase reduces and the rental market has to compete more with lower mortgage payments.
The answer to it all is build more homes to reduce rental/mortgage costs.
The answer to it all is build more homes to reduce rental/mortgage costs.
Forester1965 said:
The homes don't just disappear. If they leave the rental market they enter the sale market. If more holes enter the sale market, the price pressure on purchase reduces and the rental market has to compete more with lower mortgage payments.
The answer to it all is build more homes to reduce rental/mortgage costs.
Agreed, however the rental market is a fundamental part of the wider property market.The answer to it all is build more homes to reduce rental/mortgage costs.
Therefore more rental homes are also required. There is significant demand from both build to rent developers and tenants however the current gov policies in Scotland have brought a stop to development.
Build to rent is a much more developed market in the larger English cities and over the past few years there has been considerable progress in Scotland however a significant number of schemes in both Glasgow and Edinburgh (1,000s of units) are no longer economically viable.
Therefore the tenants for these units are left competing in the traditional rental market where there is reducing supply due to small landlords exiting the market.
If you want to understand the dynamics of the market, have a read of the article at page 30, which accurately dispels many myths;
https://aces.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/202...
loafer123 said:
If you want to understand the dynamics of the market, have a read of the article at page 30, which accurately dispels many myths;
https://aces.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/202...
I understand the market thanks, given that I am a Director at one of the writer’s competitors. My comments are specific to Scotland where the Green/SNP policies are wreaking havoc with investment in the housing sector. https://aces.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/202...
loafer123 said:
skwdenyer said:
Many hoped interest rates would fall. They’re not. That’s going to hit hard.
They will be on the way down in June.A couple of months late because the BoE seems to think that we should set our rates based upon the growth and inflation rates in the US instead of the U.K., mainly because they are t
ts.loafer123 said:
If you want to understand the dynamics of the market, have a read of the article at page 30, which accurately dispels many myths;
https://aces.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/202...
I don't agree with him that stamp duty is the problem. https://aces.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/202...
Of course housebuilders build to demand. That stands to reason. The problem holding up demand is affordability. Affordability is a problem because house prices are too high versus the average wage. House prices are too high because supply is restricted so sellers can attain high sale values. Chicken and egg.
Housebuilders and associated agents don't want a fall in resi values or to have to carry the cashflow/margin can for a downwoard adjustment in housing values when supply begins to properly meet demand. Politicians don't want it because the risk of negative equity or falling house prices for existing home owners is an electoral disaster on a stick. Nobody wants it, apart from people trying to get on the housing ladder.
Much easier to blame a tax that might get in the way of high margin housing transactions at a greater scale.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff