Rental Crisis: Why are Landlords Selling Their Properties?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 авг 2023
- Sign up to Brilliant (the first 200 sign ups get 20% off an annual premium subscription): brilliant.org/tldruk/
The rental crisis in the UK is getting worse, and with landlords selling properties & leaving the market, it's only likely to get worse. So in this video we unpack what's at the root of this issue, and if landlords could be the real losers here.
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
🗣 Discord: tldrnews.co.uk/discord
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
Our mission is to explain news and politics in an impartial, efficient, and accessible way, balancing import and interest while fostering independent thought.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, engaging and sharing. Thanks!
In Cambridge, home owners wouldn't let new development happen because they love their houses getting more expensive by the day. There is a fight over any rental property that shows up on the market and rates sore. All junior doctors that I know are either moving to other cities or leaving the country altogether. Then those homeowners have to wait for a year just to see a doctor. It's all a loop people. If you raise a wolf it's gonna bite you in the ass.
We need planning reform … the fact you can’t build on your own land without the permission of some bitter old busybodies is a travesty! There should be zoning laws where you can build on your land provided you comply with basic rules and requirements (i.e. no sky scrapers in a residential suburb, no weird looking monstrosities etc).
this is literally what is happening in my neighbourhood group chat, they're trying so hard to block a housing development under the guise of the environment and sustainability. I disagree but all I can do is just sit and listen.
@@Witnessmoowhile I agree with your point the exact reason why some bitter old busy bodies get to say is because what "building something weird"?
Tbh it's your land do with it what you want, keep it under two stories without permission and must be up to standards Ie made of bricks rather than cardboard. The least the better.
@pm3302 nice story dude.
totally… short sighted greed will eventually affect everyone, everything is connected. The importance of rising the quality of life for the whole of society cannot be underestimated.
Because so many people overpaid for homes even while loan rates were low, I believe there will be a housing catastrophe because these people are in debt. If housing costs continue to drop and, for whatever reason, they can no longer afford the property and it goes into foreclosure, they have no equity since, even if they try to sell, they will not make any money. I believe that many individuals will experience this, especially given the impending mass layoffs and rapidly rising living expenses.
I advise you to invest in stocks to balance out your real estate, Even the worst recessions offer wonderful buying opportunities in the markets if you're cautious. Volatility can also result in excellent short-term buy and sell opportunities. This is not financial advice, but buy now because cash is definitely not king right now!
You're correct! With the help of an investment coach, I was able to diversify my 450K portfolio across markets and produce slightly more than $830K in net profit from high dividend yield equities, ETFs, and bonds.
Would you mind providing details on the advisor who helped you? saving for a pension through a corporate program since the age of 18. I hit greater tax along the road, so I increased my company pension with a SIPP (tax benefits). I'm now 50 and would love to expand my finances more aggressively; there are a few automobiles I still want to drive and a few mega-vacations that I still want to take.
Well, there are a few out there who know what they are doing. I tried a few in the past years, but I’ve been with Margaret Johnson Arndt for the last five years or so, and her returns have been pretty much amazing.
She appears to be well-educated and well-read I ran a google search on her name and came across her website; Thank You for sharing.
The real problem here is that the cost of housing is so high. Whether you rent or buy it's the huge amount of capital needed to pay the house vs salaries makes it increasingly unaffordable.
Not really to those that held their savings in gold over the years, or other hard assets. For awhile if you checked the housing index priced in gold it’s been rather steady. In inflating fiat not so much.
All of the problems do stem from the Government inaction for the last 10 - 20 years and negative action from the 2020 tax relief. We're not building enough houses or flats. So house prices go up. Rents go up. Tax relief got removed, so rents went up.
I know everyone loves to say landlords leave the properties in bad conditions, but there are a ton that will do something about it. I've moved around at least once a year for 10 years with different landlords. Only 1 could I say has been bad and I just moved out, but I know that's not an option for everyone.
In the last year, you've seen rental properties drop by 1/3 (according to the video). That's huge, and it's not the bad ones that are avoiding maintenance that are getting out.
Sounds like what we need to solve is lots more people, who need lots more housing and other services.
Better open the borders.
It really depends where you are in the country. The house price to earnings ratio is very different across the UK.
True, but the cost of housing is downstream from, the cost of raw land, the cost of skilled labor to build houses, and the level of government regulation.
If you want cheap housing, concentrate on getting people to live in areas with cheap land, encouraging people to go into trades, and reducing government regulation (where possible, understanding this is a double edged sword). That eventually will lead to lower house prices, cheaper mortgages, and lower rent.
In my opinion, a housing market crash is imminent due to the high number of individuals who purchased homes above the asking price despite the low interest rates. These buyers find themselves in precarious situations as housing prices decline, leaving them without any equity. If they become unable to afford their homes, foreclosure becomes a likely outcome. Even attempting to sell would not yield any profits. This scenario is expected to impact a significant number of people, particularly in light of the anticipated surge in layoffs and the rapid increase in the cost of living.
I suggest you offset your real estate and get into stocks, A recession as bad it can be, provides good buying opportunities in the markets if you’re careful and it can also create volatility giving great short time buy and sell opportunities too. This is not financial advise but get buying, cash isn’t king at all in this time!
You are right! I’ve diversified my 450K portfolio across various market with the aid of an investment coach, I have been able to generate a little bit above $830k in net profit across high dividend yield stocks, ETF and bonds.
*@shirleygarland4766* Do you mind sharing info on the adviser who assisted you?
Camille Alicia Garcia is the coach that guides me, She has years of financial market experience, you can use something else but for me her strategy works hence my result. She provides entry and exit point for the securities I focus on.
She appears to be well-educated and well-read. I ran a Google search on her name and came across her website; thank you for sharing..
imagine having a spare house to sell its a different world for some people
I know. The poor landlords.
@@PhukYougoogle-vx2qmso people who already have enough money to buy a house get to opt out of having to work a real job, and everybody else just has to deal with it?
@@devanman7920 You assume they are paid for and there may well be a bill at the end for many .
@@devanman7920 And they call it an investment when the prices go up but when it goes down it's everything but their fault. These people are so entitled because they want to pretend to be like a feudal lord.
@@PhukYougoogle-vx2qm I really hate these vapid comments "Just magically be in a better situation!" as if it's a light switch.
The true TLDR for renters is a very short video, simply consisting of "your fucked"
It's also really hard to see a way back from here
your fucked what?
@@damienhine1861 The next pandemic will simply be an entire generation of people living in tents and shipping containers, with the suit they wear to work hung up in the corner.
You’re*
That's most TLDRs these days.
I rented for years in England before moving abroad. It was only through experiencing how other countries treat those who rent did I realise that tenants in GB receive terrible treatment: from unregulated landlords to absentee agent management companies, no fault evictions, surprise property inspections…UK renters face demeaning conditions with very few rights. No wonder so many break their backs to take on massive mortgages, just to secure a safe roof over their head.
Specifically private rented landlords, with a few social housing landlords also being horrible towards tenants in the UK too.
As a landlord I've struggled to find a property management company that isn't complete garbage. I finally think I've found one and am in negotiations with them at the moment. But as far as surprise inspections go. They can't do that. But there's currently litigation going on in the US regarding privacy issues from drones flying overhead and some management companies have started to employ them due to that being the only realistic way of finding out what is going on in properties. They also have to run extremely high penalties due to the fact that it's not possible to stop something before it becomes so destructive. For example non smoking homes. There's no such thing as discovering whether or not someone has smoked in the house until they move out and then test strips are used on the walls. Most of the time damage costs over $5,000 USD so that's what the fee is for tenants who's walls test positive. If there was a way to check periodically and catch it after only a month or so then it can be stopped and cleaned for only a few dollars. But without the ability to do surprise inspections, extremely high fees is the ONLY options
True story unfortunately
@calebbearup
There is another option: make exploitative landlordism illegal, just like we made slavery illegal recently.
Surprise property inspections are against the law. No fault evictions are going away, and even in its current form a tenant can simply refuse to leave forcing a protracted legal battle for the landlord to evict them. Trust me, there is plenty of red tape... The real problem is the housing situation gives the landlords alot of power over people. Are you going to make a big fuss about your landlord being a shitty landlord knowing they can easily get another tenant and you might not find it so easy to rent somewhere the next time?
The question under all of this: who’s buying? Is it individuals or megacorps acquiring all the homes?
If it's megacorps nobody should rent
It’s big corporations. In fact, in California in the usa large corporations actually sponsored and backed the eviction moratoriums that just ended after over three years. The large businesses pushed these policies to force owners to sell so they could take over and raise rents
Banks gobbling em up too. Seems a storm is being designed successfully.
The current housing crisis in UK is unfolding as a multifaceted challenge that requires our collective attention and strategic solutions. As real estate prices continue their upward trajectory, the dream of homeownership is slipping away for many hardworking individuals and families, leaving them in the throes of an unsettling rental market.
Absolutely, The crisis isn't just affecting potential homebuyers; even those fortunate enough to own homes are experiencing the ripple effects. The accompanying surge in property taxes and maintenance costs has propelled the overall cost of homeownership to unprecedented levels.
▪︎▪︎ In times as financially precarious as these, seeking counsel from a seasoned financial advisor becomes imperative. Professionals like Kayla Tabitha Rodrigues have honed their expertise in navigating the intricate web of real estate and financial intricacies, offering guidance and strategies to help individuals and families make informed decisions
¤□Kayla Tabitha Rodrigues's name has frequently been associated with proficiency in real estate and financial matters. Her reputation precedes her, and she has a knack for providing tailored solutions, be it for aspiring homeowners trying to find a foothold in the property market or existing homeowners striving to maintain their financial equilibrium amidst these challenging market dynamics.
You're absolutely right, I've been keeping a close eye on the housing crisis, and the financial strains it's causing are undeniable. It's heartening to know that there are experts like Kayla who can offer practical solutions.
I'm intrigued to know more about the kind of advice kayla provides. Can she really help people in such dire housing situations?
The houses aren't being sold of to the renters. They're being sold to large conglomerates looking to secure, if not a monopoly, at least an oligopoly.
Yep, it was always going to be like that.
I said it right at the start of this fiasco when people were celebrating mortgage repayments going up for landlords. Like, OK, mortgage repayments going up, that either means they'll just pass the cost on and increase the rent, or if they can't and struggle, the property will just get foreclosed, meaning renters are thrown onto the street. When properties are foreclosed, banks don't rent it out, renters can't stay in it, they get sold off cheap so the bank can recuperate the money as fast as possible, and that means the rich who can afford to buy the property straight up with cash wins, because they get it cheap and rent it out at an extortionate price due to reduced properties on the rental market. Rich gets richer in the end. And people were celebrating landlords losing money, thinking the rich were going to lose out. Marvellous outcome, renters and people on the poorer end of the spectrum are now thrown onto the street or pay ridiculous rent.
Some people hate the rich so much, they celebrate the even more rich getting richer. Not sure what logic their brain uses, but pretty sure it's a dysfunctional brain, probably hit by a breezeblock when they were an infant or dropped when they were born.
@@DanteLovesPizzathe people celebrating don't understand basic economics and I wouldn't be surprised if major property owners are astroturfing anti-landlord/-lady propaganda while lobbying the government to increase regulations to price small players out.
A lot of things people hate about landlords and -ladies come from government regulations rather than greed, but people will always blame greed.
@@-haclong2366
It just baffles me how people can lack basic understanding of logic, like, not even economics, just simple logic of how the world works.
Worst of all, voices that try to explain it to them so no one panics get drowned out by mass hysteria. We had the exact same thing at the start of the pandemic when everyone decided to stock pile unnecessarily. It was very clear that if no one panic buys, there is no need to panic buy.
@@DanteLovesPizza If the properties being bought with cash are being rented out, why is the number of rental properties reduced? This is what I don't understand. I understand that landlords are sellin en masse to cash buyers. but why aren't those buyers renting them out?
@@Angelcreature
It's hard to say.
I don't have the data, analysis, research, etc, but it could be a similar situation to panic buying.
What I mean is, what if the number of properties available to rent hasn't really gone down, at least not by THAT much? What if it seems to be reduced because more people have rented due to mass hysteria that they wouldn't be able to rent a place if they didn't rent it quickly?
Looking back to before the fiasco, people weren't renting immediately the moment a place became available, you would realistically check out a few places, see which one you liked best, and then rented. This could vary from weeks to months.
Now? There's a fear of scarcity and people are renting immediately, meaning more properties are being rented out quicker and taken off the market, so there's an illusion of less available.
Not to mention, this is made worse by people booted out, because when that happens, they'll be desperate to look for a place. Desperation hikes up prices, which in turn increases fear of scarcity, and the cycle repeats.
All in all, Truss was an absolute douchebag for creating this mess.
Wow, missed answering a major question: Who is buying the houses the landlords are selling and what are they doing with them? If people are buying them to live in then it's awesome news because every new home buyer is one less renter. If they are being bought by other investors then that's generally not as good but will usually result in the property being put up for rent again.
There is more to this story that TLDR didn't even mention.
Yeah, the fact the number of rentable properties is dropping means something is happening to those houses, but it's not clear whether they're being lived in, or just taken out in some way...
@@rmsgrey They are being scooped up by hedge funds and other financial institutions to hold as an investment, and you would not want your investment to deteriorate while someone is living in it...and at the same time you can increase rent costs by not renting your investment. This is a win-win for investors and a loss-loss for ordinary people
The same thing was happening in Canada where big companies were buying homes above asking price to inflate rent in neighbourhoods. The result of that? average houses that sold for 150~200k a decade ago are now on the market for close to 1 mil
No that is a misconception. Most renters are not in a position to buy. An ex rental property might just as easily be someone buying who previously lived with their parents or perhaps had a relationship breakdown. It won’t result in a 1:1 reduction in the number of renters and hence the problem.
And if sold to someone buying rents go up for the remaining renters and now there is less rentable stock. It’s never just good news. The only win win news would be more houses built.
Renters are much more likely to share.
If it's an HMO being sold to an owner occupier that could be 5 individuals losing out.
I feel like there is a question if raising number of individual landlords selling up and getting out of the rentier market, who are they selling their houses to? They cant be selling to their renters because they are finding it difficult to get a mortgage. It would be a rational decision for people to get into renting properties for the first time now because interest rates are so high. I feel like this leaves only large rental property firms and asset management firms to gobble up this housing stock like blackstone did after the 08 financial crash.
I had the same question and I’m disappointed they didn’t address it. I have the same assumption, though. It feels like a transfer of wealth from the well off to the super rich.
It's Buy to let landlords who can't afford Mortgage repayments selling to Landlords with enough wealth to outright buy the houses.
In the USA the small landlords are selling to large investment companies. Those same companies are also building new homes that are for rent! The result will be higher rental prices. The small landlords were gone with small profit margins. The institutional investors want big returns.
The market for ex rental properties is no different from the wider housing market so the buyers are the same, mostly owner occupiers.
There's an excellent video by James Shack, which goes much deeper into why landlords are selling up. It also explains who they're selling them to and why that creates more problems.
This is even effecting tourist attractions.
I work at a steam railway where rent out our visitor centre, the landlord sold up to get a return on his investment, effectively kicking us out if we didn't play an exorbitant price to keep them. The thing is, they aren't selling well 😂
I think the main problem for landlords in the UK is they use a lot of finance and they are in debt too, so they are influenced by interest rates like renters
If you’re in debt, you have no business buying a house.
You have no place putting someone in a financial chokehold because you are in one yourself. You don’t dig yourself out by burying someone else.
@@EliAlexanderClark Landlords buy property with BTL mortgages, most would have put 25% down at least. Interest rate changes will be passed on to tenants like any other business.
So how much of the economic problems are really about numbers like growth and there-being-enough-of-something, instead of everyone being locked in by debt and fealty to others?
@@nielskorpel8860 I think slow growth can be a problem in the medium-long term too, but being in debt too much and using leverage makes both tenants and landlords fragile to economic shocks and so also in the short term. Obviously when things go well using debt can be good but when they go wrong...
yeah these landlords are criminals, poor and can't actually do a job or role that would help and improve society so i.e. incompetent too. UK the loser janitor of the world now lol
The point where landlords realise they aren't savvy business investors and just had it easy. Kinda reminds me of all the crypto crazies who thought they were neo buffets.
Yes, and they want to sell before losing more money - nothing wrong with that.
@@todortodorov940.
😊😮z
J didn't have it easy when I bought a 1 bedroom flat In London in 2005. I saved and saved. Now in 2024 I still own the flat and have a tenant there. I am not selling.
The entire situation is completely unsustainable, has been for a long time. Need more social housing and genuinely affordable homes, loads more. Any plan not including that isn't serious.
They need to build it without having to comply with boomer NIMBYs who are worried that any new property built near them will devalue their property slightly, because their wealth and net worth is tied to the house they bought in the 70s with a pack of haribos.
I think the main problem is that London is too big. If all people move to London there will never be enough housing. You need to make it more attractive to live and work in other areas.
Complete bollox. The situation is self sustaining
So 3 bed house to build cost about £250k.. you want to build 300k houses? How much is that costing and who will finance it?
@@manjeetgill1like hell it is
Houses should be homes first, and investments... never. Find something else to invest in that doesn't hold people's personal lives to ransom.
Bring in rent controls linked to local income. Tax empty houses, and use the proceeds to properly fund social housing development so people aren't at the mercy of the exploitative private rental sector.
Empty dwellings should forfeit 100% of capital gains during the period in which they are unoccupied.
The only thing that would make landlords reduce rent would be an abundance of rental properties, its the same as any other market, raise prices due to pressure, reduce prices due to pressure, you dont volunteer a price drop, thats just giving away money
This guy is gay😂😂
the abundance of rental properties that are non-market.. if you build a bunch of for-profit housing, then who would buy them if they don't make a profit?
I agree. Saying Landlords are greedy is equivalent to saying tenants are cheap!
Actually- that would NOT really reduce rent - it might cause a Landlord to sell out more than reduce rent. If a landlord has fixed costs - mortgage, taxes, Utilities, insurance - that they cannot cover with rental income and make a profit - there is no reason to keep a rental property. AND THAT is the problem. With rent controls -they are trying to put a cap on how much a person can increase rent - BUT they put no such cap on how much they can increase taxes - how much Insurance goes up, or the cost of a Mortgage. Over time a rental property goes under water - where the cost of the fixed expenses cannot be covered by rent - and one less unit is available on the market - and that raised rents for othersl
Look, whatever you try, people will find a way to logic towards "it is bad for renters because it was bad for landlords, and so landlords did X instead".
These arguments are weird, and therefore probably bullshit.
The most common reason for landlords selling is due to the fact it’s now unaffordable. The mortgage rates have soared and to be able to pay it. They would have to raise rent significantly, for a slight profit. It’s just not worth it.
It's not unaffordable for all of them. It all depends on the circumstances. Lot of landlords out there with multiple properties, but no mortgage whatsoever.
Then the other ones just raise the rent significantly.
You say its not worth it, but they are making hundreds a month in profit for doing no work, then the asseet itself (the house) goes up on average 10% per year.
In what other investment would you be getting a 10% increase in value per year, while still paying out several hundred a month profit too ?
For a slight profit? This is wildly inaccurate. Every penny they charge is profit! Even if the rent isnt as high as the mortgage, they still have an asset worth at however much they have rinsed from the renters plus the tiny bit they pay on the mortgage.
@@sixstarhorizon295 ^ This is also wildly inaccurate. "Every penny they charge is profit" - Tax, mortgage interest, landlords insurance, gas/electricity certifications/ repairs/improvements, agent fees. .
"Tiny bit they pay on the mortgage" - UK average house is £260k, 25% deposit, = £195k loan. 6% of 195k = £11.7k mortgage INTEREST payment each year. That's not even including paying the actual mortgage off.
@BumbleyBoo but what happens when you 'pay' the mortgage off? Yeah, you have a 300k asset that you paid almost NOTHING for. Thats 300k of pure profit minus a relatively small amount of repair and maintenance. Renting is a scam to keep up house prices make the poor poorer. If landlards cant pay their mortgage interest its their fault for investing money in an asset that comes with risk.
@@sixstarhorizon295 The above maths doesn't include actually paying the mortgage off. Most buy to let mortgages are interest only because rental wont cover the loan too. Extremely few will be able to pay off the actual mortgage. So no, you don't end up with a 300k asset. You'd need to charge another £7600 a year. So £19k (first year) a year just to cover the mortgage and interest costs (25y) Then add in the above costs, you'd be looking at £26k-30k rent for an average UK house. See how the maths doesn't work?
Edit: Did some corrections, it's be £16k a year for mortgage + interest. + 25% corp tax, + the rest would be around 22- 24k I think.
Just a note, you don’t pay capital gains tax on the sale of your principle primary residence
If there is a taxable gain by an individual selling property, then it is reportable within 60 days whether it was ever their principle residence (ie it was for a while but they didn’t live there the whole time they owned it)
I literally got a no fault eviction notice yesterday, because the landlord wants to sell the flat. 2nd time it’s happened to me in less than 3 years in London for the same reason.
You mean so-called 'no fault eviction notice'...
@@ChrisLee-yr7tz ? Each time they were selling and having viewings for months prior to my leave
I warned about this when a bunch of imbecilic trisomy 21 idiots without an ounce of economic understanding were celebrating "landlords losing money" because of Truss' dog turd budget that forced interest rates, hence mortgages, to skyrocket. And the worst part is, you're not the only one this has happened to, this is happening on a country-wide scale, so you can only imagine the numbers.
I'll never understand the logic of imbeciles. Landlords losing money vs renters being thrown out on the street. Who has it worse? It's such a simple answer, but I guess when schools don't educate people on basic logic, there will always be idiots who think this is a good phenomenon.
It will happen a lot more yet because mums and dads carry the burden of rentals and it just grinds them down until they can't manage, go broke and have to sell. It is that simple.
Thank you for the important reminder that for landlords, these are investments. Their profits can swing up and down.
I do not feel bad for them, basically because of how much rent has increased in recent years.
The only tone I feel bad for them is when tenants utterly trash a house then leave after months of non payment.
If rent goes down because the market dictates that then that's life.
When someone who's supposed to pay $900 a month but stops paying and refuses to leave and the landlord has to pay the local sheriff $3,000 to evict the tenant but only after a judge authorizes the eviction after a court hearing. And the cutest hearing can't even get scheduled until 3 months of rent are skipped and it usually takes a couple months for the court date. So the landlord is out about $7,500 before they can even get inside the house to see what it looks like and then it's common to see $15,000-$20,000 in damages
It takes about ten years of good tenant occupancy to make up for one year of a bad tenant.
There's a general rule of thumb that it takes owning 5 rental properties before reaching the break even point. Until they get there landlords are partially/completely funding the rental properties by working other jobs.
Well that's what you for an illiquid asset
Eventually economic circumstances come along that come back and bite you for your greed
I work as an inventory clerk so moving people in and out of rentals is my entire job. I can say with certainty that I'm moving far more tenants out than in this year and a lot of new lets are on a 'until the property is sold' basis.
What's worse is that most of London zone 1 places aren't being re-let because they're Airbnbs now (because the tax is far less).
We're flat hunting at the moment and one of the agencies is trying to push a six month only rental, being up front about the property being sold at the end of it. Problem is, it's taken us nearly six months just to start getting viewings because the competition is ridiculous in Cardiff. I told them 'no, we'd basically be flat hunting from day 1 and it's really bad as it is - it's cheaper and less hassle for us to stay where we are'. Also, what was high rent for me when I moved in is now relatively cheap, it's insane how quickly prices have gone up in a year.
How many of those are foreigners? Interesting that 82% of babies born in Brent during the last year were born to non-UK mothers.
Indeed rents have gone up at least 30%-50% and some have doubled. Maybe that will get rid of some of the foreigners. @@maxek46
Airbnb is a curse. Killing local communities and creating housing crises. I guess MPs have a few let and therefore wont regulate
@@eliakimjosephsophia4542 Without foreigners UK can't function! Get over it
Guessing landlords can see the crash coming and want to dump their stocks before the crash happens.
Reminds me of 2008.
I remember the early 90s now that was a house price crash.
2008 didn't effect the housing market where I was living at the time
I'm not from the UK but, that thing with the landlords having option to screw over the renters seems quite evil to me.
It's pushed to the extreme, but in Poland for example, you can't evict someone even if he is not paying. There should be just list of reasons why You can evict someone and it would be fair and square.
Buy a house and rent for free! Be a good angel landlord then!
@@laurynaszilenas4705 You don't have to get to the other extreme. I say that the landlords could get a little less money instead of charging the renteres an extra for the costs.
@@daniel_rossy_explica are you a landlord? When boiler break down and gas engineer charge you 670 he not making discount, when need to refurbish kitchen they dont make discount, when need to replace bathroom with tiles guess what - they not making discount. Ever more on that everyone is charging extra because of living crisis so why I would make a discount? Try to ring utilities gas water electricity companies who make billions in profite and ask for a discount...
@@daniel_rossy_explica when you look at regular person - latest phone, holidays abroad, 5y old vehicle, nails hairs done, nice clothes, smoking drinking takeaways, 65inch TV, desktop pc laptops and tablets AND these people complaint when rent increase £50 in 9years...sorry but don't know who to blame...
1:31 - For people watching this video, you do NOT have to pay capital gains tax if you sell your main residence. This is confirmed on HMRCs website and multiple others that cover this topic. TLDR, please can you edit the video to remove this section as this type of misinformation is potentially dangerous for people considering selling their main residence.
It literally says not the main residence...
He said you don't need to pay it till the next tax year.
@@pexijsanchez you don’t have to pay it at all. That’s my point.
@@joefothergill6303primary address and main residence mean the same thing. Look up Private Residence Relief.
You still have to pay CGT for the period a house wasn't your main residence, even if it now is. This might apply if someone has multiple homes, let it for an extended period abroad, or owned it as a main residence and later kept it as an investment/tenancy. It may be that it can be paid at the end of the year in these circumstances, along with CGT for any other purpose?
People buying those properties in effect become landlords, so "landlords" don"'t do anything. It's just an asset transfer to the better offs. Again.
"People buying those properties in effect become landlords"
Unless they live in the house themselves. Since the number of properties available to rent is decreasing, that means that many are now occupied by their owners.
a house being sold = a house being bought... someone has to live in it either way unless the house is just being used as a store of value by the new owner.
So selling is a good thing because puts downward pressure on house prices allowing some renters to purchase their own home which in turn takes pressure off the rental market.
So in the short term rental prices may go up but in the long run prices tend to even out and you end up with a greater percentage of people owning their own home.
Example: After WW2 in Australia the government built a whole bunch of rental houses which they then sold off in the 1980s.. these houses fondly called "ex-govies" were often purchased by the very people who were renting them and it is how an entire generation became home owners.
I’m a landlord with just 1 property. Sort of accidental landlord. I would have bought more over time but I won’t, and am seriously thinking of getting out but I feel bad for my tenants, they have a son same age as my boy.
Basically, it’s just not profitable anymore for me as a higher rate tax payer (I have a good job). I actually don’t make any profit after tax. It’s messed up. At this stage my rental is losing value too so I’m making a loss overall.
I know the sensible financial decision is to sell and make my tenants homeless basically, but I feel horrible doing that, so I haven’t.
But I have a financial pain threshold as well and the way things are going I will have to do it… and as my cousin keeps reminding me, I’m not a charity!
It is really messed up. By 2025, due to new environmental regulations, I will have to spend about £15k to insulate the property so it’s band C (currently it’s band E) which I can’t afford so I will almost certainly have to sell.
This government has destroyed the sector… but hasn’t provided alternatives to tenants like council housing.
It’s a tragedy.
well, try to sell the property to the renters. you could see part of the rent as a downpayment already: the part that didn't go into maintainence costs.
@@Ramie0Catthis is the only right answer letting is unethical in my mind and leaving them homeless is cruel
@@Ramie0CatIt’s such an obvious I’m genuinely angry op hasn’t considered it
@@Ramie0CatI would sell it to them at market price (the lowest valuation by a good faith agent basically - when they tell you it’s worth between X and Y, I would sell it for X) but I won’t sell it cheaper because I have family that could use that money if I was inclined to give it away. My parents for example don’t have a pension other than state pension. They sacrificed a lot of raise me right and if I have money to spare I should give it to them rather than tenants.
It’s a moot point anyway because they can’t afford to get a deposit and a mortgage, sadly. They have a kid and I know how expensive they can be! I waited to buy before I had mine even though my partner is mid 30’s and we risked fertility issues by waiting too long.
Also - just so people know I grew up in a council estate to first generation immigrant parents and only became a property owner through a lot of hard work and struggle - instead of selling that house, I bought another with savings and that’s how I became a landlord. I decided to invest my savings in bricks and mortar instead of scam stock market or crypto nonsense where the prices go up and down randomly! I have not inherited a penny, I have not exploited anyone so the ones saying it’s unethical, I profoundly disagree. I bought that property from an old couple cashing out for a pension, and I did it up with my own hands (and help from my dad).
@@SianNadineI’ll sell you the property at market cost and you can take the financial hit to house them. We can get three agents to value it, and we can choose the average if their lower valuations. That’s as fair as it gets… How about that?
It’s easy ti be generous with other peoples hard earned money / investments. Step up. I’m not joking. The property is in central Colchester.
For over a decade , we have simply not built enough houses as a nation. Now, both landlords and tenants are suffering due to lack. It is almost as if the big housing developers and government are in it together to keep this lack going! 🤔
Don't forget the NIMBYs
or the influx of 10 million people in 20 years.... might have an effect on the house prices.
its like asking why hotels are so expensive when the government has filled them with migrants at tax payers cost.
@shaaddhillon3819 You make a good point!
the passive aggresive tone at 6:10 is beautiful,my bet is that none of the TLDR group owns a house,but they pay rent
Its not worth renting out your property anymore
Yeah, not the end of the world. Wait 10 years and you'll find renting is almost monopolized by a company that buy this dip. That company will have enough to lobby for policies for their advantage. Happened before. Will happen again.
The weird twist in economy that most people think this would create affordable housing for those who are less fortunate.
In reality multimillionaire companies just purchase houses to increase their own (rental) portfolio...
The best landlord I had was a multi billion pound property fund. They were courteous, prompt to fix things and professional.
But if there's no one to afford the rent...
Renting out is largely a capital gains game. With dipping house prices, those have dried up and look to do so for the foreseeable future. For smaller landlords, I’d say this is the biggest reason for the sell off. I sold in the last financial crisis for this reason. All my rental income was eaten up by mortgages, maintenance and fees. My outgoings were actually more than the rent, because I maintained my properties properly and kept them in top notch condition to attract the right kinds of tenants. Without house prices rising to offset that, it wasn’t worth my time and effort.
And big arse property management companies come in and gobble them up. Even houses, single or semi-detach are bought up by these companies in my nation. I do genuinely feel bad for good landlords, I've had a number of them over the years, some I've helped out with cleanup / repairs from nightmare tenants, went to the tribunal with landlord to help plead their case (was a rough one). Nothing wrong with an extra property or two for small time folk who did right with their earnings, it's the large management groups that really irk my ire.
@@mukkah exactly this won't give many people a chance to get on the property ladder but will increase the portfolios of a few.
Yes sadly the war on landlords included ordinary people just trying to have some kind of pension pot.
The real question we should be asking is who is buying?
The Chinese. At least that's who's buying in the US
@@calebbearup4282 Massive real estate firms, like blackrock and vanguard, who use 0% interest rate loans from government.
Well, landlords, by definition. Other possibility is blackrock-like companies scooping up properties to strangle the market.
@@Andromahlius "Well, landlords, by definition."
Only if your definition of 'landlords' includes 'owner occupiers', because those are the people who should be buying right now.
Housing, like education, is an 'export'; foreign money borrowed at low interest buys up/invests in housing as an asset. Policy is tailored accordingly. For example, Sharia banks based in the Gulf buy UK housing stock at zero interest on behalf of UK based landlords.
So, I assume that when a landlord leaves the rental sector the house is dismantled and put into storage?
I’m now waiting for part two, who’s buying these houses coming on to the market, what are they doing with them and what impact that’s likely to have on the rental and sales landscape. Are we looking at a fall in house prices, reducing the overall number of renters? Or maybe a rise in the stock of corporate landlords, what impact is that likely to have on the experience of renters?
I want these questions given the trade mark TLDR thorough treatment.
They might be selling them to people who live in them or turn them into short-term rentals (Air B-n-B). The house I live in now was a rental before I lived in it. If the overall rental stock does not decrease, who cares. But if the properties are being converted to other uses including owner-occupied housing it could create problems for renters.
@@danz1182 You might be living in owner-occupied housing now but you are also one less tenant out of the rental pool. One house gone, one tenant gone. No proportion change.
The issue is that rentals are far more likely to have sharers. Once they get removed from the rental market it generally does cause a reduction in net supply.
One of my landlords had 47 homes in Reading. 9 people paying £600/month in mine. Never fixed anything. Agency was criminally useless
When my one and only tennant eventually decides to leave I'll probably sell the property.
It's just to risky if I get a bad tennant, it could potentially ruin me financially.
Plus added costs, it just isn't worth the hassle.
There are also the upcoming changes to EPC requirements that will be pushing many landlords to sell up. Many will own properties that will need significant investment to bring them up to code so combined with the changes listed in this video will be another push factor to sell up.
agreed I just had quotes for over 10000pounds to upgrade the insulation and electrical heaters in my two properties thats more than I make gross on a year, I'm retired and the rentals are about 30% of my income, can anyone take that kind of income loss??
Landlords and home owners have too much power, from the ways they can leverage power over renters to their ability to shout down new housing developments to preserve their "investment." Housing is shelter, not an investment.
it is, like it or not.
@@mad3721 just because it is does not mean it ought to be
@@gentlemandemon Look, if it wasn't investment, when you move somewhere you would wait until new houses have build. You couldn't travel and when you travel you would be at mercy of hotel prices. People spend money on houses because they think they can profit and you got your house. When you break this equation you or someone else will become homeless.
@@mad3721 What are you on about? Here's an idea: when you move someone new, buy a new house and sell your old house. What most people end up doing is buying a new house, and then renting their old property because they think it's an investment. That doesn't even get into the substance of my original comment, which is landlords blocking new development because of NIMBYism.
A good reason to stop being tenant and become home owner.
the number of houses doesn’t change just because the owners of those houses change. so if the house are actually leaving the market and not being consolidated by bigger landlord firms, where are the houses going? if they are being sold to be lived on then the number of renters goes down with the number of houses leaving the market, if they are being bought to be rented by someone with more capital the supply is the same, so the only way for the supply to decrease compared to demand is if the houses are just there, not being used, which, even under capitalism, where the surplus value is the driving force of economics, it’s counterproductive. what are people wasting money on houses that they are not going to use in any way?
So many errors in reasoning in this video:
1) Just because landlords are selling units, doesn't mean that those units aren't being bought by other landlords. If that were the case, the sales would have no bearing on the number of units available on the rental market.
2) Even if the unit is sold to someone who will make it their principal residence, and it ceases be a rental unit. Someone who would have otherwise been a renter is no longer needing a rental unit to live in. That is, the housing isn't getting demolished. The total number of units, and the total number of people living in those units remains the same regardless of the number of sales. Since prices are a function of supply and demand, and both supply and demand aren't affected by the home sales, prices should also not be affected.
Would be good to compare the housing market in France to the U.K. With the same size population they have 1/3 more dwellings. That is roughly 8-9 million more homes then here. Housing is unaffordable because we have let the population size grow far faster than we have built homes and now it seems the market is basically at breaking point.
If you want French levels of rent, then we need to pause population growth until we have built 8 million more homes.
Just get rid of all the Africans
France has land. We don't. Our population is too high.
Finally someone correctly identifying the problem being demand, not supply. Given the UK has a below replacement birth rate, if we wait 20-30 years the market will rebalance itself.
Oh no, who will sell unsafe living conditions at a premium rate and drive up housing prices at a ridiculous rate now!?
Big corporations that end up owning at least 60% of the housing stock. That'll about do it xD
@@seansloth7730have you checked stocks for rental and real estate companies lately? 🤡👍🏽
You're free to buy into the rental market through a listed publicly traded entity, they're not doing well as you seem to imply.
It's like you didn't actually watch the video
Lol yeh, better for you to just live at home with your parents till you hit 40 then rent 😊
@@seansloth7730 Big corporations are less likely to worry about renters than a private landlord that depends on the income, or wants their investment to grow. The crowds are cheering to get burnt again.
When a landlord sells a house, that house still exists, right? I.e. the number of available houses remains the same, the house just has a different owner. If the new owner still rents out the house, nothing has really changed for the market. If the new owners move in themselves, then another house or flat somewhere else becomes available. So the change for the market isn't a lower number of available rentable spaces, though likely a larger and/or more desirable rentable house is taken off the market and replaced by a smaller/less desirable house/flat.
Basically a lack of affordable housing is due to the increasing demand, as there's a lohg-standing trend towards a larger space-per-person ratio, including more singles and more grown-up children who want their own place while their parents aren't going to move to a smaller house (or rent out their kids' former rooms 😜).
I dont think you understand the concept of supply and demand nearly as well as you think you do
Well the number of available houses could be could be changing from place to place - maybe growing in Northumbria and shrinking in London; growing in Spain and shrinking England; people move around, and populations grow and shrink.
Where did all the boat people live and can we rent out their old houses?
Oh wait.
Not always the case as a large number of uk landlords do not own any other property or the house was inherited. There are many reasons people choice let over sale and it's not always financial. Could be emotional. Like parent goes into a care home and family do not want to part with the house as one of kid wants it but that kid is say 20. So they let it out for a few years. These house will just remain empty so you lose them from the housing stock.
@@user-qk4tm7nn1q mostly the landlords thrilled to profit greatly
I’ll give you a quick example as to why being a landlord in the UK sucks. You buy a flat in London in 2014. Turns out the building has flammable cladding, which means you can’t sell the flat or refinance it with a different bank; it also means you are personally liable for up to £50K as your share of the cost of refurbishing the cladding in the building. Imagine you rent the 2 bedroom flat for £3000/month and your mortgage has gone from £1500/month to £2600/month. You are left with £400/month, but you have to pay taxes on £2400/month of “rental income” at 40% tax rate because you happen to be a salaried employee. This mean you have to come up with £592 / month out of your own pocket to rent out your flat. This is without counting building service charges, letting agent fees, repairs or the cladding situation. Conclusion: you take the flat out of the market, sell it and put your money elsewhere where people welcome investors and are happy to have someone provide jobs or housing.
You still sound like a leech. No sympathy. Hope you sold your flat for a loss.
its bad for landlords but much worse for renters, because we don't have an asset we can choose to sell. You made a business decision to make money out of a renter in hopes they pay your mortgage off for you. It failed and was asked for you to pay your own mortgage off and you complain. A lot of us would love the opportunity to pay off our own mortgage in a home we live in.
That's amazing to hear 🎉🎉🎉. Maybe landlords should be more responsible with their money and cut down on all that avocado toast?
And maybe renters should manage their money better and save money to buy their own property? You gotta love the hypocrisy
@@LorraineAmoako this literally came about because landlords over leveraged themselves and expected renters to pay off their mortgage while they gain an asset. If you borrowed 200k to play with stocks and lost money, everyone would just accept that's a risk. Why is property just assumed to be an infinite money glitch?
Penalise people who have second homes, properties that aren't lived in full time. Then go for Airbnb properties. That would bring additional properties to be lived in full time
Tories won't do that 'cause they and their rich mates own second homes. Getting them out of power is the only way forward.
I mean sure, it might scrape the surface of the problem, but the real issue is housing supply. Kill NIMBYism by introducing state-wide zoning laws. It is insane that a couple of rich landlords can stop entire neighborhoods being built due to "ruining the neighborhood character", while we all know the real reason: Decrease supply so much that they can make a huge profit when they decide to sell...
@@misosoppa3279 it would help, at the stroke of a pen; no builders needed!
@@misosoppa3279 You don't have to resort to Zoning to fix that. Just reduce the ability of people to object to planning applications and increase the ability of people to appeal. People should be able to put forward case by case changes. I don't want a US style system which abolishes corner shops in suburban areas.
@@misosoppa3279Planning permission is also a case by case basis done by the parish council which adds to the NIMBYish.
I know someone who wanted their plot of land with a barely habitable bungalow to have the bungalow bulldozed and have two smaller cabin houses in there. Apparently they can’t do that as the bungalow was still ‘fit for use’ and the cabins will ruin the neighbourhood aesthetic even though it’s a rural neighbourhood :/
I work in property management. Land lords by and large don't evicted people who are clean and pay on time and don't cause trouble. People complain that a land lord can evict but don't understand if every eviction has to go through lawyers and attorneys that cost thousands of dollars and months of work to get a 1 person out that is loud or threatening people or filthy. Now times that by 5% of residents that's a huge expense that is passed on to other renters. So people think that getting rid of no reason eviction will be a benefit but most likely rise your rent.
That is inherently coercive as a system regardless of how chill any landlord in particular is
Make housing so unaffordable that even small and medium landlords can't afford houses. Funnel all available properties to large corporations. Profit.
This country is finished. Stealth tax after stealth tax. No forward thinking. The average worker keeps 20 - 30% of earnings with the rest going to the government. How is the country supposed to progress. No foresight.
Bad deal to be a landlord if you don’t fully own the home. If you’re paying a mortgage then it’s no longer going to pay your bills. Sell up before you go into negative equity and or lose your house.
You missed the risk return.
Earning 5% + interest for just having money in the bank is a better return than renting a house with all the demonisation of landlords, extra tax costs and maintenance etc.
I became an accidental landlord after I couldn't sell my flat during covid. And it's been an eye opener for me. The amount of regulation and red tape to go through to get the flat ready for rental, the stress of finding tenants, thousands in commission, the repairs, the tax returns... and the kicker, now I have managed to sell, is the capital gains tax for the time it was rented. Did i make any profit from renting? No. I made a loss. The only plus was the flat was not empty. Don't judge until you've walked in a landlord's shoes. Never ever would I choose to bevcome a landlord again. I completely understsnd if landlords are exiting the "business".
Your house raised in price and you owned a house when someone paid your mortgage for you, did you really make a loss?
@@RichardTongemanyes. Feel free to come over to go through the profit and loss... I kept all my receipts 😊
People aren’t talking about ‘accidental landlords’ though are they? They are talking about the plethora of people with large amounts of spare cash who thought they could jump on the bandwagon and become an easy millionaire off unprecedented high rents that have helped empoverish the British people massively over the last few decades.
Considering that is it really unsurprising that there is limited sympathy for landlords in Britain across a large section of society?
And yes shockingly there are additional responsibilities when it comes to owning and renting out property in modern countries. UK landlord regulations are actually a lot less strict than quite a number of other countries and loose regulations is how you end up with kids dying from mold like we have already seen.
@@maxpowerii7368 I have rented in several countries across the EU and the landlords have never had to provide to me the number of certificates I have had to provide to my tenants. Which countries have tighter regulations? The point of my post was to highlight that it is in no way all profit, as people will believe. In any event, private individuals are not social landlords. It is a business. Are businesses not meant to make profit? I don't understand the vilification of all landlords, when it's a small minority that may be classified as "rogue". As for deaths due to mould, social housing landlords are more guilty of that.
Without a private rental sector, society cannot function. I have come to shift my perspective and now recognise that the government should be encouraging the enterprise, not discouraging to the extent that property owners prefer now to sell up rather than to take in tenants. If there are no private landlords, what will happen? Already the reports show that property owners are selling up, and a higher percentage as anticipated from the time of this video.
Imagine what a 1970's freehold house is like compared to a little condo.
This is misstating the tax situation. With increased interest rates, but tax on gross rent and the inability to deduct many costs (especially mortgage), you end up paying more tax than any profit so you are paying to have tenants. Why would you want to be a landlord losing money and facing more hostility from people ignorant of the situation? Bad news for tenants as we all quit the market. It is not landlords fault that successive governments have entirely failed to properly manage the property market nor control the demand from migration.
One thing, (Context, I rent in another country, and my dad has several houses mainly from deceased family members, he rents UK.) There are some cowboy landlords, but is it the majority of the market? My dad barely breaks even on his renting for years and one nightmare tenant sets you back. He has had his houses turned into grow houses several times. Even with waiting for the section to go through he has been out of 6month's rent plus renovating costs, and the police are sat talking to him what they have done to his house. He used to try and make the houses nice, but now he buys second-hand kitchens and he has stopped furnishing them because some tenants can get away with it. More rules for landlords is good, but also some for tenants. People don't take care of other people's things.
An easy solution would be to replace all the council houses that have been sold off (use that money) and have the private sector as a more premium side.
The real problem is having short fix term mortgages. Crazy the banks get away with it.
You don't buy a car not knowing the payments for the whole loan.
The government needs to do their jobs for once.
UK banking regulations are unfriendly to long term mortgages with fixed rates. It does not make financial sense for banks to make them except at fairly expensive rates.
"The real problem is having short fix term mortgages. Crazy the banks get away with it."
If you don't like it get a variable rate mortgage instead. But a lot of people are keen on knowing that they have fixed outgoings during the difficult early years of owning a house, and it would be wrong to deny them that option.
@@NorthDownReaderthe issue is the short term part not the fixed rate part
@@danz1182 We haved fixed rate over 25 year in France, and the interest rate are still way lower that this shit. Sound just like predatory banking
I’ve seen many news stories where banks essentially blame customer preference, as in customers apparently prefer to have short term fixed mortgages because they get a lower interest rate. Yet when you look internationally, there a plenty of developed economies where mortgages with a fixed rate of 10 years or more, make up a significant portion of the total mortgage market. Are the British just built different or is there more going on here? My money’s on the latter.
As a recently landlord of 2 properties for past 3 years my profit margins are crap.. but I'm not in a position where im losing money.
I think experienced landlords are selling for a few reasons and none are because they need to
1. Older landlords don't want the stress
2. Release money to cover other properties expenses
3. To cover life expenses in this recession
As an estate agent in the north east, we have had a few landlords throw in the towel however long-standing landlords are in a better position to weather the austerity. On the whole though, most landlords are not selling.
In terms of rents, the cheapest rents highlighted in the video are 1 bed properties (of which they are increasingly rare), when this and inflation are couple together it is hardly surprising a premium for 1 bed properties have shot up.
Two points:
1: This episode was very London centric (south-east)
2: Though limited companies don’t pay capital gain, any increased value would be identified as profit and therefore would be subject to corporate tax which is a much higher percentage.
for me there is one important piece missing - who are they selling to? Just because the owner/landlord changes doesn't have to mean that the flat goes of the market, but it could be rented out again...
Is there an option for cooperatives to get stronger in the housing market to therewith fight the rising of housing-costs?
The banks are buying at an incredible rate. They will be the biggest landlords soon. And there will be zero reasoning with them!
Australia is about to try some if that. But lots of foreign incestors moving in now, buying and paying a "vacancy tax" because they only came for the capital gain. We are hopping mad ocer it in Australia as we have nationally a less than 1% vacancy rate. In some parts of the country it's deader than the dead parrot sketch in Monty Python, at 0.4%.....60 people in lines at viewings. It's horrendous. If your thinking of coming buy a tent🏕
Something I’m curious is what has happened to the 100,000+ properties no longer on the rental market. If they are being converted into permanent residences (say sold to first-time house buyers who then move in rather than to existing home-owners looking for a second property they can have a tenant pay the mortgage for them), then that at least should indicate an increase in the supply of houses on the market and a decrease in that price (at least relative to if they weren’t put on the market) even if the rental market gets more expensive. Given that non-rental properties have been slowly being turned to rentals over the past few decades in the Anglosphere, any reverse in that trend would be welcome, even if it has negative side effects in the short term.
Alternatively the properties could be going empty as larger landlords buy the properties to sit on then until they become profitable to rent again, or possibly being torn down to be replaced with something new. That would be an overall negative situation, as that just means that more people will be forced to move in with other people, rent overpriced locations that should be condemned on safety and sanitation reasons, move to other cities with available housing but likely lack of jobs not to mention removing themselves from any social support they may have built up, or in the worse case if any of those are not an option, becoming homeless.
Both are likely happening to some extent, I am curious which one is happening more, or if something else is happening.
there is so much demand for houseing that as soon as theres any time that seems good to buy or any dip in prices demand goes through the roof and stops any serious drops
Corporations are acquiring the sold property.. and driving up rent costs.
Predictively Tone-deaf. I am a lawyer, who represents landlords. What you call just investment is for many people, especially small scale landlords, their livelihood. You had might as well say homeowners don’t give back value when their homes go up in price, or people with jobs don’t complain when their wages go up. The simple law of supply and demand means that any challenges for landowners will result in a reduction of supply of housing. The question is how much do you want to protect the individuals who will continue to have housing and how many people are you willing to throw out of the housing market in order to do so. There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
As long as new houses aren't build this problem won't be solved.
There are more empty homes than there are homeless people. The problem isn't the number of homes, it's how the economy treats shelter like a commodity
The real solution is to recognize rent-seeking for the crime it is.
Can't build new houses without lowering the cost of materials
@@blckspice5167 the bulk of cost in property isn't in the materials, it's the land it's built on.
Finally someone that gets it and don’t just see the plus for their side of the issue 🫡
The joke is that new build estates are sold at inflated prices and actually the surrounding property prices are also inflated by these. So for the first few years it actually benefits you having a new build estate in the area
Do you know how much it costs to build? Land is not cheap. Materials are not cheap. Labour is not cheap. Of course it is expensive.
@@todortodorov940 I do yes... I know it's also cheaper (in most cases) to build your own than to buy an equivalent new build. But I feel like you might be missing my point. I wasn't complaining that new builds are expensive I was pointing out that NIMBYs shouldn't complain about new build sites near them as it most likely actually elevates their house values.
A big problem is that there are a lot of landlords that can't even afford to maintain their properties for renters. Like installing boilers and heaters. Those are the people the government need to go after.
Interestingly, many can't even sell their properties with the new rates so it goes back on the rental market while they try to sell it.
Oh noes, won't anyone think of the poor landlords?
Frankly, UK landlords deserve this. They only feel it's unfair because it's been so insanely stacked in their favour for literally decades, and so a slight rebalance of the playing field is making them piss their pants and cry about it. Screw those greedy parasites.
There will always be money to be made in renting, it's just that now those that will snap up these houses, in order to rent them out, will have to do it in line with the rest of europe, and actually put some work in.
Frankly it's economics at the end of the day, the economy cannot support these exploitative conditions in the state it is, so this renters reform bill is nothing but a realignment to reality, and hopefully not the last to come.
I hate the tories with a passion, but this sort of thing feels like a labour policy, and i'm here for it.
You're looking at this very one sided and missing the extremely bad reaction that's already happening - Landlords aren't just sitting there and taking it, they're moving on! Look at the numbers in the video, down 1/3 of rental properties since last year. That's huge! Open your eyes, your cheering away at the 'solution' but that's just making the problem worse.
@@BumbleyBoo There's a troubling assumption here that this state is some permanent or damaging, which it clearly isn't, the idea that a landlord selling a house now, prevents a new landlord from buying and renting out that property later is just silly.
If you stop for a second and think, you will realise that landlords are not a finite resource. It's immediately apparent that getting the problematic landords out of the system is not an issue, the rest of europe operates on the rules that make it 'too unfair' for them, and renting out property is not an issue in any other of those nations, and is still wildly profitable, and worthwhile.
All that's changed is they cannot abuse their position anymore, and they cannot handle that, and will be replaced by others.
Unintended consequences: the government has crimped small time btl landlords, meaning that the ones that remain are the big scale multiple property ownwrs who do everything through a limited company, and dont pay as much tax. That alrwady badly distorted the london market, and the Gov are making things even worse, especially when airbnb is totally unregulated! No wonder theres no whereto live in Cornwall.
I think you have missed a major reason and that is the rules coming in regarding rental is that all rentals will require a minimum rating of C, meaning landlords whose housing stock is below this will either need to upgrade or offload them, hopoefully (from their pov) before a potential surge in houses coming up for sale pushing down the values of these houses.
Personally i've been of the idea that the property market is likely to split with cheaper to run/heat houses having higher values than those that are more expensive to run as upgrading the existing housing stock is more important than making new houses more energy efficient, there has to be a financial return for this though, otherwise it will come back to the governments bank account to fund it (all of use who pay taxes).
Because they spent all the profit during the low interest era.... IT'S AN INVESTMENT, UPS AND DOWN.
Landlords are some of the biggest whiners in society.
Every other business can write off interest except landlords…
Anyway, this government has made this investment untenable so people will sell, and tenants will just have to buy their own houses to live in.
@@Witnessmoo I'm an UK accountant who deals with Rentals.....so please delete absurd comment.
@@SkamGameso you should know that it's different rules depending on whether you let through a ltd company or as an individual then
@crazycjk Don't care if you're a housing scalper l hope you lose all your money🥱
"Landlords are some of the biggest whiners in society."
By all means ignore their whining. But it's still a useful clue as to why they are selling, which does matter.
This took a weird turn at 6:17 away from TLDR’s usual efforts of neutrality. An editorial aside expressing, at best, ambivalence towards the fate of landlords seemed doubly odd, coming on the heels of an explanation of how their exit negatively affects renters’ affordability.
"Proud sponsor" Pon Zinvestor
This channel is most definitely not neutral lol. Their views on India for instance lacks a nuanced understanding, so I'm not surprised.
2,500,000 new arrivals in two years all need somewhere to live.
Where I live my landlords land rates have doubles in 3 years to a ridiculous 20 grand a quarter, he is looking at selling understandibly and I will be screwed, this is the world we live in.
We recently sold one of our rentals. The cost of maintenance and other compliance costs reduces the effective return well below what we would get if we just put the cash into a savings account for zero hassle.
Exactly; Being landlord is not the same as running a charity.
Inflation will slowly chew through the value of that cash in the bank though wont it?
"oh no a cost of living crisis?!? lets vote for the CONSERVATIVES!!! they'll totally fix it and not just make things worse for their own gain!!!!" ~idiots in my country /sigh
That’s conservatism explained quite well
My grandson was on a job in Liverpool. Had to return to London because his landlord is broke. Literally over night.
You don't pay CGT on your primary residence if it's your only residence.
Lots of older people have a spare house as their retirement fund. They saved enough to get a mortgage (and where lucky enough to live in a time that was possible) have tenants to pay the mortgage and then can sell it in order to retire. These aren’t rich corporations. More importantly this inevitably hurts everyone. The demand for somewhere to live is the same or growing but the number of places letting you rent has decreased. As a result more high rise properties are being built to meet the demand, and are able to be listed at a higher price point because the demand is there.
As a landlord, I've never bought a property that wasn't derelict, in a state of disrepair or ran by a slum landlord.
Every property I've redone, got all the certification up to date and rented to local families. I've bought all in cash as me and my wife are able to live on a single salary and the other goes on investments. I don’t have a pension as I'm self-employed consultant and chose against putting money in where the age of retirement keeps increasing.
All my tenants are happy with me as a landlord, I've put houses on the private rental sector that wasn't available before or was ran badly and this is basically my pension.
I know many other landlords, most with half a dozen houses or less, again it's a pension for them, most self employed without investments or private pensions until they bought houses in their 50s for retirement income.
Landlords leaving are those overleveraged and many of those houses are being scooped up by corporations and the banks are building portfolios in residential properties to let too. Those asking for landlords leaving or happy about it will get a big shock when the corporation monopoly increases and the rents and affordability becomes like Ireland.
I can’t care about why, I want to be able to rely on a government that simply fixes it OR doesn’t let it get this bad in the first place. What are we paying you for?
If landlords are selling properties - then someone is buying them.....
The new buyers are either buying them to live-in themselves or they are buying them to rent out again...
Hopefully some new home-buyers might now be able to buy their first home...
Swings and Roundabouts really....
First time buyer here and property is slowly going down in price but that’s leaseholds that have sat on the market for months, I’m in a relationship have a good wage and still am struggling!
We have a similar problem in The Netherlands. A new housing law will go in effect at 2024. This means that for private owners with 1 up to 10 houses for rent in the mid segment, the taxes go up significantly, the point system will be more stringent and rent is more regulated. It basically means that mid segment rent will get the same rules as social housing. Small private owners will not get enough rent to live from. The intent of the law was to mitigate the exorbitant rent rises (or even lower the rent) in this sector (mostly caused by high income expats/immigrants), intended for starters on the housing market. But the effect is that home owners are quitting the rent agreement and sell the property to high income people. Because of the housing crises, the price of a house is too high for starters and former starters a few years ago. There is a shortage of houses here and there are not enough houses being built because of slow licensing and environmental objections (also caused by the government/parliament itself). The government and parliament moved the whole country into a corner, the government collapsed, elections are in November and now we’re also in a (mild) recession. The government was warned for the effect of mid rent houses being sold, but wanted to appease the left parties in parliament (the government coalition has a majority in parliament, but not in the senate). Starters and even former starters of a few years ago, go back to live with their parents or move to a holiday bungalow, where it is illegal to live permanently. It is a big mess.
The point of this law is to create a monopoly of corporation landlords, where only large corporates can become landlords. I doubt this will help the situation for people in your country. Only the free market can make the necessary corrections to bring prices back to equilibrium. Restrictions on building, restrictions on renting, restrictions on selling all create black markets or monopolies - none are good for society.
Taxing short term rentals/rental homes just flat out wont work as the biggest players will absorb the cost with ease. Corporations need to be outright banned from owning single family housing.
Politics is about trade offs, not solutions. If you decide that landlords have too much power and campaign for rental reform and higher taxes on landlords. You can then not be surprised that rents go up when less people decide they want to be a landlord.
But those landlords don't demolish the house when they sell. The house will either go to another landlord, or will go to someone intending to live in the home. If that someone was a renter, then one fewer houses in the rental market and one fewer renters is a zero sum. If it goes to another landlord, zero sum. If it goes to someone who already owned a home, then the home they moved out of has the same maths.
If every landlord sold their extra properties tomorrow, what you'd have is a lot more home owners.
@@OriginalPiManwhat you will have is a lot of renters spending thousands each to move house, getting very stressed and being in a worse financial position than before and probably paying more rent. You get a more competitive housing market, where house prices will fall, while interests rates are much higher than not long ago so buyers pay the same. So everyone who has to do anything ends up worse off. But those with cash to burn can buy up property and the rich get richer again.
@@OriginalPiMan That only makes sense if a) we have an abundance of housing stock, and b) the population isn't growing. Both of those things aren't true in the UK. Less rental properties when the demand is going up, means more competition for the renters and means that landlords can demand higher rents. Another way to look at the stats is, even though the number of rental properties has gone down by a 1/3 from last year, there are less % of the population as home owners this year, than last year.
@@BumbleyBoo
Housing stock and population changes are just different forces on house and rental prices. They move house and rental prices in the same directions regardless of whether landlords decided to sell en masse.
@@piraterubberduck6056
Interest rates won't always be high, so the reduced prices still produce a net benefit for those able to buy in for the first time.
They aren't. If they were we could afford to buy a house, because buying is cheaper than renting.
When will the government understand that social housing is a part of the country's infrastructure (like roads, motorways, railways etc.)? In the 70s, people paid 20-30% of their salary towards flats. A college professor and a manual labourer could all rent and have a life. And then came a decision by one famous politician to sell a part of the country's infrastructure in order to advance people from working to the middle class and win their votes (aka selling council flats). And this is what we are paying for now. I have been paying 75%-50% of my salary towards rent. I cannot afford to have children, I cannot afford to even save for the deposit to buy a property and honesty, I cannot see this situation improving 🤷🏻♀
Short term rental crisis for long term benefit maybe? If it compresses the value of houses, it might put more of those properties into homeowners hands rather than landlords. But interest rates after affecting those looking for new mortgages as well. In an ideal world, those buy to let mortgages will keep high rates as regular mortgages fall. Would be an easy tax to introduce imo. It would be popular with most of the country, but not with a large chunk of the Tory base, so probably won't happen anytime soon
People who can't get on to the market won't benefit
probably by design so the Tories can buy up there old properties
So it’s Tories exploiting other Tories. I don’t know how I’ll cope with the grief.
@@ShaunieDale well, im going to lose my home soon and i never voted for the tories in my life. i just cant cope with needing to find an extra 7 grand a year from nowhere. and that was on a 120k mortgage. im not a landlord btw. i live here, for now anyway :(
@@kanedNunable but I’m not talking about you am I ? The topic is about landlords losing out.
Similar No interest deducibility rules applied in New Zealand for residential rentals way after UK introduced it. Main centers had 30% drop in property prices here in NZ in last 18 months.
I live in California... interesting to read how people demonize those who worked harder or risked more in the same fashion. Lazy people, the world over, offer the same crying and whining stories!
If you buy a home and dont pay the mortgage you get evicted. Why should it be different for tenants ? Why should banks be allowed to evict, but not landlords ?
I m a landlord my buy to let mortgage is £500 , service charge is £240 monthly + 20% income tax, I m charging £990 a month, I haven't even add any plumbing , electrician, damaged good costs etc, it's getting ridiculous.
Then leave it for a genuine family in need..live in your house and go for a job
Get a job
It's almost like basing your entire system of housing on a for profit system can backfire when there is a huge recession and inflation. There will be a huge spike in homelessness. Which will further impact the economy, as people who do those jobs at sainsburys, your local gas station and so on. Will need to be paid more. To stay and work in thier local areas. Thus driving prices up. Basically it's a cycle that impacts the economy by making it more costly for workers to live in certain areas. Honestly, caps on energy, housing and food. Is one of the only stop gaps u can implement short term to stop this from happening.
I live in the USA and airbnb is the next monster. Now we are talking day rates, that go up or down completely unregulated.
Feeling bad for landlords is like feeling bad for bankers who only get a 20% bonus and raise compared to 25%
Landlords reduce prices when demand goes down, as was seen in London during the pandemic.
I think you let personal bias slip into the conclusions on this one.
Yeah rent prices can stay up when out of country owners are at play who own several hundred thousand units. But most rental units are owned by landlords who have less than 3 units. And those can't be left empty so prices go up and down to match the market rate. Since 2006 my rental property has went on the market for less than the previous tenant was paying on 8 occasions
I presume they meant "landlords don't reduce prices for their current tenant". Yeah when their tenant goes f-this and leaves for a cheaper place, the place usually sits empty for a while until the landlord admits they're dumb and lowers the price.
Would be interested to know if houses previously for rent has been sold in the past years, who has bought them? mainly renters who could afford manovering to a property ownership, or big companies with access to cheaper money? It could be argue that the former do not neccessarily put pressure on rents by itself to go up as demand/offer is cancelled out. Neverthelees, it makes sense to expect a rent rise in the later. This translates into a tendency for accumulation of wealth for the higher classes and impoverishment of the middle and lower classes. Being more than 80% of UK middle and working class... how are this policies allowed?!
This is a good thing. If landlords can afford it, it sells, which increases the supply of houses on the market aka rents could become buyers
Now introduce a massive vacancy tax to prevent large capital investors from buying the housing and sitting on it