Jump to content
Stephen Muddie

Labour Vow to Smash BTL Landlords

Recommended Posts

Stephen Muddie

Looks like a lotta champagne socialists, remainiacs and other general hypocrites have a real dilemma on their hands.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7417191/John-McDonnell-declare-war-buy-let-landlords-giving-tenants-chance-buy-property.html

Edited by Stephen Muddie
wrong link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin

That's it. I'm voting Tory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ri Alban

Daily Mail ::facepaw::

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brighton Jambo

Because its the Daily Mail I will take this with a huge pinch of salt.  But it is these sort of stories that do terrify people.

 

I don't mind admitting my wife and I have a flat in Edinburgh we rent out.  My wife bought it before we were together and we have kept it on when we bought a family home.  Its pretty small and the rent barely covers the mortgage but we are pleased we managed to keep it.  We declare all the income and do everything above board.

 

The idea that someone could come along and order us to sell that at a discounted price is sickening.  We aren't some couple with twenty buy to lets making us a fortune we are a couple of have worked hard to have this extra next egg.

 

It might be nonsense but to me and many other people it is stuff of nightmares nonsense (In context I do realise there are people starving and homeless).  Stories like these really wont help them get elected.    Imagine the fall out and the legal challenges - chaos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikey1874

Just change the land ownership rules and build more housing. 

 

Probably too radical for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

The private lettings market does need tighter regulations.

Some stories I've heard and read about feature horrific abuses of power, working people with plenty of money made homeless and totally uncaring landlords.

 

Knee-jerk compulsary purchase orders are not the way to handle the current situation.

Just make sure that Landlords are more responsible and that they cannot just evict anybody they want on a whim every 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
6 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Because its the Daily Mail I will take this with a huge pinch of salt.  But it is these sort of stories that do terrify people.

 

I don't mind admitting my wife and I have a flat in Edinburgh we rent out.  My wife bought it before we were together and we have kept it on when we bought a family home.  Its pretty small and the rent barely covers the mortgage but we are pleased we managed to keep it.  We declare all the income and do everything above board.

 

The idea that someone could come along and order us to sell that at a discounted price is sickening.  We aren't some couple with twenty buy to lets making us a fortune we are a couple of have worked hard to have this extra next egg.

 

It might be nonsense but to me and many other people it is stuff of nightmares nonsense (In context I do realise there are people starving and homeless).  Stories like these really wont help them get elected.    Imagine the fall out and the legal challenges - chaos.

It's in all news agencies. News is news. Granted, the way the Daily Heil article is written (and the comments!) are biased, but what? I am only passing a message on, not endorsing the bearers of said message. Here's some other sources that aren't as easily ignored.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=john+mcdonnell+btl
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brighton Jambo
1 minute ago, Stephen Muddie said:

It's in all news agencies. News is news. Granted, the way the Daily Heil article is written (and the comments!) are biased, but what? I am only passing a message on, not endorsing the bearers of said message. Here's some other sources that aren't as easily ignored.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=john+mcdonnell+btl
 

Sorry don't take that as a dig at you it was a dig at the daily mail.  I am just trying to convince myself this cant be real!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
24 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

That's it. I'm voting Tory.

Think the point that should resonate is that many BTLers vote Tory presently, but won't due them mostly all being Remainers too 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
Just now, Brighton Jambo said:

Sorry don't take that as a dig at you it was a dig at the daily mail.  I am just trying to convince myself this cant be real!

I know mate, I didn't. It's real mate. Greedy people who think other folk's wages should be their retirement plan have ensured it's real (please don't take that as a dig at yourself man - more talking the ones who are baws deep in multiple profitable mortgages..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diadora Van Basten

Any landlord that votes Tory needs to remember what happened after Cameron’s last election victory.

 

Immediately after the election they announced an emergency budget to bring in section 24 tax. Section 24 tax ignores Generally Accepted accounting principles and taxes landlords on a notional profit rather than an actual profit.

 

I earn well under the higher rate threshold but because of the way section 24 is calculated I will now become a higher rate tax payer.

 

I actually think the Blair/Brown government encouraged buy to let to create more tenants as tenants are more likely to vote Labour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thommo414

The house I live in was bought for 80k in 2004.

 

The rent is 700 a month. Take away 10% for a deposit and you're left with 72k. The mortgage would then come in at a whopping £240 a month. 

 

Landlords are quite simply the scum of the ****ing earth and any misfortune that comes to them is music to my ears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

Various unfair and punitive letting fees were recently abolished.

 

Many Landlords have simply introduced steep pet charges to make up the shortfall.

 

The private letting market is the wild west and needs tightly regulated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brighton Jambo
5 minutes ago, Thommo414 said:

The house I live in was bought for 80k in 2004.

 

The rent is 700 a month. Take away 10% for a deposit and you're left with 72k. The mortgage would then come in at a whopping £240 a month. 

 

Landlords are quite simply the scum of the ****ing earth and any misfortune that comes to them is music to my ears

Rubbish, so the flat my wife and I have worked bloody hard to hold onto all these years while living in a family home makes us scum of the earth.

 

with respect [email protected] you, we have worked our asses off to have this little nest egg to protect our future should we just leave it sitting empty? Maybe just give it away?  

 

 

Edited by Brighton Jambo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thommo414
Just now, Brighton Jambo said:

Rubbish, so the flat my wife and I have worked bloody hard to hold onto all these years while living in a family home makes us scum of the earth.

 

with respect [email protected] you, we have worked our asses off to have this little nest egg to protect our future should we just leave it sitting empty? Maybe just give it away?  

There's protecting your future then there's exploiting people who will never be able to actually own the roof that's over their heads because of some ***** greed making it impossible for them to save up for a deposit. 

 

Tell me, do you think it's fair that people should have to live with their parents until deep into their 20's to afford to buy a house? Do you think it's fair that people who own their house is much less today than it used to be?

 

Of course I know you'll probably start some pish about millennial entitlement without knowing my circumstances so I won't hold my breath for a decent answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diadora Van Basten
13 minutes ago, Thommo414 said:

There's protecting your future then there's exploiting people who will never be able to actually own the roof that's over their heads because of some ***** greed making it impossible for them to save up for a deposit. 

 

Tell me, do you think it's fair that people should have to live with their parents until deep into their 20's to afford to buy a house? Do you think it's fair that people who own their house is much less today than it used to be?

 

Of course I know you'll probably start some pish about millennial entitlement without knowing my circumstances so I won't hold my breath for a decent answer

The Polish bloke in my Sandwich shop has just bought a house in Mayfield using the lift scheme.

 

Meanwhile a millennial at my work rents a flat in Stockbridge and complains that she will never be able to buy anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
systemx
6 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

The Polish bloke in my Sandwich shop has just bought a house in Mayfield using the lift scheme.

 

Meanwhile a millennial at my work rents a flat in Stockbridge and complains that she will never be able to buy anything.

Mayfield!!!!!!!!must be effing desperate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
systemx
6 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

The Polish bloke in my Sandwich shop has just bought a house in Mayfield using the lift scheme.

 

Meanwhile a millennial at my work rents a flat in Stockbridge and complains that she will never be able to buy anything.

Mayfield!!!!!!!!must be effing desperate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thommo414
2 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

The Polish bloke in my Sandwich shop has just bought a house in Mayfield using the lift scheme.

 

Meanwhile a millennial at my work rents a flat in Stockbridge and complains that she will never be able to buy anything.

I'm not surprised she can't afford anything renting in Stockbridge. But yet I also know people renting in the likes of Drylaw, Sighthill etc who are being taken for a ride by some of these arseholes. Rent prices in a large majority of cases are disgustingly disproportionate to the mortgages on these houses.

 

As for the Polish bloke, well done to him but as you say, he had to get on a scheme to be able to afford that. Schemes weren't needed before and it's a clear indicator that things have gotten bad that they seem to be a requirement now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brighton Jambo
42 minutes ago, Thommo414 said:

There's protecting your future then there's exploiting people who will never be able to actually own the roof that's over their heads because of some ***** greed making it impossible for them to save up for a deposit. 

 

Tell me, do you think it's fair that people should have to live with their parents until deep into their 20's to afford to buy a house? Do you think it's fair that people who own their house is much less today than it used to be?

 

Of course I know you'll probably start some pish about millennial entitlement without knowing my circumstances so I won't hold my breath for a decent answer

I don’t exploit people.  We charge a rent of less than 500 pound a month for a flat five minutes from Haymarket.  That doesn’t cover the mortgage as we are on a high rate as we did everything by the book and switched to a buy to let mortgage when my wife moved in with me.  

 

Do so I think it is fair, probably not, do I think what my wife and I are doing is unfair, absolutely not, we earned every penny for that place and our house.  Tell me why anyone should come and take that away from us and that be fair? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlphonseCapone

I'm uncomfortable with folk owning more than 2 homes but it's completely unfair to change the rules of the game for people that are already playing imo. And I say that as someone who'd benefit handsomely from something like this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diadora Van Basten
1 minute ago, AlphonseCapone said:

I'm uncomfortable with folk owning more than 2 homes but it's completely unfair to change the rules of the game for people that are already playing imo. And I say that as someone who'd benefit handsomely from something like this. 

I think the additional dwelling supplement (additional 4% on top of land and building tax) is fair as it is a major disincentive to people from buying multiple rental properties. 

 

Section 24 is a tax to encourage landlords to sell and in my opinion a very bad tax.

 

The flip side is that the government are encouraging build to rent which are likely to be high rise flats in the suburbs, funded by pension schemes for people to rent for their lifetime - personally I can’t think of anything worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thommo414
6 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I don’t exploit people.  We charge a rent of less than 500 pound a month for a flat five minutes from Haymarket.  That doesn’t cover the mortgage as we are on a high rate as we did everything by the book and switched to a buy to let mortgage when my wife moved in with me.  

 

Do so I think it is fair, probably not, do I think what my wife and I are doing is unfair, absolutely not, we earned every penny for that place and our house.  Tell me why anyone should come and take that away from us and that be fair? 

See I actually read your original post and dare I even say empathised with it a little bit. I'm glad to hear you're not exploiting people and charging what is actually a decent rate given the area. 

 

And no, it wouldn't be particularly fair to have it sold from underneath you.

 

Should I have called all landlords "scum"? Probably not but whats done is done I suppose. As I outlined in my original post however, I'm literally paying for this place 3 times over but yet I know I won't get anything cheaper where I can raise a family (and that includes downsizing) unless I move out to some backwater shitehole which still won't even be that much different.

 

My situation might colour my judgement on this subject but it just riles me to see what some of these pricks are getting away with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
2 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I don’t exploit people.  We charge a rent of less than 500 pound a month for a flat five minutes from Haymarket.  That doesn’t cover the mortgage as we are on a high rate as we did everything by the book and switched to a buy to let mortgage when my wife moved in with me.  

 

Do so I think it is fair, probably not, do I think what my wife and I are doing is unfair, absolutely not, we earned every penny for that place and our house.  Tell me why anyone should come and take that away from us and that be fair? 

This guy is the sort of landlord who is good. It's sad that so many idiots have fecked it. I currently rent after a breakup and have no problem with renting. Got a new washing machine today 'cause my old one broke. Didn't affect me. The pity is I could easily afford a mortgage on four of these flats for the rent I pay (500 - reasonable)  and then rent them out for £2000 pcm 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamboelite

I have a flat we rent to a mate, he covers the equivalent of the mortgage and insurance and nothing more.

 

I saved my ass off to have a new deposit for our family home so i could  retain my flat as a pension/nest egg.

 

So for someone to tell me that all of that means they can force me to sell at a reduced price afterall that sacrifice **** OFF.

 

There are other ways to go about it, not all landlords have extensive portfolios some are just hard working people investing in property for their long term future.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sexton Hardcastle

If they want to sort the the housing shortage, they need to stop building student accommodation everywhere and anywhere possible.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
31 minutes ago, Sexton Hardcastle said:

If they want to sort the the housing shortage, they need to stop building student accommodation everywhere and anywhere possible.

 

 

+1. It's a joke.A lucrative joke for all involved though. I used to rent out a room in my old house. Some students on the website i was using to advertise were willing to pay up to £700 of mummy and daddy's money each month. Hate to say this, but Edinburgh seems like it's not for locals any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

If you link rents to average wages in the area, then the problem is lessened.

 

People end up in a rental trap, never able to save up enough for a deposit on a house.

 

Monthly rents are way higher than mortgage payments. So they are paying out more per month.

Then there is the fact that they have no security so have to pay even more per month into  "rent deposit" savings so they can pay the deposit on the next place they have to move into in 6 month's time.

And don't try to tell me that deposits are refunded at the end of the lease, we all know that's pish.

 

Then the house prices themselves keep going up due to BTL landlords competing with each other for properties.

Which in turn puts the rents up even more.

 

So eventually most people renting are paying astronomical rents, houses are priced further and further out of reach and they will never own a home.

 

Government is complicit in this state of affairs too.

The "Help to buy" scheme is nothing but the taxpayer helping keep the housing price bubble artificially inflated.

Same goes for "help to buy ISA".

Even Housing Benefit is nothing but the taxpayer inflating rental prices.

Without these schemes pumping money from general taxation into the market, the rents and property prices would fall and stabilise due to open market economics.

It's not a free market. It's a scam. It's robbing tenants and the taxpayer blind to provide landlords with free money.

But since the entire UK economy seems to be based on a giant housing bubble (and has been since the 1980s), the Government is happy to keep inflating the bubble.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thommo414
3 minutes ago, Cade said:

If you link rents to average wages in the area, then the problem is lessened.

 

People end up in a rental trap, never able to save up enough for a deposit on a house.

 

Monthly rents are way higher than mortgage payments. So they are paying out more per month.

Then there is the fact that they have no security so have to pay even more per month into  "rent deposit" savings so they can pay the deposit on the next place they have to move into in 6 month's time.

And don't try to tell me that deposits are refunded at the end of the lease, we all know that's pish.

 

Then the house prices themselves keep going up due to BTL landlords competing with each other for properties.

Which in turn puts the rents up even more.

 

So eventually most people renting are paying astronomical rents, houses are priced further and further out of reach and they will never own a home.

 

Government is complicit in this state of affairs too.

The "Help to buy" scheme is nothing but the taxpayer helping keep the housing price bubble artificially inflated.

Same goes for "help to buy ISA".

Even Housing Benefit is nothing but the taxpayer inflating rental prices.

Without these schemes pumping money from general taxation into the market, the rents and property prices would fall and stabilise due to open market economics.

It's not a free market. It's a scam. It's robbing tenants and the taxpayer blind to provide landlords with free money.

But since the entire UK economy seems to be based on a giant housing bubble (and has been since the 1980s), the Government is happy to keep inflating the bubble.

 

Pretty much exactly how I feel but put far more eloquently than I could've done, thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justin Z
8 hours ago, Stephen Muddie said:

This guy is the sort of landlord who is good. It's sad that so many idiots have fecked it. I currently rent after a breakup and have no problem with renting. Got a new washing machine today 'cause my old one broke. Didn't affect me. The pity is I could easily afford a mortgage on four of these flats for the rent I pay (500 - reasonable)  and then rent them out for £2000 pcm 😉

 

Totally agree he is the sort of landlord that's good, but the entire scheme is bent, imo. It's the system we're all in, and it just gets worsened by things like in this thread, but until a fundamental human right like shelter isn't being commodified, it will simply continue to get worse, and that bubble will continue to grow until the eventually pop is more like an enormous bang. Much like not all cops are bad people, not all landlords are bad people, but they've willfully engaged themselves in an exploitative, immoral system for profit nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stephen Muddie
29 minutes ago, Cade said:

If you link rents to average wages in the area, then the problem is lessened.

 

People end up in a rental trap, never able to save up enough for a deposit on a house.

 

Monthly rents are way higher than mortgage payments. So they are paying out more per month.

Then there is the fact that they have no security so have to pay even more per month into  "rent deposit" savings so they can pay the deposit on the next place they have to move into in 6 month's time.

And don't try to tell me that deposits are refunded at the end of the lease, we all know that's pish.

 

Then the house prices themselves keep going up due to BTL landlords competing with each other for properties.

Which in turn puts the rents up even more.

 

So eventually most people renting are paying astronomical rents, houses are priced further and further out of reach and they will never own a home.

 

Government is complicit in this state of affairs too.

The "Help to buy" scheme is nothing but the taxpayer helping keep the housing price bubble artificially inflated.

Same goes for "help to buy ISA".

Even Housing Benefit is nothing but the taxpayer inflating rental prices.

Without these schemes pumping money from general taxation into the market, the rents and property prices would fall and stabilise due to open market economics.

It's not a free market. It's a scam. It's robbing tenants and the taxpayer blind to provide landlords with free money.

But since the entire UK economy seems to be based on a giant housing bubble (and has been since the 1980s), the Government is happy to keep inflating the bubble.

 

Tend to agree but wasn't wanting to have to deal with tonnes of flak by putting it as simply as that. Hats off to you for doing so. To tell the truth on a Hearts forum, a club based in a city where the dark art of banking is held so dear, is admirable and takes nuts. 

I sometimes wonder if the ptb realise how many folk have sussed things... It's pretty simple, whole swathes of our society now didn't get any free money or other government doping, and were forced to see the world for what it was. I reckon a fair percentage of people wouldn't give two shits if the economy totally crashed tomorrow. Nothing to lose, nothing to be afraid of losing.

Edited by Stephen Muddie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikey1874

Private rents in Edinburgh are an average £1,100 a month. 26% of homes in Edinburgh are privately rented. Doubled in 20 years. 

 

That is taking money out of the economy. 

 

As above a proper market doesn't exist. Partly as house builders keep land to keep prices high. 

 

Maybe all this has happened by accident. Or maybe certain interests are prioritised. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smithee
20 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Private rents in Edinburgh are an average £1,100 a month. 26% of homes in Edinburgh are privately rented. Doubled in 20 years. 

 

That is taking money out of the economy. 

 

As above a proper market doesn't exist. Partly as house builders keep land to keep prices high. 

 

Maybe all this has happened by accident. Or maybe certain interests are prioritised. 

 

Holy crap is that right? 1100 a month?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N Lincs Jambo

My daughter is off to Uni in Edinburgh this weekend. She’s renting a room in a purpose built student flat. The flats are beautiful but the rent is astronomical (in my opinion anyway) at £150 a week. The landlord is the University btw. And as a landlord myself this is not an anti landlord rant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mutley
19 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

My daughter is off to Uni in Edinburgh this weekend. She’s renting a room in a purpose built student flat. The flats are beautiful but the rent is astronomical (in my opinion anyway) at £150 a week. The landlord is the University btw. And as a landlord myself this is not an anti landlord rant.

The student roost places are a minimum of £170 a week in Edinburgh so your getting a good deal😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikey1874
43 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

Holy crap is that right? 1100 a month?

 

 

Nearer £700 per month across Scotland 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N Lincs Jambo
11 minutes ago, mutley said:

The student roost places are a minimum of £170 a week in Edinburgh so your getting a good deal😂

 

Living down in England I sometimes get asked about whether I would go back to Scotland. My reply is usually that I can’t afford to (well not to Edinburgh anyway). If that’s right about £150 being a good deal it just shows that “location, location, location” is spot on 😓

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
3 hours ago, Jamboelite said:

I have a flat we rent to a mate, he covers the equivalent of the mortgage and insurance and nothing more.

 

I saved my ass off to have a new deposit for our family home so i could  retain my flat as a pension/nest egg.

 

So for someone to tell me that all of that means they can force me to sell at a reduced price afterall that sacrifice **** OFF.

 

There are other ways to go about it, not all landlords have extensive portfolios some are just hard working people investing in property for their long term future.

 

 

 

 

 

I went against the advice of my letting agent last week and froze the rent on my flat for the fifth year running. 

Last month I replaced the washing machine as the tenants have added baby Rahim to their family and the last one was a bit old and probably not up to the increased workload. The extractor fan in the bathroom is getting replaced as we speak and a new shower will be going in over the next week or so.

 

Some scumbag filthy capitalist pigs are actually good guys.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FORTHCLYDE

My partner moved with me to a house in  Manchester. 

She also owns her former house in Edinburgh it cost her £80k which she has mortgage.

She rents it out which just covers the mortgage fee.

If Labour introduce this policy and she has to sell house for £40k right away she has lost forty thousand pounds.

How can this be right.

She would have to sell house and make tenant homeless.

I've never voted Conservative in my life but I will now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JackLadd

Individuals with portfolios of multiple BTL properties should be curtailed, no? It's a big reason why people can't get on the housing ladder and are paying big rents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysterion
1 hour ago, FORTHCLYDE said:

My partner moved with me to a house in  Manchester. 

She also owns her former house in Edinburgh it cost her £80k which she has mortgage.

She rents it out which just covers the mortgage fee.

If Labour introduce this policy and she has to sell house for £40k right away she has lost forty thousand pounds.

How can this be right.

She would have to sell house and make tenant homeless.

I've never voted Conservative in my life but I will now.

 

I am not sure they’d introduce legislation as brutal as that.

 

Its arguable that an escalating increase in stamp duty could be a better method of discouraging people from purchasing 3rd/4th/5th dwellings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

LaBoUr ArE gOnNaE fOrCe EvErY lAnDlOrD tAe SeLl HaLf PrIcE lIkEs

 

:liesalarm:

Edited by Cade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

If you actually READ the proposal, it's LAND they're considering forcing the sale of.

Speculators buy up land cheap, get some basic planning permission, put the price up tenfold, then sell on to developers who then have to price the resulting houses accordingly to recoup their land purchase.
This is artificially inflating the house prices (a common theme).

Labour are proposing buying EMPTY LAND at nominal value, not the inflated "hope value" that landowners try to sell land with planning consent on it.

Many companies, including banks and supermarkets, are using empty plots of land as "land banks", either turning a quick buck by applying for planning themselves or simply sitting on the land for years, waiting for councils to build new developments in the area and selling the land to the developers at an inflated cost once the land has been re-zoned as residential rather than agricultural or brown field.

 

The Tories had an identical plan a couple of years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mikey1874

Thought people hadn't read it properly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diadora Van Basten

John McConnell definitely spoke about right to buy on Buy to Let.

 

I also doubt they would actually do it.

 

I remember Brown bottled a General Election after Osbourne said he would raise Inheritance Tax threshold to £1 million.

 

The Tories have been in power for a long time and the Inheritance Tax threshold still isn’t £1 million and I think the Labour proposal will be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

It's just building on Cameron's trial scheme that extended right-to-buy to housing association tenants.

 

Besides, even that only gives a discount if you've lived in the same house for a minimum of three years and in the current rental market, that just isn't a thing.

Landlords simply turf people out on a whim every few months so nobody would ever qualify for it anyways.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diadora Van Basten
31 minutes ago, Cade said:

Landlords simply turf people out on a whim every few months so nobody would ever qualify for it anyways.

 

 

That’s not my experience at all nearly all tenancies are ended by tenants.

 

For landlords void periods are expensive so they prefer to keep tenants for the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...