X

Sign Up

or

By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Sign Up

Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google

or


By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions


Already a PT member? Log In

Log In

or


Don't have an account? Sign Up

Forgot Password

To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.


Already a PT member? Log In

Don't have an account? Sign Up

  • Tax

    November 2017 Budget

    Any predictions for what is likely to be included?

    We are told that it is to include incentives for long term tenancies - 12 months plus?  This would need to also appeal to low leaveraged landlords.

    Any additional incentives for FTBs?

    Could there be action on pensions?

    Any ideas?

    0
    0

    Doesn't matter what Govt says it cannot require lenders to let LL  have longer AST

    It is the lenders that control what a LL  does

    Govt doesn't seem to understand  this basic premise

    So before Govt keeps banging on about long period tenancies it needs to persuade  lenders to remove the restrictions  from mortgage conditions.

    Most lenders still have such AST length restrictions

    Also while they are persuading lenders on this they should also get them to drop the no HB tenants condition.

    It is disgraceful that a lender can require a LL  to let to only tenants who do not receive Govt HB.

    Banning LL  from letting to HB tenants is outright  discrimination and lenders should be forced to drop such conditions.

    A HB  tenant is just  as good as any other tenant.

    They pay with coin of the realm like any other tenant.

    Why is HB money deemed to be less worthy than private money?

    Whilst they are at it they should require insurers to stop charging higher premiums if tenants are on HB.

    Hammond is supposedly going to announce more housing spend.

    Small developers will receive incentives

    The PRS  will get nothing least of all S24 abolishing.

    Expect more penal regulations to drive the PRS  out of business.

    0
    0

    I would like to think that if planning longer AST`s they have done the background work with lenders prior to making any formal announcement

    Lenders can then  send out an agreed amendment to the lending conditions. As long as its not detrimental to their security they will have agreed this change so government will have put safeguards in place for them so they are not disadvantaged

    But longer AST`s do not suit everyone . I give all mine the option at the end of the 1st 6 mths fixed to go to an SPT or renew at 6 or 12 mths.

    99% say let it go to an SPT.    I sense they fear being trapped just as much as we do

    Or maybe its just the £150 fee I say I would charge them  for a new AST ( joking )

    0
    0

    Jonathan Clarke. http://www.buytoletmk.com

    I think after the election and the result The Conservatives  will do very little this time around

    Give it Three Years and they will be giving sweeteners  away


    0
    0

    Learn Change and Adapt ?????

    I dont know really if I`m honest 

    Its all so up in the air with Brexit that we are just a sideshow

    I tend to agree with DL .

    There will be the normal tinkering but any big policy shift to potentially help us / tenants will be in about 3 years

    S24 hasnt even bitten in real terms yet . We have to wait till  April next year

    Even then its just the beginning.

    The LL voice will be  a lot louder come 2020

    The voice of the tenants will be a lot louder come  2020

    Homeless figures will be maybe doubled by then  with a tsunami of evictions

    I can see them announcing a new housing quango  to look at UC / AST`s/ S24 / housing tenure etc

    Its needs it  - as by 2020 if something is not done the build up of resentment by all sides will reach fever pitch

    They need to head off that looming disaster or else they may  lose the election  

    So they can debate it further for 18mths seek evidence from all sides ( PT will be a valued  source document for them  )

    Then they produce a report with recommendations and in 2 years a major announcement may bring better news for LL `s

    In return we will offer concessions which may be beneficial to us and tenants  in the long run anyway

    1
    0

    Jonathan Clarke. http://www.buytoletmk.com

    Doesn't matter what the current Govt does

    They won't be the next Govt

    Labour will be in charge until all the idiot Corbynisatas reaslise the disaster they have elected.

    I will have left the PRS just as Labour are being elected

    Thank God!

    0
    0

    There is speculation that Hammond needs to come up with something to start winning back the young vote so I tend to think he can’t just tinker round the edges but needs to come up with something radical.

    0
    0

    If he Hammond stated tax was increasing by a penny in the pound and it was going to be spent on millions of council houses and building new garden cities do you think many would  object.

    Cos I wouldn't

    I resent having to do so.

    But I accept this is to pay for Labour allowing mass uncontrolled  immigration

    The taxpayer must pay.

    The population  must be housed decently and affordably.

    Next to food it is the most important thing to most people.

    The private builder and PRS is just not the answer

    Only State provision can supply what is required with private builders and the PRS hanging on the State's coat tails!

    0
    0

    We do not need millions more homes

    We are building roughly the right number for population growth

    The average home in the UK only has 2.3 people living in it

    Residential floor space per capita is at all time highs

    0
    0

    I sort of see where you are coming from

    Yes there are millions of unoccupied spare rooms

    I don't think tenants and homeowners are prepared to have billeting imposed on them just yet!!

    But if all of a sudden 2 million had to be housed  them compulsory  billeting would bring more than sufficient  accommodation!

    It would be a socialist response

    Socialism only really works during war time.

    We aren't at war...........yet!

    Though the NK situation  is looking decidedly dodgy!!




    0
    0

    I am not saying that there are spare rooms in owner homes that can be used, those cant be used

    What I am saying is that by any actual evidence we have more housing than at any other time in history.

    House prices can be high yet the nation be housed well. In shanty towns the houses are really cheap but people are very poorly housed. In kensington house prices are very high but the people of kensington are housed well.

    The problem is people simply think high house prices = housing shortage when that is too simplistic and simply wrong

    We have sufficient housing for the nation as we stand.
    The reason the south is expensive is because the economy of London has been booming for 20 years.
    The reason the north is cheap is because the economy of the north has been in recession or stagnant for 20 years

    The country needs roughly 200,000 homes a year and we build close to that.
    Anyone who claims there is a housing shortage is just mouthing off on something they haven't thought through
    For a start there is clearly a massive difference between the regions. You cant just say there is a housing shortgage as you need to consider the regions. For instance house prices in Wales Scotland N-Ireland NE NW Y&H are so cheap that buying a FTB property in those regions is cheaper than renting social homes. When buying a house is cheaper than renting social stock then clearly there is no problem or shortage at all in those regions.

    I think the closest thing to the truth is to say

    Scotland Wales N-Ireland NE NW Y&H have no housing problem at all those areas are not only affordable but CHEAP

    The W-Midlands and E-Midlands have no problem and the housing there is affordable.

    Only London and some parts of the SE are expensive but they are affordable for the people who want to live there.
    We could build a lot more homes in London but houses would not get cheaper in London instead the roughly 100,000 people who leave London annually would no longer leave. And the 200,000 gross who arrive will become 300,000 gross who arrive. The result would be that with much more house building in London (say 100,000 units a year) London would go from a growth rate of +100,000 annually to +300,000 annually

    What that would do is make London boom even more, and make the rest of the country grow even slower

    Overall there is no problem

    0
    0