Landlordism 2.0

[Mike Tyson]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

[Look-Up!]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

Glad you clarified you think it's idiotic to be paying a mortgage on a rental property and not collecting rent.

[Mike Tyson]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

Glad you clarified you think it's idiotic to be paying a mortgage on a rental property and not collecting rent.

Of course it's idiotic, equally as idiotic as taking on a mortgage without the ability to repay it independently of rental income. Basic affordability rules.

[Look-Up!]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

Glad you clarified you think it's idiotic to be paying a mortgage on a rental property and not collecting rent.

Of course it's idiotic, equally as idiotic as taking on a mortgage without the ability to repay it independently of rental income. Basic affordability rules.

People borrow all the time on good faith. Business people borrow on the strength of their company and projected revenues. If it goes tits up there's no alternative affordability rules. People with jobs borrow on the strength of their future earning potential. If they lose job or get sick and can't pay the mortgage there's no alternative affordability rules. The house goes.
Renting property is no different. People borrow to get into the game or expand their business. Expecting a return on a highly valuable asset like a house is hardly idiotic.

[Mike Tyson]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

Glad you clarified you think it's idiotic to be paying a mortgage on a rental property and not collecting rent.

Of course it's idiotic, equally as idiotic as taking on a mortgage without the ability to repay it independently of rental income. Basic affordability rules.

People borrow all the time on good faith. Business people borrow on the strength of their company and projected revenues. If it goes tits up there's no alternative affordability rules. People with jobs borrow on the strength of their future earning potential. If they lose job or get sick and can't pay the mortgage there's no alternative affordability rules. The house goes.
Renting property is no different. People borrow to get into the game or expand their business. Expecting a return on a highly valuable asset like a house is hardly idiotic.

Expecting it to carry no risk is.

The risk is this instance is a landlord cannot get tenants to pay their rental mortgage. Tough shit, that's the risk they took when agreeing a buy to let mortgage.

Again, if you can't afford a rental property without income from tenants you shouldn't have taken it on.

[Armagh18]

And the notion of having tenants and not collecting rent. That's just a ridiculous scenario to be advocating.

Never suggested that at all. Don't know where you got that idiotic idea from.

Glad you clarified you think it's idiotic to be paying a mortgage on a rental property and not collecting rent.

Of course it's idiotic, equally as idiotic as taking on a mortgage without the ability to repay it independently of rental income. Basic affordability rules.

People borrow all the time on good faith. Business people borrow on the strength of their company and projected revenues. If it goes tits up there's no alternative affordability rules. People with jobs borrow on the strength of their future earning potential. If they lose job or get sick and can't pay the mortgage there's no alternative affordability rules. The house goes.
Renting property is no different. People borrow to get into the game or expand their business. Expecting a return on a highly valuable asset like a house is hardly idiotic.

Expecting it to carry no risk is.

The risk is this instance is a landlord cannot get tenants to pay their rental mortgage. Tough shit, that's the risk they took when agreeing a buy to let mortgage.

Again, if you can't afford a rental property without income from tenants you shouldn't have taken it on.

I find it hard to believe theres any landlord that cant find a tenant. Are you trying to say if the tenants dont bother paying rent then it's just tough shit for the land lord?

[Mike Tyson]

Expecting it to carry no risk is.

The risk is this instance is a landlord cannot get tenants to pay their rental mortgage. Tough shit, that's the risk they took when agreeing a buy to let mortgage.

Again, if you can't afford a rental property without income from tenants you shouldn't have taken it on.

I find it hard to believe theres any landlord that cant find a tenant. Are you trying to say if the tenants dont bother paying rent then it's just tough shit for the land lord?

No, I'm saying if you can't afford your rental mortgage without income from tenants, then you shouldn't have one in the first instance. Tough shit.

[seafoid]

If there are 60,000 people who in other times would be in social housing now housed in the private sector and inflation is at 8% and the 60,000 people are mostly low paid, what is most likely to happen ?

[armaghniac]

No, I'm saying if you can't afford your rental mortgage without income from tenants, then you shouldn't have one in the first instance. Tough shit.

Renting property is a business, you have to cover your costs. If there was a general inability to cover costs then the house would not have been rented out in the first place and so the tenants would never have had a house.

[seafoid]

The tenants from the social housing section are the poorest. House prices are the highest in at least 13 years. Plus you have inflation.
And pay rises are limited.
The whole system is a joke. We need to get house prices down to fix this.

[trueblue1234]

Expecting it to carry no risk is.

The risk is this instance is a landlord cannot get tenants to pay their rental mortgage. Tough shit, that's the risk they took when agreeing a buy to let mortgage.

Again, if you can't afford a rental property without income from tenants you shouldn't have taken it on.

I find it hard to believe theres any landlord that cant find a tenant. Are you trying to say if the tenants dont bother paying rent then it's just tough shit for the land lord?

No, I'm saying if you can't afford your rental mortgage without income from tenants, then you shouldn't have one in the first instance. Tough shit.

So do you think there should be any actions available for landlords in cases where tenants don't pay rent? Or just tough sh!t and they should absorb the cost?

[thewobbler]

No, I'm saying if you can't afford your rental mortgage without income from tenants, then you shouldn't have one in the first instance. Tough shit.

Renting property is a business, you have to cover your costs. If there was a general inability to cover costs then the house would not have been rented out in the first place and so the tenants would never have had a house.

This is nonsense.

House prices, and therefore mortgages, and therefore rent, are not determined by the usual rules of supply and demand. These figures are determined by speculation levels and investment levels.

The problem is that all that speculation, all that investment, has reached a point whereby housing of any shape or form is an unaffordable proposition for a hefty and growing percentage of the population. Mr "quick buck" who took on a property or two at maximum LtV, and needing rent to always cover his mortgage is, clean and simple, fucked. He can't afford to do anything other than increase the rent, and nobody in his target market can afford to pay his new mortgage rate for him.

So we now in a situation where people are now both metaphorically and physically sleeping outside vacant properties.

f**k the landlords. f**k the greedy, skill less c***ts.

[Rossfan]

Why don't you try howling at the moon?

[east down gael]

Is the problem not that landlords are charging way and above the mortgage on the property? That would just be pure greed.

[CK_Redhand]

No, I'm saying if you can't afford your rental mortgage without income from tenants, then you shouldn't have one in the first instance. Tough shit.

Renting property is a business, you have to cover your costs. If there was a general inability to cover costs then the house would not have been rented out in the first place and so the tenants would never have had a house.

This is nonsense.

House prices, and therefore mortgages, and therefore rent, are not determined by the usual rules of supply and demand. These figures are determined by speculation levels and investment levels.

The problem is that all that speculation, all that investment, has reached a point whereby housing of any shape or form is an unaffordable proposition for a hefty and growing percentage of the population. Mr "quick buck" who took on a property or two at maximum LtV, and needing rent to always cover his mortgage is, clean and simple, fucked. He can't afford to do anything other than increase the rent, and nobody in his target market can afford to pay his new mortgage rate for him.

So we now in a situation where people are now both metaphorically and physically sleeping outside vacant properties.

f**k the landlords. f**k the greedy, skill less c***ts.

I dont understand this statement in bold. Speculation and investment levels are more complicated ways of saying demand.