A bit council (Vol 5)

[Disco You]

Countdown said:

littlebasher said:

Dog Star said:

pocketspring said:

I'm calling HOUSE! on council bingo with this one. (Yes, Faily Wail).

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11871863/...

Eight fking kids. No job. “Disabled”

God help the poor landlord - and these scrotes always wail about how “unfair” it is when they say “no DSS”.

Apparently, his mobility issues didn't extend to repeatedly bouncing up and down on top of his wife.

Ok. Leaving aside the issue of "should you really be having 8 kids if you can't afford to provide them with food and housing and you aren't working and therefore expect the State to pay for everything" (which admittedly is a strong argument) in this particular situation AIUI they're being evicted because the landlord wants more money.

Yes, the landlord is entitled to do that. However the tenants don't seem to have done anything wrong (apart from having lots of kids they can't afford to look after).

Agreed. No fault evictions are bullst, the sooner they are outlawed the better.

[cheesejunkie]

Disco You said:

Agreed. No fault evictions are bullst, the sooner they are outlawed the better.

Doesn’t affect me but a hard yes. I’ll shed no tears for landlords ever. If they want money for doing nothing other than owning something fk them. The rougher the better. It won’t happen though.

[CardinalBlue]

HTP99 said:

Why would one send a cock and balls to their mum though!!

You have clearly never been to Norfolk.

[cheesejunkie]

ArsE82 said:

Probably OT but I find watch snobs funny. Does Georgio do watches? I’d never wear Emporio. Let’s face it I’d never wear either.

I quite like how fitness devices have democratised the watch world. But I’ve seen many who I wonder if their steps go beyond the nearest Greg’s.

[MDMA .]

Disco You said:

Countdown said:

littlebasher said:

Dog Star said:

pocketspring said:

I'm calling HOUSE! on council bingo with this one. (Yes, Faily Wail).

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11871863/...

Eight fking kids. No job. “Disabled”

God help the poor landlord - and these scrotes always wail about how “unfair” it is when they say “no DSS”.

Apparently, his mobility issues didn't extend to repeatedly bouncing up and down on top of his wife.

Ok. Leaving aside the issue of "should you really be having 8 kids if you can't afford to provide them with food and housing and you aren't working and therefore expect the State to pay for everything" (which admittedly is a strong argument) in this particular situation AIUI they're being evicted because the landlord wants more money.

Yes, the landlord is entitled to do that. However the tenants don't seem to have done anything wrong (apart from having lots of kids they can't afford to look after).

Agreed. No fault evictions are bullst, the sooner they are outlawed the better.

Why’s that? He’s a landlord, it’s his business. If you want a house for life, buy one.

[Penny Whistle]

cheesejunkie said:

Disco You said:

Agreed. No fault evictions are bullst, the sooner they are outlawed the better.

Doesn’t affect me but a hard yes. I’ll shed no tears for landlords ever. If they want money for doing nothing other than owning something fk them. The rougher the better. It won’t happen though.

Having been screwed over by tenants I harbour the same sentiments towards them.

[gazza285]

cheesejunkie said:

Doesn’t affect me but a hard yes. I’ll shed no tears for landlords ever. If they want money for doing nothing other than owning something fk them. The rougher the better. It won’t happen though.

What about other stuff you rent? Same treatment for hotel rooms, holiday rents, rental cars etc.

[cheesejunkie]

gazza285 said:

What about other stuff you rent? Same treatment for hotel rooms, holiday rents, rental cars etc.

No, why would I? I know the difference between a service provider and a rent taker.

I’ve been a landlord so don’t piss on me and tell me it’s raining. It’s not a hard life in comparison to real work. Don’t try cry me a river about bad tenants, people wouldn’t be in it if it they weren’t making profit from others that don’t have their capital and when you get down to the nitty gritty that’s all that separates those from some that are taking advantage. It isn’t talent or effort.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Saturday 18th March 22:35

[Richtea1970]

cheesejunkie said:

gazza285 said:

What about other stuff you rent? Same treatment for hotel rooms, holiday rents, rental cars etc.

No, why would I? I know the difference between a service provider and a rent taker.

I’ve been a landlord so don’t piss on me and tell me it’s raining. It’s not a hard life in comparison to real work. Don’t try cry me a river about bad tenants, people wouldn’t be in it if it they weren’t making profit from others that don’t have their capital and when you get down to the nitty gritty that’s all that separates those from some that are taking advantage. It isn’t talent or effort.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Saturday 18th March 22:35

Odd statement. Whatever you think of landlords, it’s a business, they are entitled to raise their costs the same as everyone else, particularly in the current market where everything costs more.
And your comment about ‘talent or effort’, do you judge every business based on the amount of talent the proprietor has?

[cheesejunkie]

Richtea1970 said:

cheesejunkie said:

gazza285 said:

What about other stuff you rent? Same treatment for hotel rooms, holiday rents, rental cars etc.

No, why would I? I know the difference between a service provider and a rent taker.

I’ve been a landlord so don’t piss on me and tell me it’s raining. It’s not a hard life in comparison to real work. Don’t try cry me a river about bad tenants, people wouldn’t be in it if it they weren’t making profit from others that don’t have their capital and when you get down to the nitty gritty that’s all that separates those from some that are taking advantage. It isn’t talent or effort.

Edited by cheesejunkie on Saturday 18th March 22:35

Odd statement. Whatever you think of landlords, it’s a business, they are entitled to raise their costs the same as everyone else, particularly in the current market where everything costs more.
And your comment about ‘talent or effort’, do you judge every business based on the amount of talent the proprietor has?

I honestly wish it was a business and not a ropey unregulated system of people wealthy enough to own a few extra houses milking those that aren’t.

There are good landlords and bad ones. But there are no rules worth talking about. It’s a bit of a free for all for anyone with a few quid.

Landlord’s entitlement comes from the system that allows them to expect it. I’d remove their business case tomorrow for various reasons but I feel no need to defend that opinion and find it quite amusing how quick some are to jump on it.

[bongtom]

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

[cheesejunkie]

bongtom said:

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

If I do I’m not. Dislike of the status quo is not jealousy and to be honest that’s a lazy accusation to make.

There is much wrong with a system that encourages people to become landlords as if that’s a good use of entrepreneurial investment from banks through to well meaning parents saving for their kid’s mortgage because they’re locked in the system.

I understand why some do it but I’ll not defend their right to make money from those less fortunate. I definitely won’t have any truck with someone suggesting that as a landlord they’re hard done by. It’s money for nothing. They’re a pampered class not a hard done by one.

[Sway]

Why is someone renting 'less fortunate' by definition?

Plenty of scenarios where it's the favorable option for the renter.

Just like a car lease is the right option for some, and purchase for others.

[Captain Smerc]

I've rented for many years & my landlord is excellent.
Not everyone is the same, lazy thinking to believe that.

[cheesejunkie]

Sway said:

Why is someone renting 'less fortunate' by definition?

Plenty of scenarios where it's the favorable option for the renter.

Just like a car lease is the right option for some, and purchase for others.

I don’t know the answer but care to take a punt on how many renters would prefer to be owners?

It does work for some, the word you’re looking for is landlords .

I don’t know hey I got involved in this fight but it’s more interesting than slagging fat council families to me.

I’ve rented when it suited my circumstances. The market needs rental properties. It doesn’t need them all to be owned by amateur speculators. It does need an evaluation of renter vs landlord rights. The feudal system’s getting a bit dated.

[Grumps.]

cheesejunkie said:

bongtom said:

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

If I do I’m not. Dislike of the status quo is not jealousy and to be honest that’s a lazy accusation to make.

There is much wrong with a system that encourages people to become landlords as if that’s a good use of entrepreneurial investment from banks through to well meaning parents saving for their kid’s mortgage because they’re locked in the system.

I understand why some do it but I’ll not defend their right to make money from those less fortunate. I definitely won’t have any truck with someone suggesting that as a landlord they’re hard done by. It’s money for nothing. They’re a pampered class not a hard done by one.

Why did you give up being a landlord as surely it must be quite profitable?

[Caddyshack]

cheesejunkie said:

bongtom said:

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

If I do I’m not. Dislike of the status quo is not jealousy and to be honest that’s a lazy accusation to make.

There is much wrong with a system that encourages people to become landlords as if that’s a good use of entrepreneurial investment from banks through to well meaning parents saving for their kid’s mortgage because they’re locked in the system.

I understand why some do it but I’ll not defend their right to make money from those less fortunate. I definitely won’t have any truck with someone suggesting that as a landlord they’re hard done by. It’s money for nothing. They’re a pampered class not a hard done by one.

The system actively discouraged the land Lord these days…the taxation is harsh on the way in and the way out and whilst trying to make a profit. The land Lord is the big bad wolf in the eyes of the system.

[cheesejunkie]

Grumps. said:

cheesejunkie said:

bongtom said:

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

If I do I’m not. Dislike of the status quo is not jealousy and to be honest that’s a lazy accusation to make.

There is much wrong with a system that encourages people to become landlords as if that’s a good use of entrepreneurial investment from banks through to well meaning parents saving for their kid’s mortgage because they’re locked in the system.

I understand why some do it but I’ll not defend their right to make money from those less fortunate. I definitely won’t have any truck with someone suggesting that as a landlord they’re hard done by. It’s money for nothing. They’re a pampered class not a hard done by one.

Why did you give up being a landlord as surely it must be quite profitable?

Very good question and gets to the heart of why I may be a little two faced on this. Being a landlord wasn’t hard work but doing it for one house was an extra level of effort I couldn’t be bothered with, I was an attentive good one, I’m not born for that industry.

It has definitely coloured my view of one or two house owners speculating because they have the money to do so as opposed to those with a portfolio running it as their business.

[Alorotom]

cheesejunkie said:

Grumps. said:

cheesejunkie said:

bongtom said:

You come across as a little bitter, or jealous.

If I do I’m not. Dislike of the status quo is not jealousy and to be honest that’s a lazy accusation to make.

There is much wrong with a system that encourages people to become landlords as if that’s a good use of entrepreneurial investment from banks through to well meaning parents saving for their kid’s mortgage because they’re locked in the system.

I understand why some do it but I’ll not defend their right to make money from those less fortunate. I definitely won’t have any truck with someone suggesting that as a landlord they’re hard done by. It’s money for nothing. They’re a pampered class not a hard done by one.

Why did you give up being a landlord as surely it must be quite profitable?

Very good question and gets to the heart of why I may be a little two faced on this. Being a landlord wasn’t hard work but doing it for one house was an extra level of effort I couldn’t be bothered with, I was an attentive good one, I’m not born for that industry.

It has definitely coloured my view of one or two house owners speculating because they have the money to do so as opposed to those with a portfolio running it as their business.

Never mind 2-faced, it's complete contradictory. It's either work/effort or it isnt. Being a landlord definitely is work/effort irrespective where in the market your properties are aimed at.

You say you were a "good one" ... all landlords do (I do/did, but I know some tenants of mine would say I wasn't I didn't roll over to them) - landlord-ing does make you the worst version of yourself.

I myself was a "good one" that got sick of it and cashed out my 11 properties (as I was tired of the trials and tribulations of the low end of the market, and) to build my current home, and am slowly rebuilding having rentals again, albeit a different market segment now.

Anyway, living under a roof, owned or otherwise, council.

[cheesejunkie]

Alorotom said:

Never mind 2-faced, it's complete contradictory. It's either work/effort or it isnt. Being a landlord definitely is work/effort irrespective where in the market your properties are aimed at.

You say you were a "good one" ... all landlords do (I do/did, but I know some tenants of mine would say I wasn't I didn't roll over to them) - landlord-ing does make you the worst version of yourself.

I myself was a "good one" that got sick of it and cashed out my 11 properties (as I was tired of the trials and tribulations of the low end of the market, and) to build my current home, and am slowly rebuilding having rentals again, albeit a different market segment now.

Anyway, living under a roof, owned or otherwise, council.

No, it was an easy life. People pay me because I own something they’d like to own.

I listened to their complaints and dealt with them. I was under no obligation to do so. None.

If you’re going to try and tell me that landlords are hard done by saints looking after their spendthrift tenants I’m not going to take you very seriously. I know you’re not. I’ve already said the rapidity of some prepared to jump down my throat at the suggestion the game is rigged in favour of landlords has not changed my opinion that it would be a brave government to ps off landlords but it would be good for all if they did.