Its been one of those days today. I've spent a lot of time on the telephone to Housing Benefit offices in three different local authorities, and postponed the call to a fourth till tomorrow. I'm tired, frustrated, and down right angry. And tired of well meaning but largely powerless council staff trying to explain to me how the LHA scheme works-as if I didn't know already. Oh yes sir, don't I just know how it works.
The people in gofmint that thought up the LHA scheme and insisted on having LHA paid direct to tenant in all cases, and the civil servants that drew up the guidelines, have a lot to answer for. They just haven't got a clue about the damage they have caused with their do-gooding ideas.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for empowering people and encouraging them to exercise their rights to this and that and the other. But with rights come responsibilities. The two go hand in hand, like the two halves of a pair of scissors. You can't have rights without responsibilities. Too often people focus on their rights, conveniently forgetting their responsibilities, and that's why the LHA is not working. Frankly, by not including any repercussions or sanctions for failure to use the LHA correctly, the gofmint opened the floodgates to fraud. Lets call a spade a spade, okay, and not a digging implement. Accepting LHA and then using it for purposes other than rent is theft, fraud, stealing, robbery.... you get the jist. It is government-sanctioned daylight robbery. But does the gofmint see it that way? Oh no. If that is what this gofmint calls empowering, then I think we are in deep deep trouble here. We already are in trouble anyway.
I do (sometimes) feel for the council staff at the benefit offices. Theirs is not an easy task, and being on the receiving end of the anger and frustration of landlords who have been robbed by tenants, cannot be a good experience. Perhaps the gofmint would be wise to actually conduct a proper survey of the benefit office staff, and hence get another enlightening view to assist with their enquiry into the LHA scheme.
Here endeth my day of chasing LHA payments: (i) Two different councils failed to pay LHA into nominated credit union accounts, even where details were specified fully on application forms, (ii) where tenant is more than 2 months in arrears (including time served), request made 2 weeks ago to pay landlord direct, but council still "investigating with tenant", and (iii) where benefit suspended.. for unknown reasons.
If I were a drinking person, I'd be downing a few shots of whisky by now. But, I'll just have to make do with a cup of tea.....
Monday 26 October 2009
Saturday 24 October 2009
Government Signals U-turn on LHA
The government, via the House of Commons Works and Pensions Committee, has indicated it will carry out a review of the LHA system later this year. This comes in the face of campaigning by landlords organisations NLA and RLA following the rollout of the system in April 2008 and the subsequent humonguous losses suffered by landlords as a result of tenants deciding not to pass on the LHA to their landlords.
If you are a landlord, and have tenants in receipt of LHA, you should have your say by filling in the online questionnare. What is the saying that .. "bad things happen when good people do nothing"... Let's each do something to redress the balance.
The RLA have a comprehensive questionnare, so please go to Full LHA Survey.
At the end of it, you can and should also download a template letter to complete and send to your MP.
The NLA have a shorter version which is Postcard LHA Survey
Come on people, lets tell the gofmint exactly what we think of their "air-brained" scheme.
1. Whilst I think that the idea of using the market rents is fair, and simple to calculate, and determining the allowance based on room needs/requirements, the implementation of it by the various Councils leaves a lot to be desired.
2. What happened to the fundamental right of the tenant to choose to pay the allowance to the Landlord? Most of them want it paid direct anyway, and are surprised that they are not allowed to (nanny gofmint..).
3. And why are there no deterrents put in place for those who might be tempted to use the LHA for something other than rent? when taxpayer's money has been given to the tenant to use for rent and tenant misuses it, is that not fraud or theft??
4. What happened to the right of the taxpaying public to expect accountability for their taxes paid in good faith and given to claimants for the specific purpose of paying rent?
5. Why must landlords suffer at least 8 weeks of lost rent before being able to get the LHA paid direct? And how are we supposed to recoup the spent LHA from people with little or no assets? I suppose we can flog the 40inch plasma screens .... We can't claim lost rent on expenses now can we???
Think again, gofmint. Enough is enough. We are not charities, nor do we have deep pockets. We are small businesses being strangled slowly and surely. The banks to whom you gave our tax money are hoarding it and not giving us any. They pull our overdrafts, refuse to give us credit for anything-not even for retraining, and hike our repayment rates and interest charges and all those other charges that they dream of. So what, dear gofmint, are you going to do about it??
Over to you folks and fellow landlords. Lets give the gofmint something more useful to work with than their rosy, unrealistic 3-4 year old Pathfinder trial results.
If you are a landlord, and have tenants in receipt of LHA, you should have your say by filling in the online questionnare. What is the saying that .. "bad things happen when good people do nothing"... Let's each do something to redress the balance.
The RLA have a comprehensive questionnare, so please go to Full LHA Survey.
At the end of it, you can and should also download a template letter to complete and send to your MP.
The NLA have a shorter version which is Postcard LHA Survey
Come on people, lets tell the gofmint exactly what we think of their "air-brained" scheme.
1. Whilst I think that the idea of using the market rents is fair, and simple to calculate, and determining the allowance based on room needs/requirements, the implementation of it by the various Councils leaves a lot to be desired.
2. What happened to the fundamental right of the tenant to choose to pay the allowance to the Landlord? Most of them want it paid direct anyway, and are surprised that they are not allowed to (nanny gofmint..).
3. And why are there no deterrents put in place for those who might be tempted to use the LHA for something other than rent? when taxpayer's money has been given to the tenant to use for rent and tenant misuses it, is that not fraud or theft??
4. What happened to the right of the taxpaying public to expect accountability for their taxes paid in good faith and given to claimants for the specific purpose of paying rent?
5. Why must landlords suffer at least 8 weeks of lost rent before being able to get the LHA paid direct? And how are we supposed to recoup the spent LHA from people with little or no assets? I suppose we can flog the 40inch plasma screens .... We can't claim lost rent on expenses now can we???
Think again, gofmint. Enough is enough. We are not charities, nor do we have deep pockets. We are small businesses being strangled slowly and surely. The banks to whom you gave our tax money are hoarding it and not giving us any. They pull our overdrafts, refuse to give us credit for anything-not even for retraining, and hike our repayment rates and interest charges and all those other charges that they dream of. So what, dear gofmint, are you going to do about it??
Over to you folks and fellow landlords. Lets give the gofmint something more useful to work with than their rosy, unrealistic 3-4 year old Pathfinder trial results.
Thursday 22 October 2009
Tories urge tenant benefit change
Yes, now the tories are on to it! and about time too.
The BBC has has the story which says: "Automatic direct payments of housing benefits to private tenants in England should be stopped, the Tories say."
And it goes on further:
"The Conservatives want to allow tenants to choose whether to have benefits paid directly to the landlord or maintain responsibility for passing on rent payments themselves.
At the national conference for homeless charity Crisis, shadow housing minister Grant Shapps said: "Fearful that rent money may never be paid, some landlords routinely include the words NO HB in their ads, further restricting the supply of housing for affordable rent.
"At the same time some of the most chaotic tenants have struggled to manage their finances, meaning that the cash is already spent by rent pay day.
"It strikes me that the current situation is bad for everyone and I can see no reason why people on Local Housing Allowance shouldn't enjoy the freedom to have their Housing Benefit paid direct to their landlord. Our proposal will destigmatise the system and increase the amount of affordable homes available."
Hear! Hear. Freedom of choice was taken away from tenants by the government that insists on being a nanny state. Hopefully sanity will prevail and freedom of choice will be restored, and with it, restore confidence in the benefits system which has seen landlords lose money hand over fist.
Guess what?
"The government say the new system is fairer and simpler than the one it replaced but are beginning a review of the system later in the year"
Government still insists its a great system. But of course they would. Afterall, they've spent taxpayers money to create the "flagship" system, and can't be seen to be backing down or doing a U-turn. It might be fairer in terms of rent calculations, and simpler to implement for the councils, but the insistence on paying the HB to tenant in all but a few cases stinks. I bet you none of these law makers would ever rent to someone on HB, as they know the implications. No rent for 8 weeks, tough. Can't claim it back from someone with no assets, can they? The hypocrisy of it all. How on earth do they expect landlords' businesses to survive in such a situation beats me. But then again, we all know what planet they live on .... gravy train called Westminster. That, explains it all.
The BBC has has the story which says: "Automatic direct payments of housing benefits to private tenants in England should be stopped, the Tories say."
And it goes on further:
"The Conservatives want to allow tenants to choose whether to have benefits paid directly to the landlord or maintain responsibility for passing on rent payments themselves.
At the national conference for homeless charity Crisis, shadow housing minister Grant Shapps said: "Fearful that rent money may never be paid, some landlords routinely include the words NO HB in their ads, further restricting the supply of housing for affordable rent.
"At the same time some of the most chaotic tenants have struggled to manage their finances, meaning that the cash is already spent by rent pay day.
"It strikes me that the current situation is bad for everyone and I can see no reason why people on Local Housing Allowance shouldn't enjoy the freedom to have their Housing Benefit paid direct to their landlord. Our proposal will destigmatise the system and increase the amount of affordable homes available."
Hear! Hear. Freedom of choice was taken away from tenants by the government that insists on being a nanny state. Hopefully sanity will prevail and freedom of choice will be restored, and with it, restore confidence in the benefits system which has seen landlords lose money hand over fist.
Guess what?
"The government say the new system is fairer and simpler than the one it replaced but are beginning a review of the system later in the year"
Government still insists its a great system. But of course they would. Afterall, they've spent taxpayers money to create the "flagship" system, and can't be seen to be backing down or doing a U-turn. It might be fairer in terms of rent calculations, and simpler to implement for the councils, but the insistence on paying the HB to tenant in all but a few cases stinks. I bet you none of these law makers would ever rent to someone on HB, as they know the implications. No rent for 8 weeks, tough. Can't claim it back from someone with no assets, can they? The hypocrisy of it all. How on earth do they expect landlords' businesses to survive in such a situation beats me. But then again, we all know what planet they live on .... gravy train called Westminster. That, explains it all.
Saturday 17 October 2009
When is a tenant 8 weeks in arrears?
You may be wondering why this question is relevant or important. If so, bear with me whilst I enlighten you. A tribunal decision in Coventry is set to shake the current practice of councils paying housing benefit to claimant tenants 4-weeks in arrears. Landlords who have such tenants ... take note.
The Housing Act 1988, Section 8 (as amended by Section 151 of the Housing Act 1996) states that a landlord can serve notice on the tenant to seek possession of a property let on an assured tenancy on grounds of rent arrears, if at least eight weeks rent is unpaid, where the rent is payable weekly or fortnightly, or at least two months rent is unpaid if rent is payable monthly".
Tenancy agreements normally stipulate that rent must be paid weekly or monthly in advance. So tenants are expected to pay rent in advance of the period for which the rent is applicable.That is the liability to pay rent. For example, if rent is due on 1st of each month, and the tenant doesn't pay rent due on 1st Sept and 1st October, then on 2nd October, the tenant already has 2 months rent unpaid, and the landlord can serve notice seeking possession.
The complication arises where a tenant is receiving housing benefit, which councils tend to pay 4 weekly in arrears. So, in the example above, tenant was due to pay rent on 1st September, but didn't get housing benefit until 28th September. Tenant decides not to pay the landlord anyway, and spends it on something else. On 2nd october tenant has two months rent unpaid. On 3rd October, Landlord informs council housing benefit office and requests direct payment, but council insist that tenant is not yet 8 weeks in arrears because 8 weeks of actual time has not elapsed from 1st September to 2nd October even though contractually, tenant is more than 8 weeks in arrears. So, council refuse to pay next lot of housing benefit to landlord, as the law requires them to do. But don't blame the council, its the same government that wrote the law that then gave the guidelines that "DWP takes the view that a person cannot be in rent arrears in respect of a period that has not yet been served". Completely ignoring the contractual obligations that the "person" signed with the landlord.
So, the Guild or Residential Landlords, on behalf of one Landlord, Mr Doncaster decided to take Coventry City Council to court to challenge their decision, and the Tribunal Judge, CJ Jones ruled in his favour.
He said: "In making this decision I have considered the Housing Benefit Local Housing Allowance Guidance Manual as amended in March 2008 and in particular the note at the foot of 6.86 - 6.89 that rent cannot be in arrear in respect of a period that has not been served.
I do not agree with that view. Rent is in arrears once the contractual date for payment has passed irrespective of whether rent is due in advance or in arrear. Regulation 95 of the 2006 Regulations refers to a liability to pay rent and the liability in this case is to pay rent in advance."
Hurray, Hallelujah. At last, someone with clout has pointed out the obvious, something landlords have been saying for yonks and which has fallen on deaf government/council ears.
This judgement has serious implications for all landlords who have tenants in receipt of housing benefits or local housing allowance as it is now called. Maybe common sense will now prevail.
See full story here.
I have already written to one council about problems with a current tenant, and asked what steps they were now going to take in view of this judgement - I got a reply-the usual official jargon, but no answer to the question. So, I'm sending another letter on Monday asking the same question. Watch this space.
The Housing Act 1988, Section 8 (as amended by Section 151 of the Housing Act 1996) states that a landlord can serve notice on the tenant to seek possession of a property let on an assured tenancy on grounds of rent arrears, if at least eight weeks rent is unpaid, where the rent is payable weekly or fortnightly, or at least two months rent is unpaid if rent is payable monthly".
Tenancy agreements normally stipulate that rent must be paid weekly or monthly in advance. So tenants are expected to pay rent in advance of the period for which the rent is applicable.That is the liability to pay rent. For example, if rent is due on 1st of each month, and the tenant doesn't pay rent due on 1st Sept and 1st October, then on 2nd October, the tenant already has 2 months rent unpaid, and the landlord can serve notice seeking possession.
The complication arises where a tenant is receiving housing benefit, which councils tend to pay 4 weekly in arrears. So, in the example above, tenant was due to pay rent on 1st September, but didn't get housing benefit until 28th September. Tenant decides not to pay the landlord anyway, and spends it on something else. On 2nd october tenant has two months rent unpaid. On 3rd October, Landlord informs council housing benefit office and requests direct payment, but council insist that tenant is not yet 8 weeks in arrears because 8 weeks of actual time has not elapsed from 1st September to 2nd October even though contractually, tenant is more than 8 weeks in arrears. So, council refuse to pay next lot of housing benefit to landlord, as the law requires them to do. But don't blame the council, its the same government that wrote the law that then gave the guidelines that "DWP takes the view that a person cannot be in rent arrears in respect of a period that has not yet been served". Completely ignoring the contractual obligations that the "person" signed with the landlord.
So, the Guild or Residential Landlords, on behalf of one Landlord, Mr Doncaster decided to take Coventry City Council to court to challenge their decision, and the Tribunal Judge, CJ Jones ruled in his favour.
He said: "In making this decision I have considered the Housing Benefit Local Housing Allowance Guidance Manual as amended in March 2008 and in particular the note at the foot of 6.86 - 6.89 that rent cannot be in arrear in respect of a period that has not been served.
I do not agree with that view. Rent is in arrears once the contractual date for payment has passed irrespective of whether rent is due in advance or in arrear. Regulation 95 of the 2006 Regulations refers to a liability to pay rent and the liability in this case is to pay rent in advance."
Hurray, Hallelujah. At last, someone with clout has pointed out the obvious, something landlords have been saying for yonks and which has fallen on deaf government/council ears.
This judgement has serious implications for all landlords who have tenants in receipt of housing benefits or local housing allowance as it is now called. Maybe common sense will now prevail.
See full story here.
I have already written to one council about problems with a current tenant, and asked what steps they were now going to take in view of this judgement - I got a reply-the usual official jargon, but no answer to the question. So, I'm sending another letter on Monday asking the same question. Watch this space.
The Tories reaffirm commitment to landlords
Here's another story I picked up this week from here. My comments in (brackets).
Shadow housing minister Grant Shapps has reaffirmed the Conservative Party's commitment to ensuring local authorities work better with landlords. (Music to my ears ....)
David Salusbury, chairman of the NLA, said: “There are now sufficient rules and regulations in place to ensure that the minority of rogue operators in the sector can be dealt with swiftly and effectively.
“The final piece in the jigsaw is encouraging local authorities to use existing and significant powers appropriately instead of introducing more regulation which only penalises good landlords. Of course, we are also encouraged that the shadow housing minister is looking forward to working with the NLA.”(I am really intrigued to see how the local authorities can be encouraged to use existing powers appropriately .... considering the haphazard way in which they interprete/apply the current regulations and the fact that they can't be bothered to think. Those folk are a law unto themselves. When a landlord challenges a local authority office about a decision made locally, they go "don't blame us, its the law and we are just following the law". They when the actual law is quoted to them which shows their errors, they go "but the guidelines from government says ...". and on and on. The council, often seen as government's goons, just wields the blunt instrument without thought for the devastation that it causes landlords. Unfortunately, the effect is ultimately more homelessness, as landlords will refuse to take on certain types of tenants-the very ones the so called laws were supposed to help. We wait in anticipation to see firstly if the tories get back in, and secondly what exactly it is they will do .... promises promises promises.... )
Friday 16 October 2009
The White House is for Sale?
surely not .. the White House can't be for sale, or can it. Check this out. For a cool $10 million, you get 16,000 square feet of space, car parking for 75 cars, and a swimming pool. I still can't imagine a tenant in there though. What would the rent be? electricity bills? maintenance? Not for the light pocket.
Thursday 15 October 2009
Ongoing Court processes in the matter of tenant evictions
I have been away from this for a little while, but not because there's been nothing to report. Rather, there's been too much going on and too few hours in the day.
Today, I received four letters from three Courts, and one letter from a lawyer dealing with enforcement of a possession/money judgement order. Yes, five different tenants or ex-tenants and various stages of possession. Anyone would think I had become litiguous . ... and they'd be right. Unfortunately its the only way to get the parasites off our backs, and reclaim what is owed.
The enforcement is of a money judgement given in January this year. We have had a Court order for the Defendant to pay £100/month starting August 2009. Guess what, they have so far paid £43, and propose paying £10/week. At that rate, we'd still be trying to collect for a few years. Now, I'm no legal bod, but surely, that is contempt of court, isn't it. The law comes down heavy if we don't pay parking/ticket/speeding fines, or miss payments, so why not CCJs for rent arrears? The High court enforcement officer writes to ask what we want to do? suspend enforcement and accept the offer? Now what is their job? Enforcement or negotiation ..... so I've just emailed to say... go ahead with enforcement of the court order. Its a matter of principle now.
The Order for possession arriving today was for a court hearing on 16/09/09. I get a copy of the order a month after the order was given, and two weeks after the defendant was ordered to vacate the property. The actual hearing took less than 10minutes on the day, after having waited several weeks for the hearing itself. Justice might be slow, but, hey.... thaaat sloooow?? I guess blame will be laid at the door of the postmen now.
The attachment of earnings case... that's been dragging itself around for a wee while. Started with moneyclaim online, then passed through a couple of courts to the one local to the Defendant. Well, local is relative in this case, as there's one closer, but that was not the right one. Such a rigmarole. The Defendant in this case works, but as he himself said "money seems to just slip through his fingers"... make what you will of that. And this is not a young man, I mean, he is in his fifties for goodness sakes, and can't manage his financial affairs. Unfortunately, the money is not even being spent on himself .... nor on women, nor on wine, nor on weed. You guess it, its being spent on Weapons of Mass Poverty Creation ... where the owner of the money keeps thinking his luck will change at the next draw. Yeah, right!! As long as he manages to stay in work, we will collect it all ... including ongoing rent. No, not turfing him out - ulterior motive... need to ensure he keeps a roof over his head and stay in work so we can collect.
The remaining two are being dealt with by one court. Next possession hearing is now second week in November, which means this one will be trying to find a new home in December.... not the best time eh? but that's not my problem. Its hers. She is even getting help from the State, but decided to use it for purposes other than paying rent. Then does the proverbial ostrich ... not answering telephone, email, letters or even personal visit. Car out front, people in house, knock, knock, knock... wait, knock some more, louder and louder, curtains twitch but she aint got the bottle to face up to the problem. The State have been informed, but we wait and see what the State will do. They are notorious for their inept handling of such matters, but that's another story.
The last one .. well now, THAT is one heck of a story, which will be told at a later date, so watch this space. She is one twistedly purposeful liar in the guise of a nice lady. If there's been a disaster that can befall anyone, she's had it. She basically ran out of excuses. Gave her plenty of rope, and she's basically twisted herself all up and no houdini can get her out of the knots she's tied herself in. Saw her yesterday and she tried the waterworks trick .... oh no! moved me not an iota. Now,believe it or not, I'm normally a compassionate person, but folk like these lot just don't allow compassion to even come into the equation. They'll gobble you up, chew you to bits and spit you out again without so much as a blink. That's the world we have to deal with.
Well, tomorrow is another day, and I should be checking in two new tenants.
Today, I received four letters from three Courts, and one letter from a lawyer dealing with enforcement of a possession/money judgement order. Yes, five different tenants or ex-tenants and various stages of possession. Anyone would think I had become litiguous . ... and they'd be right. Unfortunately its the only way to get the parasites off our backs, and reclaim what is owed.
The enforcement is of a money judgement given in January this year. We have had a Court order for the Defendant to pay £100/month starting August 2009. Guess what, they have so far paid £43, and propose paying £10/week. At that rate, we'd still be trying to collect for a few years. Now, I'm no legal bod, but surely, that is contempt of court, isn't it. The law comes down heavy if we don't pay parking/ticket/speeding fines, or miss payments, so why not CCJs for rent arrears? The High court enforcement officer writes to ask what we want to do? suspend enforcement and accept the offer? Now what is their job? Enforcement or negotiation ..... so I've just emailed to say... go ahead with enforcement of the court order. Its a matter of principle now.
The Order for possession arriving today was for a court hearing on 16/09/09. I get a copy of the order a month after the order was given, and two weeks after the defendant was ordered to vacate the property. The actual hearing took less than 10minutes on the day, after having waited several weeks for the hearing itself. Justice might be slow, but, hey.... thaaat sloooow?? I guess blame will be laid at the door of the postmen now.
The attachment of earnings case... that's been dragging itself around for a wee while. Started with moneyclaim online, then passed through a couple of courts to the one local to the Defendant. Well, local is relative in this case, as there's one closer, but that was not the right one. Such a rigmarole. The Defendant in this case works, but as he himself said "money seems to just slip through his fingers"... make what you will of that. And this is not a young man, I mean, he is in his fifties for goodness sakes, and can't manage his financial affairs. Unfortunately, the money is not even being spent on himself .... nor on women, nor on wine, nor on weed. You guess it, its being spent on Weapons of Mass Poverty Creation ... where the owner of the money keeps thinking his luck will change at the next draw. Yeah, right!! As long as he manages to stay in work, we will collect it all ... including ongoing rent. No, not turfing him out - ulterior motive... need to ensure he keeps a roof over his head and stay in work so we can collect.
The remaining two are being dealt with by one court. Next possession hearing is now second week in November, which means this one will be trying to find a new home in December.... not the best time eh? but that's not my problem. Its hers. She is even getting help from the State, but decided to use it for purposes other than paying rent. Then does the proverbial ostrich ... not answering telephone, email, letters or even personal visit. Car out front, people in house, knock, knock, knock... wait, knock some more, louder and louder, curtains twitch but she aint got the bottle to face up to the problem. The State have been informed, but we wait and see what the State will do. They are notorious for their inept handling of such matters, but that's another story.
The last one .. well now, THAT is one heck of a story, which will be told at a later date, so watch this space. She is one twistedly purposeful liar in the guise of a nice lady. If there's been a disaster that can befall anyone, she's had it. She basically ran out of excuses. Gave her plenty of rope, and she's basically twisted herself all up and no houdini can get her out of the knots she's tied herself in. Saw her yesterday and she tried the waterworks trick .... oh no! moved me not an iota. Now,believe it or not, I'm normally a compassionate person, but folk like these lot just don't allow compassion to even come into the equation. They'll gobble you up, chew you to bits and spit you out again without so much as a blink. That's the world we have to deal with.
Well, tomorrow is another day, and I should be checking in two new tenants.
Tuesday 6 October 2009
landlords are "jaded" .... so I hear
I saw and article earlier today with the headline "landlords are jaded". Of course that sparked my interest, and I read the article. Apparently, we are "jaded" because and I quote "in the three months to the end of September, fewer than one in three investors were taking the trouble to review the mortgage market on a regular basis".
Now, can someone explain to me why we would bother anyway, when the banks are not lending to us? Those that are lending or pretending to do so, want to take the shirts off our backs anyway. How many buy-to-let products are still out there, and of those out there how many have reasonable terms/rates? And how many landlords have any credit history worthy of presenting to a lender? how many landlords have been turned down time and again by cautious lenders even when the applicant has a good credit rating? What is the point!!
These bankers have no clue, and I mean no clue, as to what it takes to run a property portfolio, sitting in their cushy chairs in front of their computer screens, twirling numbers around to justify their existence. They pull overdrafts without so much as a by-your-leave, and say "no" even before you've finished asking the question. Between the bankers, the government's ill-thought-out housing regulations, the councils' cack-handed implementation of said regulations, and the tenants shenanigans, the average landlord/investor is pretty chewed up. Frankly, I'm surprised there's any of us left.
Anyway, back to the topic: Buy-to-let mortgages, just a few short months ago, were considered "toxic debts", by our government. Infact I'd go so far as to say the term was so toxic, that one immediately thought "barge pole" when buy-to-let was mentioned. Unfortunately, those maligning the mortgages forgot that most of the properties (houses and flats) bought with these mortgages were good solid housing stock, and not the overpriced city centre flats that no average person could afford!!
We all know that the days of cheap and easy mortgage lending is over, well for now anyway, and we may not likely see a return to the sorts of levels that was around 12-18months ago, and maybe that's a good thing. There is talk that the property market is improving, and we hope so.
I'm a firm believer in bricks-and-mortar being a good solid investment, if held for the long term. Even if one is just trading, there's value in it. For those who are able to, now is very much a good time to be buying property, as there are good deals to be had. For those who are not able, well, they can sit on the ring side and watch the match in safety and train and tweak their portfolio to maximum potential.
Now, can someone explain to me why we would bother anyway, when the banks are not lending to us? Those that are lending or pretending to do so, want to take the shirts off our backs anyway. How many buy-to-let products are still out there, and of those out there how many have reasonable terms/rates? And how many landlords have any credit history worthy of presenting to a lender? how many landlords have been turned down time and again by cautious lenders even when the applicant has a good credit rating? What is the point!!
These bankers have no clue, and I mean no clue, as to what it takes to run a property portfolio, sitting in their cushy chairs in front of their computer screens, twirling numbers around to justify their existence. They pull overdrafts without so much as a by-your-leave, and say "no" even before you've finished asking the question. Between the bankers, the government's ill-thought-out housing regulations, the councils' cack-handed implementation of said regulations, and the tenants shenanigans, the average landlord/investor is pretty chewed up. Frankly, I'm surprised there's any of us left.
Anyway, back to the topic: Buy-to-let mortgages, just a few short months ago, were considered "toxic debts", by our government. Infact I'd go so far as to say the term was so toxic, that one immediately thought "barge pole" when buy-to-let was mentioned. Unfortunately, those maligning the mortgages forgot that most of the properties (houses and flats) bought with these mortgages were good solid housing stock, and not the overpriced city centre flats that no average person could afford!!
We all know that the days of cheap and easy mortgage lending is over, well for now anyway, and we may not likely see a return to the sorts of levels that was around 12-18months ago, and maybe that's a good thing. There is talk that the property market is improving, and we hope so.
I'm a firm believer in bricks-and-mortar being a good solid investment, if held for the long term. Even if one is just trading, there's value in it. For those who are able to, now is very much a good time to be buying property, as there are good deals to be had. For those who are not able, well, they can sit on the ring side and watch the match in safety and train and tweak their portfolio to maximum potential.
a relatively quiet day
Today has been relatively quiet. Whilst there has been no major disaster, there has still been the odd minor irritations. Just over a week ago, in preparation for moving a new tenant into a flat, the boiler was serviced and the gas safety certificate issued. one week later, the tenant moves in, and all seems fine. Then on saturday, the tenant calls to report that the boiler wasn't working, and claimed it hadn't worked since he moved in. Now, I was at the premises when the service/certification was done, and knew the boiler was working. Anyhow, we send the Gas Safe plumber round on saturday, he couldn't fix it, then he went back on monday and talked it through with the boiler manufacturer, and worked out that the pcb thingy in it has now gone kaput, and without it, the boiler ain't gonna work. And guess what, that little board of tricks will set me back a nice and tidy sum of £386, another unexpected expense. I'm in two minds as to whether or not the tenant caused the damage or it was just a coincidence. The jury is out on that one. Boilers are a rip off, there's always something not right with them, particularly those combis!!
With this and a leak here, a repair there, and what not, it does sometimes feel as if the bank account is just a conduit, you know. Funds come in one end, and straight out the other, with hardly a pause to sit and be admired.
Talking about water leaks reminded me of a message a tenant left for us at the end of last week. She wants a water meter fitted, and Anglian water sent their surveyor round to check the best location for it. Anyhow, they've decided it needs to go somewhere in the kitchen that requires removal of some of the kitchen units and what not, so she calls and says could we send someone round, to remove the said units, and then put them back etc. LOL! What a cheek! Its not as if there has been a damage or any such thing, but for her convenience. Needless to say I haven't even bothered to reply.
With this and a leak here, a repair there, and what not, it does sometimes feel as if the bank account is just a conduit, you know. Funds come in one end, and straight out the other, with hardly a pause to sit and be admired.
Talking about water leaks reminded me of a message a tenant left for us at the end of last week. She wants a water meter fitted, and Anglian water sent their surveyor round to check the best location for it. Anyhow, they've decided it needs to go somewhere in the kitchen that requires removal of some of the kitchen units and what not, so she calls and says could we send someone round, to remove the said units, and then put them back etc. LOL! What a cheek! Its not as if there has been a damage or any such thing, but for her convenience. Needless to say I haven't even bothered to reply.
Welcome ......
I am a landlord, of the bricks-and-mortar variety, and have been for a little while now. The journey has been quite interesting, sometimes exhilirating and sometimes downright frustrating. The antics of tenants - you've got to experience it to believe it. I've often said to myself, "i must write a book about my experiences", but of course it always seems a daunting task. I haven't even kept a diary-its all in my head. But of course the older I get, the more distant the memory becomes and details fade....
Whilst I've been aware of blogging for a while now, I've never really taken notice. Yes, yes, yes, I know.... how could I not, in this day and age of e-life and e-living, and for one who is an engineer by profession.... Its never too late though, is it? I recently attended an event that has changed my outlook, and made me decide to just get on with it.
So, come enjoy with me the highs and lows of being a landlord.
Whilst I've been aware of blogging for a while now, I've never really taken notice. Yes, yes, yes, I know.... how could I not, in this day and age of e-life and e-living, and for one who is an engineer by profession.... Its never too late though, is it? I recently attended an event that has changed my outlook, and made me decide to just get on with it.
So, come enjoy with me the highs and lows of being a landlord.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)