• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

ricky2tricky4city said:
Much like Mutley is doing...the mini private landlords have been squeezed out by policy or interest rates. I know 4 people who are selling up personally...so I don't doubt there are thousands doing the same.
But the market isn't crashing from over supply. It's stalling/stagnating for sure. It's probably because the new buyer in the room is corporates. Ideally, as @Gutter Boy suggests prices would fall to fix the affordability rungs at the lower part of the property ladder BUT successive governments have done all they can to prop up and keep rising prices ticking along. And that creates two outcomes...the unaffordability that we see (creating an army of renters, possibly for life). Complete fear of the banks, as at the end of the day, they're the asset holders of all mortgaged property...and a crash would destroy that asset value. (hence the last time the banks fudged up...we (artificially) zero interest rated for years to keep all their commitments above water)
Click to expand...

But the problem in a post Brexit world is that the government is scared to raise business taxes even though they know the housing market shifts to corporates who aren't paying the same tax as the private landlord. They are offsetting the property debt in their P&L, reducing their company profit and not paying HMRC tax. The tenants are now buying houses for the companies.

It took 5 years on a declining scale for mortgages to get eliminated from a private landlords calculation for tax. They need the same disincentive for companies.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
You can't do that though as times have moved on. 60-70% of adults in this country own a house via a mortgage. Not only would what you suggest put millions into negative equity it would also massively devalue mortgaged backed securities and destroy retail bank asset portfolios causing a repeat of the financial crisis.
Click to expand...
I thought it was around 30% or are you including buy to let and commercial mortgages in that percentage?
 
Last edited:
Muttley said:
But the problem in a post Brexit world is that the government is scared to raise business taxes even though they know the housing market shifts to corporates who aren't paying the same tax as the private landlord. They are offsetting the property debt in their P&L, reducing their company profit and not paying HMRC tax. The tenants are now buying houses for the companies.

It took 5 years on a declining scale for mortgages to get eliminated from a private landlords calculation for tax. They need the same disincentive for companies.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The government are between a rock and a hard place. They're skint as well...so get played by the wealthy. Follow the money.

The overall UK property landscape needs a remix, but it's gonna take a strong minded human to implement that. And in political circles that's rare as hens teeth.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
You can't do that though as times have moved on. 60-70% of adults in this country own a house via a mortgage. Not only would what you suggest put millions into negative equity it would also massively devalue mortgaged backed securities and destroy retail bank asset portfolios causing a repeat of the financial crisis.
Click to expand...
The point is generational wealth redistribution. To stop boomers being the only people who can own property. To bring house ownership within reach of the under 50s.

And surely its not 60-70% of adults have mortgages? Its 60-70% of people who own homes have mortgages. There's also the majority of the population who are being denied home ownership by the rigging of the current system.

The introduction of rent caps worked very successfully in the 1920s. Private renting virtually died out, whilst home ownership and council housing quickly filled the gap.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I thought it was around 30% or are you including but to let and commercial mortgages in that percentage?
Click to expand...
Way off. Having checked properly it's 65% of all UK households own their own home. Does vary significantly by demographic though:
- 70% of white British
- 68% of British Indian
- much lower for other ethnic groups with the lowest being mixed white/black and black other (down at 14 and 16%)

Age distribution of home owners:
- 65+: 36%
- 55-64: 20%
- 45-54: 18%
- 35-44: 15.1%
- 25-34: 10.2%
- 16-24: 0.7%
 
Gutter Boy said:
The point is generational wealth redistribution. To stop boomers being the only people who can own property. To bring house ownership within reach of the under 50s.

And surely its not 60-70% of adults have mortgages? Its 60-70% of people who own homes have mortgages. There's also the majority of the population who are being denied home ownership by the rigging of the current system.

The introduction of rent caps worked very successfully in the 1920s. Private renting virtually died out, whilst home ownership and council housing quickly filled the gap.
Click to expand...
Boomers aren't the only people that can afford houses, that is a myth.

It is 65% of households in Britain own their home. Not all of them will be mortgaged.

UK Finance state members told them there were 8.5 million outstanding residential mortgage loans at 2022 and 2 million buy to let loans.

Although mortgage applications are increasing - the FCA data states that the value of outstanding mortgage balances in 2025 was 2.6% higher than 2024 and the 2024 balance was 50.4% higher than in 2023.

In terms of new lending there were for example 77.5 million new advances in Q1 2025 of which 31.27% were for house purchases by first-time buyers.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Way off. Having checked properly it's 65% of all UK households own their own home. Does vary significantly by demographic though:
- 70% of white British
- 68% of British Indian
- much lower for other ethnic groups with the lowest being mixed white/black and black other (down at 14 and 16%)

Age distribution of home owners:
- 65+: 36%
- 55-64: 20%
- 45-54: 18%
- 35-44: 15.1%
- 25-34: 10.2%
- 16-24: 0.7%
Click to expand...
You were talking about the % owned via a mortgage in the original post.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
You were talking about the % owned via a mortgage in the original post.
Click to expand...
Most properties owned will have been owned via a mortgage at some point.

But if you want mortgage % the total number of "households" in the UK is 28.6 million.

65% own the home = 18.59 million.

There are 8.5 million outstanding mortgages at 2022. While thats increased since i'd say roughly half the home owning population in the UK have an outstanding mortgage.
 
Gutter Boy said:
The introduction of rent caps worked very successfully in the 1920s. Private renting virtually died out, whilst home ownership and council housing quickly filled the gap.
Click to expand...

Very different things. Rent caps one hundred years ago were based on the concept of council houses. It was a very different world.

What you're now implying is that a landlord can perhaps receive £1200 a month rent on a 2 bedder and it is capped. Typically letting agent fees are 10-15% and it's a risky game not using these guys. Say the landlord has a £150k loan and is paying £750 a month on an interest only mortgage. So the landlord has to also pay tax on £14k rental income less deductions. That £14k is on top of his/her salary and likely in the 40% tax bracket. So that's another £500 a month coming out of the £1200.

That rent has to be at £1400 before a theoretical break even is reached. It's probably more like £1600 in real terms because landlords pay leasehold fees like ground rent and maintenance. They also have running costs for repairs etc.

So for landlords the rental cap needs to be around £1800 to give them an incentive to even be involved. Even then, you're probably better off investing your money elsewhere. Nobody wants tenants paying £1800 "dead money" for a 2 bedder on top of their monthly bills. They want them owning houses.

Rental caps will make things worse in my opinion. It has to be a joined up strategy, not a blunt object.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Most properties owned will have been owned via a mortgage at some point.

But if you want mortgage % the total number of "households" in the UK is 28.6 million.

65% own the home = 18.59 million.

There are 8.5 million outstanding mortgages at 2022. While thats increased since i'd say roughly half the home owning population in the UK have an outstanding mortgage.
Click to expand...

Great data. What's the trend though. Which direction is it going? I am surprised so many people own house outright. Obviously, for those that do, inheritance tax can be a natural reducer of these numbers.

Is there any data on how many of those mortgages are landlord mortgages, and which ones are interest only? Surely, there's a chunk of this data where one person can have multiple mortgages.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Most properties owned will have been owned via a mortgage at some point.

But if you want mortgage % the total number of "households" in the UK is 28.6 million.

65% own the home = 18.59 million.

There are 8.5 million outstanding mortgages at 2022. While thats increased since i'd say roughly half the home owning population in the UK have an outstanding mortgage.
Click to expand...
So miraculously we're talking about 30% of total properties. Roll eyes.
 
Muttley said:
Very different things. Rent caps one hundred years ago were based on the concept of council houses. It was a very different world.

What you're now implying is that a landlord can perhaps receive £1200 a month rent on a 2 bedder and it is capped. Typically letting agent fees are 10-15% and it's a risky game not using these guys. Say the landlord has a £150k loan and is paying £750 a month on an interest only mortgage. So the landlord has to also pay tax on £14k rental income less deductions. That £14k is on top of his/her salary and likely in the 40% tax bracket. So that's another £500 a month coming out of the £1200.

That rent has to be at £1400 before a theoretical break even is reached. It's probably more like £1600 in real terms because landlords pay leasehold fees like ground rent and maintenance. They also have running costs for repairs etc.

So for landlords the rental cap needs to be around £1800 to give them an incentive to even be involved. Even then, you're probably better off investing your money elsewhere. Nobody wants tenants paying £1800 "dead money" for a 2 bedder on top of their monthly bills. They want them owning houses.

Rental caps will make things worse in my opinion. It has to be a joined up strategy, not a blunt object.
Click to expand...
The difference is a 'professional' landlord is solely concerned with yield. Capital gains is a bonus.

The issue with you're 'better investing your money point' is you're not investing 'your' money (beyond deposit), you're looking to gain by leveraging someone else's money. You don't have that lump sum yourself.

I think the other points describe why rents have soared. BTL owners trying to make the sums add up, luckily having an increasing market of people who have no choice but to rent. But now's looks like the squeeze and attractiveness of such an investment has become too much.

Social housing has to be a big new part of the mix, and innovative housing construction (techniques, materials, technology) needs to come to the fore, especially in the small unit area. (Which would help the bottom rungs of the ladder). Much of modern house building is stuck in the 80s and 90s and quality control is iffy at best.
 
You know what's fun to see. The right leaning members are furiously posting about Rayner and her stamp duty but are conveniently ignoring their Dad Farage getting his ass handed to him in the US. And being a treasonous little cretin.

And yes Rayner is terrible and probably needs to be sacked. But she's no worse than half the cabinet.

We must accept our MPs are generally talentless or insincere scum. Or both. And occasionally we might get someone with principles.
 
LutonSpurs said:
You know what's fun to see. The right leaning members are furiously posting about Rayner and her stamp duty but are conveniently ignoring their Dad Farage getting his ass handed to him in the US. And being a treasonous little cretin.

And yes Rayner is terrible and probably needs to be sacked. But she's no worse than half the cabinet.

We must accept our MPs are generally talentless or insincere scum. Or both. And occasionally we might get someone with principles.
Click to expand...

I don't think we have to accept it, we just do and that's the sad part.
We should be aiming for a higher standard of public servant, but too many can't or won't accept that their side can be wrong.
Wrong is wrong.
It's better to call it out and take the initial heat than to stay quiet and reap the consequences latter.
You've sold out your principles by then and you'll never get them back.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
The difference is a 'professional' landlord is solely concerned with yield. Capital gains is a bonus.

The issue with you're 'better investing your money point' is you're not investing 'your' money (beyond deposit), you're looking to gain by leveraging someone else's money. You don't have that lump sum yourself.

I think the other points describe why rents have soared. BTL owners trying to make the sums add up, luckily having an increasing market of people who have no choice but to rent. But now's looks like the squeeze and attractiveness of such an investment has become too much.

Social housing has to be a big new part of the mix, and innovative housing construction (techniques, materials, technology) needs to come to the fore, especially in the small unit area. (Which would help the bottom rungs of the ladder). Much of modern house building is stuck in the 80s and 90s and quality control is iffy at best.
Click to expand...

You are right. For private landlords, deposits have to be 25% of the value of the property and you have to find stamp duty + 5% on top.

It's pretty clear in my model that you're not really leveraging other people's money to make money. You are under water on a monthly basis. Unless you have your rent sky high you're actually subsidising them in today's climate. Hence why you're seeing the exodus of private landlords.

Take a £300k property. Your deposit is £75k and you have to pay £20k stamp duty. Add in all of the other expenses like estate agents fees and conveyancing that goes with buying a house. You probably have to find £105k to own a £75k stake in the property. Say you're a 40% tax payer and let's say the letting agent fees are 10%. Your interest only mortgage at today's interest rates will be at least a grand.

There is only one way you can recover you £30k loss at the point of purchase (by leveraging other peoples money) and that is if house prices increase. That is not happening in this climate.

That's why it's a professional landlord's game now. You have to put it into the mix of a company's P&L.

I guess in some ways it's no different from company directors not receiving PAYE, and paying themselves in dividends. We've always known there is an inequity between the 2 things. That's why government policy needs to address the professional landlords who tend to be worse landlords for the tenant than the private landlords. They fully leverage themselves and leave no cashflow for important upkeep and maintenance. Property maintenance companies are also incredibly poor based on my own experiences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back