x

John McKay

7087 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

John's Recent Activity

Same crap different day

From: John McKay 08 January 2021 14:01 PM

Haha. Tbh guys I'm soft. I did start S21 with the intention of selling the property a while ago but then changed plans. The lady is a PITA from time to time but is way better than she used to be. The second oldest has learning difficulties and it's this frustration that sometimes gets him into mischief. I like the lad but he's also an influence on some of his siblings. The problem was that when I told her I was selling she tried to get help from the council and they were completely and utterly bloody useless. They have nowhere for her to go and frankly I didn't want to be the evil scumbag landlord that puts 6 kids on the street. You can imagine what the local press would say about that! So we came to an arrangement in that I'll stick with things until her oldest two are old enough to leave home. In fact the first should be off to join the army very soon. Meanwhile the rent is good even though the wear and tear on the property is intense.

From: John McKay 04 December 2020 18:23 PM

I have a problem tenant, or at least she is a problem from time to time. SIngle mum with 6 kids and whilst she can't control them, she'll attack anyone that threatens them in any way. As a result an anti-social behaviour situation arose and the Council summoned me to a meeting where there were 4 of them (including a police officer) and lil ol me. What they actually wanted was for me to serve S21 on the woman to get her to behave but wouldn't go as far as saying they wanted me to evict. However it was made clear that if I did on anti-social behaviour grounds then the police would write me a supporting letter. An interesting conundrum for councils that use S21 to control this sort of thing.

From: John McKay 04 December 2020 16:35 PM

Already done in June. @Paul Hart... The Landlords Guild is supposed to be pretty good though not had personal experience.

From: John McKay 04 December 2020 16:29 PM

@Robert... There are opportunities all over if you look. The longest term empty I have acquired was languishing for 14 years, the second longest 12 years. The first is now a family home, the second a high spec HMO housing 6 people. Even my own home was long term empty and was quite a state.

From: John McKay 04 November 2020 18:39 PM

Mark won't entertain anything that doesn't support his incorrect theories Andrew.

From: John McKay 04 November 2020 10:16 AM

I took a homeless person into an HMO after discussing it with the other tenants. The guy turned out to be one of the best tenants I've ever had and even became a good friend. Alas some time later I found him dead in his bed after suffering a heart attack.

From: John McKay 04 November 2020 06:50 AM

What Government doesn't acknowledge is that private landlords very often turn into developers. They bring disused property back into use, they convert commercial buildings, they build from scratch themselves and they will buy new-builds (sometimes off plan). All this adds to housing stock. By attacking the sector Government risks disenfranchising landlords and curtailing of a very important part of housing provision. I do wonder who's getting the backhanders.

From: John McKay 04 November 2020 06:40 AM

Baroness Kennedy could perhaps ask Government to remove S24.

From: John McKay 02 November 2020 10:20 AM

Perhaps the Resolution Foundation should campaign for the removal of S24 and thus remove a cost to landlords.

From: John McKay 02 November 2020 10:18 AM

Wait for the photo opportunity of Sunak with his fingers in his ears and singing 'Lalalalala'

From: John McKay 29 October 2020 10:37 AM

Why are SRS landlords excluded from SL? My local HA had more than 1000 expired gas certificates at one stage. I've recently heard of another LA instructing a carpenter to fit normal internal doors where fire doors should be fitted, but to also fit smoke seals to make them look like fire doors. Why are standards in the SRS assumed to be wonderful, or is it that those tenants are expendable?

From: John McKay 24 July 2020 11:14 AM

Yes. I sold some houses in an area when they introduced the licensing scheme.

From: John McKay 24 July 2020 11:12 AM

And for HMOs: gas, electricity, broadband (& line rental), cleaners, council tax, etc, etc, etc.

From: John McKay 15 April 2020 10:02 AM

No not at all. The PRS has been shrinking at a rate of around 1000 properties a week for some time. When we start emerging from this mess it's extremely likely, well a certainty really that the rate will increase. That will sustain rents and may even cause rental inflation.

From: John McKay 28 March 2020 16:59 PM

"They had called for Rishi Sunak’s big-spending budget to include the abolishment of stamp duty on the acquisition of additional homes" And still they ignore the real issue of S24!

From: John McKay 13 March 2020 18:09 PM

Same old claptrap Mark? Gromit is quite right in what he says about the EHS but you may also care to read the recent report by the BoE that confirms what the EHS say. The fact is that BTL has added massively to usable housing stock but that's being well and truly restricted now. For example in my immediate circle of friends, one complete a block of 5 flats last year, another 5 houses, another 9 houses. All of them have said that they won't build any more. And then there's another who's had a piece of land for a while and has only just applied to put 41 flats on it. However he too has said that he will not be doing any more after that. You need to get your vision checked Mark because you clearly can't see the facts.

From: John McKay 30 January 2020 10:19 AM

Great post of FB about how much Shelter have pulled in over the years and how many houses that would have built. Best thing that could happen for renters is for the so-called 'charity' to be shut down. Obviously a similar argument could be made about GR as they've campaigned for all the things that are driving rents up.

From: John McKay 29 January 2020 10:50 AM

Legal & Tax Changes The Letting Industry Has Had Imposed In The Last 4 Years (some are currently proposed) 1. S24 (disallowing of finance costs) 2. Additional 3% SDLT on property purchase 3. Premium of 8% CGT when selling property 4. Banning of letting agent fees 5. Halving of lettings relief 6. Prospective banning of ‘No DSS’ wording in adverts 7. Promised banning of S21 notice 8. Growing trend of councils charging hefty licence fees per property 9. Changes to HMO regs including minimum room sizes 10. Right to rent checks (now shown to be discriminatory and there is no guidance on how to deal with EU immigrants) 11. Benefit tenants migrated to UC causing lengthy delays in rent payments and often substantial arrears 12. Deregulation Act 13. Scrapping of Wear & Tear allowance 14. Introduction of EPC minimum requirements (even on HMOs) which can be difficult to meet with older properties 15. Unfit for human habitation legislation 16. CO detectors must be fitted 17. 100%+ council tax on properties being refurbished between tenancies. Not even the 25% single person discount 18. Substantial increases in court costs for use of S8, thus making S21 more popular 19. Membership of compulsory redress scheme for agents (and most likely for landlords soon) 20. Limit on amount of deposit we’re allowed to take 21. Rogue landlord database 22. Proposed 3 year minimum tenancies though not sure what the value of this would be with the abolition of S21 23. Some councils now charging council tax on HMO rooms

From: John McKay 16 January 2020 12:01 PM

There are already 85k households living in emergency/ temporary accommodation. This figure ignores those that have moved in with other family members of course. The point is we're already way past the 10k figure in your hypothetical example but the question is when will Government say 'enough is enough'. Perhaps when they wake up and stop listening to the likes of Shelter?

From: John McKay 16 January 2020 11:57 AM

May I suggest two things to you Mark. Firstly you study property cycles and secondly you understand just how much landlords have added to housing stock. You are completely incorrect when you say that BTL has pushed up prices. It hasn't.

From: John McKay 20 December 2019 18:19 PM

Me too Neil, me too.

From: John McKay 20 December 2019 18:18 PM

Yes Paul they can remove EIS but it would be nigh on impossible to make that retroactive. Anyway that is up to you.

From: John McKay 23 November 2019 19:42 PM

For anyone selling it is possible to legally avoid CGT using EIS investments. It won't suit everyone but it is an option.

From: John McKay 23 November 2019 17:54 PM

"Until we start seeing normal tenants on the street homeless Govt WON'T do anything to assist the PRS." Paul there are 85,000 households (with 126,000 children) in temporary/emergency accommodation. This is as close as they get to being on the streets. How many more before Government take note?

From: John McKay 23 November 2019 15:21 PM

Yes G. Perhaps we could see some evidence of this phenomenon of bad landlords exiting. I'd find that most interesting.

From: John McKay 05 November 2019 10:03 AM

A couple of years ago I offered nearly all my tenants the option to buy their homes at a discount. Not one took me up on the deal, or even showed any real interest.

From: John McKay 23 October 2019 09:27 AM

Best they start making the required donations to the Conservative Party then.

From: John McKay 26 June 2019 09:28 AM

So the more that landlords are being pushed to take on DSS tenants the more will sell up. Little choice with S24. That means fewer properties to rent and the better off tenants will need to pay more to secure a place, and that leaves out DSS. Methinks the likes of Shelter et al, have not thought this through.

From: John McKay 30 March 2019 09:27 AM

But the problem is that councils will use the powers to hit the soft targets, landlords that have made genuine mistakes or do not even realise that they've broken rules. Councils aren't necessarily that interested in improving standards but they are interested in improving revenue.

From: John McKay 01 March 2019 10:25 AM

How many more people can fit on the anti landlord bandwagon?

From: John McKay 20 February 2019 18:55 PM

I'm very surprised you haven't been banned as I and many other landlords have been. Here's another one you might enjoy.... Go on to Youtube and find some of the Shelter videos, then post asking how many of the people in the video are paid actors.

From: John McKay 04 February 2019 10:16 AM

Landlords and agents are in the same business - providing housing. Ludlow Thompson should know better than to use language as they have, no doubt intended to drum up more business for themselves. There's nothing wrong with looking for business but I have to agree that the way they've done it is playing to the likes of the anti-landlord brigade.

From: John McKay 01 February 2019 08:57 AM

"A growing number of people are opting to rent as a lifestyle option, with most tenants satisfied with their existing landlord, which is why the lettings and estate agent is baffled as to why landlords often demonised by politicians, including the Treasury." There are three reasons why the Treasury are demonising the PRS.... 1. Tax 2. Tax 3. More tax

From: John McKay 25 October 2018 11:43 AM

Last I heard it was up to 4500 properties per month now. And yet the Times today has an article (by a Tory MP) banging on about UC and homelessness. Not once did he mention S24 which is causing most of the problem.

From: John McKay 23 October 2018 09:00 AM

Interesting... my council summoned me to a meeting recently and pressurised me to serve S21 on one of my tenants.

From: John McKay 10 October 2018 09:32 AM

Well said David. It seems that the previous posters are just prepared to roll over and let people walk all over them. I've had enough of that approach as it gets us nowhere. Good on Larry for taking this on. I'm in.

From: John McKay 09 October 2018 10:30 AM

Room for another on your travels??

From: John McKay 27 September 2018 10:09 AM

I lost a long term tenant early this year. Actually it was a SARB that I bought years ago but with the family in place I never had the opportunity to do a full refurb that was definitely required. I wouldn't have been happy reletting it as it was to be honest. I have an agent that found a buyer early on, who was actually a corporate landlord owned by an out-of-area council. The company, despite their owners being who they are, do not generally buy houses with tenants in situ or buy properties that need a lot of work. So... whilst I spent 17k on the refurb I got a very quick and reliable buyer and broke the ceiling price for the street as the house was looking very, very good.

From: John McKay 20 September 2018 20:29 PM

I disagree to some extent G. Osborne was after tax and as the receipts are showing SDLT take has declined. However as landlords are selling up then the Treasury is at least benefiting from CGT, for now. Tenants are indeed facing rent rises and homelessness but the Councils are also taking it on the chin with mammoth rises in emergency accommodation costs. This article shows council by council how much costs have increased by... https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/insight/the-cost-of-homelessness-council-spend-on-temporary-accommodation-revealed-57720

From: John McKay 12 September 2018 09:08 AM

Step 1 to solving the housing crisis for tenants.... shut down Shelter and Generation Rent, as it is they that are causing many of the problems.

From: John McKay 24 August 2018 09:10 AM

Interesting time lapse video on this page I think you might like... https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/home/home/tackling-homelessness-through-modular-housing-57640

From: John McKay 23 August 2018 09:47 AM

Isn't one of the complaints from the General Public that if there is a large concentration of renters then they do not form part of the community or contribute to it??

From: John McKay 23 August 2018 09:20 AM

As it happens Bill I told the woman that I have had tenants for more than a decade and never seen a rent rise but they're now likely to experience it due to the Government landlord attacks that they support. The meeting we were at was actually a shareholder meeting for an EIS investment and I also explained to them that one of the reasons for putting money into this type of company were the tax concessions which I was offsetting against the increase due to S24. OK, it's a paperwork exercise but means I can still shield my tenants to some extent from rent rises. The woman went on about some 'friend' of theirs that had let her house when it had cockroaches in it. Her thinking appeared to be that if a 'friend' of hers is a bad landlord then they all must be. Her husband on the other hand, was saying what a bad lot we are because we were all going to sell up when the interest rates went up. Seems he'd swallowed a Carney pill or something. Sometimes it's hard to argue with people who don't have a real grasp of reality.

From: John McKay 07 August 2018 11:50 AM

I met two total strangers recently - a mature couple. We got talking and I told them I was a landlord. The woman said 'We don't like landlords'. I hesitated before asking but felt I must ask ascertain why. She replied 'Because you always just keep putting up rents and don't maintain your properties'. I told her that this wasn't true and I do not keep putting up rents. Unbelievably she said 'Yes you do'. I had never met this woman before in my life and she felt she could comment in such a way shows just how the media affect people's perceptions. In fact it turned out they were Guardian readers! I'd add that I gave her both barrels and then her husband started on me so I reloaded and gave him some too. These 'lefties' think they're being clever by landlord bashing but are hypocritical enough to ignore the massive increases in homelessness as landlords leave the sector.

From: John McKay 07 August 2018 09:24 AM

"Cllr Barry Johnson, portfolio holder for housing, commented: “The majority of landlords act responsibly, but sadly there are those who fail to provide acceptable living conditions and don’t have adequate protection for their tenants or neighbouring homes in place." I daresay that Thurrock has bad plumbers too. Is the Council going to slap extra fees on to all the plumbers in the area so they can improve plumbing standards and rid themselves of the bad ones??

From: John McKay 19 July 2018 09:03 AM

From: John McKay 16 July 2018 12:41 PM

And there are some well known cases of landlords going spectacularly bankrupt. No mention of them I see. I would have liked detail on how these numbers have been crunched as it very much depends on area, type of property, type of tenant and whether or not there has been any allowance for voids, rent arrears, damage, legal costs, etc, etc, etc. Some 'happy numbers' produced for marketing purposes perhaps???

From: John McKay 29 September 2017 13:09 PM

I think some readers will miss your irony James

From: John McKay 26 July 2017 11:34 AM

You just need to visit the local court on a possession day to see the truth. In my court in Peterborough the social cases outnumber the private cases at about a 3 to 1 ratio every time I've been there.

From: John McKay 26 July 2017 08:45 AM

The long term consequences are dire. A huge proportion of properties added to the lettings market come from landlords converting large house to HMOs, flats and bedsits. Plus the conversion of commercial properties to resi and long-term empty places brought back into use. There are many landlords that source land, obtain PP and manage a build. Now this will be curtailed, further adding to the housing crisis we are in. Just because GR blame BTL for their issues doesn't make it true. They need to open their eyes because it is their whining that gave Osborne the impetus to inflict further misery upon them. With £ signs in his eyes Hammond is reluctant to undo the legislation that is behind it all. This is despite the track record in Ireland showing what we can expect to happen in the UK. Does anyone ever learn??

From: John McKay 26 July 2017 08:43 AM

Hmmm. Yes, certainly landlords. Let's add in their tenants that have seen rent rises and know more are coming due to S24, or possibly the evictions. Don't forget the landlord bodies and the ones that genuinely care for the tenants too (that in my opinion leaves out Shelter). And of course there's the Councils around the country that are seeing many of the home providers to the social sector pulling out. Plus the forward thinking MPs that understand the consequences of S24. Lastly let's include all the tradespeople and letting agents that rely on the business they get from the PRS. I hope that helps.

From: John McKay 13 June 2017 20:51 PM

12 months Andrew? Almost 2 years now and still our Chancellor has his fingers in his ears, eyes shut and is shouting La La La

From: John McKay 01 June 2017 20:43 PM

My Conservative MP said that the restriction to MIR is absolutely nothing to do to help FTBs but is just a stealth tax.

From: John McKay 01 June 2017 19:04 PM

So if we follow this through, is the landlord responsible if the tenant is guilty of speeding? Or tax evasion, or murder???? Completely and utterly ridiculous. The law is an ass!

From: John McKay 25 May 2017 09:10 AM

And when the great unwashed start crying there isn't enough rental stock and they can't find anywhere to live Government can say.... 'but it's what you wanted!'

From: John McKay 18 May 2017 06:10 AM

It's an average price they're quoting Paul, and as you rightly point out that is high for BTL. So perhaps the fact that landlords are withdrawing is actually helping push the average price up for this developer. If the lower end demand has decreased then perhaps they are also concentrating on higher end developments and that has given the rise in profits. There's not really enough info in the article to draw reliable conclusions.

From: John McKay 06 December 2016 08:23 AM

You are missing a couple of huge points. Firstly there is enormous demand for rental stock which is increasing due to net immigration figures, or have you not seen the recent stats? A decline in the rental stock available will force up rents - simple supply and demand economics. Secondly, builders will build houses for whomever wants to buy them so what you are saying is just plain silly. The issue for this builder is that landlords will buy houses off-plan or early in the build. That deposit money gives the builder the cashflow he needs to continue, again simple economics. If a FTB wants to put down that deposit money the builder will be very happy to take it, but they don't. Hence there will be less demand and a slow down of output and that exacerbates the housing crisis, putting upward pressure on house prices and makes it even harder for the FTB to get on the ladder. When will you understand this?

From: John McKay 06 December 2016 08:19 AM

I'm not sure why Paul Robinson finds it necessary to be rude, especially as Barry F talks total sense. And actually I think Savills have got it wrong, rents will rise higher than they predict.

From: John McKay 08 November 2016 11:15 AM

Surely, above all else, rents are going up as landlords prepare for the greedy tax-take by Osborne. Private landlords are withdrawing from the market and HB in particular in their droves, and cities such as Peterborough are already citing the retreat as being partly down to S24. This is 6 months before the tax change kicks in, so what's it going to be like after it? Hence the spike in homelessness that Peterborough is facing and leading to the bizarre situation of making 74 families homeless in order to turn the properties into short-term hostel accommodation. At our local landlord's meeting this week we had a representative from Peterborough City Council come and present a case for renting to LHA tenants. She was new to the job and it's only just dawning on her what a battle she has on her hands. She knew about S24 but didn't appreciate just how onerous and damaging it is. Several landlords sypmathised with her but said they wouldn't want her job for anything. Let's hope Mr Hammond has some sense and leads from the Irish example where in the budget yesterday they announced the scrapping of the restriction of mortgage interest relief.

From: John McKay 13 October 2016 09:32 AM

Good, but have to say that after the lies that Osborne and Gauke were responsible for (only 1 in 10 of the wealthiest landlords would be affected by the S24 taxation changes, and they would bring private landlords in line with corporate ones), I personally wouldn't trust a word said by HMRC. Or perhaps I've just got cynical?

From: John McKay 01 September 2016 08:44 AM

'Despite the government’s decision to cut tax incentives ' Incentives? What incentives??? If this is referring to the mortgage interest relief changes it is a normal cost of business. Allowing it as such is not an incentive, and disallowing it is a discriminatory punitive and ill-judged action by a Chancellor that thought he could grab extra tax from people (tenants) whilst they'd applaud him for doing so. He's gone now. Let's hope the new guy in the job has more sense.

From: John McKay 20 July 2016 08:39 AM

'Despite the government’s decision to cut tax incentives ' Incentives? What incentives??? If this is referring to the mortgage interest relief changes it is a normal cost of business. Allowing it as such is not an incentive, and disallowing it is a discriminatory punitive and ill-judged action by a Chancellor that thought he could grab extra tax from people (tenants) whilst they'd applaud him for doing so. He's gone now. Let's hope the new guy in the job has more sense.

From: John McKay 20 July 2016 08:39 AM

I needed to add that I'm not sure if you understand the implications of these tax attacks. It is entirely possible that a LL could have a situation where due to C24 he has a property running at a loss, but is unable to sell the property because of lack of equity through borrowing. Even if he is at break even he may not have enough gain to pay CGT so in many cases will be doomed to losing everything. A fair tax situation this is not! Osborne promoted borrowing through the Funding to Lending programme and is now punishing LLs for taking up the cheap mortgages that were made widely available through the scheme.

From: John McKay 04 July 2016 11:04 AM

Absolutely Daniel but there lies the issue. The Government's agenda is nothing to do with reducing BTL. Sure if it happens Osborne won't care, but his aim is revenue take. Mind you, now he's said that the UK has to be more realistic (the UK, not him) in it's goal of eliminating the deficit by 2020 then maybe he won't be quite so aggressive with his attacks.

From: John McKay 04 July 2016 11:00 AM

So what you are saying is that there should be one tax system for some and a different one for others? Hmmm, I wonder what assets you have that could be unfairly taxed in relation to other people's?

From: John McKay 04 July 2016 10:57 AM

The Judicial Review CAN be won! Please landlords donate to the cause as generously as you possibly can at https://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/tenanttax/. We're already over the £100k mark but need significantly more!

From: John McKay 13 June 2016 09:44 AM

This is hardly 'fresh data'. 2013/14 the number of landlords up, 2012/13 HMRC figures. If Ludlow Thompson are luring people into BTL on these figures they need a slap on the wrist big time. Osborne's attacks have made the sector unstable. Rents are rising to cover the issues of course, but say what's happening now, not what happened 3 or 4 years ago!

From: John McKay 31 May 2016 09:18 AM

So now they're experts in property investment too.

From: John McKay 19 May 2016 08:53 AM

I have the utmost respect for Steve and Chris for mounting this defence when the landlord organisations wouldn't commit to it. The time (and money) they've personally put into it is extraordinary. I am really looking forward to the summit. Good luck guys.

From: John McKay 06 May 2016 10:01 AM

Good grief, it's not the extra stamp duty that's the killer. It's the effects of C24. That's what's going to cause rents to rise and landlords to sell up. The extra stamp duty is certainly a cost but it can be factored in. C24 can't and is going to do massive damage to the country's tenant's finances. Osbo's tenant tax will wreak havoc!

From: John McKay 29 April 2016 08:21 AM

Absolutely Nigel, plus the massive hikes to insurance premiums and the just-announced enormous increases in court costs. It'll all be passed on in higher rents of course and it seems Government is out to screw the country's tenants! Perhaps it's believed that most tenants aren't Tory voters so it doesn't matter.

From: John McKay 24 March 2016 09:09 AM

So tell me again Mr Osborne... how does your plan work to increase the country's housing stock?

From: John McKay 24 March 2016 08:22 AM

From: John McKay 21 March 2016 09:26 AM

Amazing. Don't they read the news?

From: John McKay 09 February 2016 10:50 AM

I agree with you all. This will hurt tenants mostly and rents are already rising because of it. GO has not only hacked off a million or so landlords but their tenants will also see this for what it is - a tax raid and landlords are collecting it for the Treasury. The CONservative party has no coherent house-building plan. I can offer them one and I won't charge. http://saynotogeorge.co.uk/how-to-solve-the-housing-crisis/

From: John McKay 05 February 2016 11:57 AM

Personally I absolutely disagree that the Chancellor gives a damn about home ownership. Everything he does is about taking tax or selling off assets. The commitment to building 'affordable' homes is not even going to make a dent on the shortage, and even that is turning into more asset sell-offs, which the builders will land bank. Yes he sold the message well in the budget by going on about 'level playing fields' and all that. Generation Rent fell for it so applauded him right across the land, though I think a lot of them are now becoming aware what it means in higher rents (which is just tax going to the coffers), less choice, evictions and so forth. However Mr O's chums that will benefit greatly when they build their huge rental developments will no doubt be very grateful to him, so that should put a smile on his face.

From: John McKay 03 February 2016 08:50 AM

Is there no end to the stupidity this woman comes out with? It's the policy they were campaigning for (Clause 24) which is going to be forcing up rents and if they can't go up then the tenants will be evicted. Some people really shouldn't be allowed out on their own.

From: John McKay 28 January 2016 09:46 AM

I'd suggest that Mr Carney would indeed be very wise to look at the effects of what the Chancellor has introduced in the form of Clause 24. There will be severe consequences for tenants and the wider economy.

From: John McKay 27 January 2016 09:40 AM

Completely agree with you Adrian. Landlords have not created the phenomenal demand, they're just part of the supply chain to the end user. If you look at the statistics they're amazing. The UK population in 2001 was 59.1 million. So thousands of years of evolution, natural population growth and of course some pretty bad wars had arrived at that figure. In 2015 the figure had risen to around 65 million. That's an incredible 10% growth and 85% of that is down to immigration. I am personally completely in favour of foreigners coming to work here but Government made no provision to house these people. Where are the massive building programmes of the post war period and the 1970s??? If they'd kept up that build rate there wouldn't be a housing crisis, and you know, it could be sorted out now very easily. There are enormous brownfield sites all over the UK that are redundant MOD properties. Build on them and get the finance from the PRS by offering tax free investment plans, eg 5% annual ROI. This would divert investors money into these new-builds. If modern construction methods or timber-frame systems were used the houses could be built incredibly cheaply. The properties could still be sold at a profit to FTBs but way below comparable market value and the money raised from that could be used to make the necessary improvement to local infrastructure. All this Government want to do though is tax, tax, tax and of course sell off State assets that we've owned for hundreds of years. All to settle the deficit! The powers that be have no real interest in solving the housing crisis.

From: John McKay 13 January 2016 10:28 AM

Tax grab along with the ever-increasing legislation Jason. Now we're even part of the immigration control system, though I don't see any training offered by Government and they haven't told me how much they're paying me yet. Hackney Renters clearly don't have a clue.

From: John McKay 13 January 2016 10:17 AM

And then Brandon Lewis announces that he's trying to encourage more developers to build to rent. I don't think I can remember any Government as incompetent as this one.

From: John McKay 04 January 2016 09:17 AM

I couldn't agree more with all of the above Peter but I'd also ask the question as to why Mark Carney thinks landlords are all going to sell up if prices slumped. I don't understand his reasoning. Is there some evidence that this has happened elsewhere? And so what if they did? The total incompetence of the Government is astounding but throw Mark Carney's misguided views into the pot as well and there's no way of telling what's going to come out next. Or am I missing something? Is there factual evidence that Mr Carney is basing his statement on? If there is I really would like to see it and I'll be the first to say 'fair enough', but as the Governor doesn't seem to refer to any case history I can only assume he has no understanding of why people are in the landlording business.

From: John McKay 18 December 2015 08:29 AM

Indeed the vast majority of landlords do have good relationships with their tenants are rarely (if ever) increase rents mid-tenancy. So the longer a tenant stays in a place the better the deal their getting. I have tenants that have been with me for years, many of them approaching the 10 year point and they've never had an increase. However things are now changing. Thanks to George Osborne I am now increasing my rents on my complete portfolio, with the first phase going up in January. New tenancy agreements have already been signed or S13 letters issued. Not one tenant has refused because they know that I am having to do this and they're still getting a better rate than the market allows. I'm doing this now rather than waiting till 2017 because I believe the Alice in Wonderland tax (thank you Richard Dyson from the Telegraph for the name) means that rents MUST rise by 30% minimum over the coming years and that is really quite conservative (no pun intended). This Chancellor is deliberately forcing rents up so he can raise even more tax.

From: John McKay 09 December 2015 08:14 AM

Glenn I think you're completely right except the problem will be much worse. If house prices drop the house builders will reduce output thus keeping prices higher through the excess of demand. Duncan Stott needs to understand the plain dynamics of supply and demand. It's that which is forcing up prices, not Landlords buying properties. If Landlords stop buying it'll make little difference to house prices but as you say, it will make it very, very hard to rent anywhere. With so many people in our country that can't buy because they can't get a mortgage (many of them foreigners) they have to rent. As you say, with less supply rents will rise. I also believe it will be impossible for Landlords to buy up properties because the lenders will increase their 1.25 rent multiple as it won't be safe to lend to someone that has to pay tax on all rent received. The figure could rise significantly and whilst rents are sure to rise I don't think it'll be enough to cover whatever the new multiple will be.

From: John McKay 14 July 2015 11:32 AM

I would like to invite Betsy to come and speak with Landlords at our monthly meetings in Peterborough. The problem with her position is that she only ever hears from whinging tenants, which when it comes down to it is probably a relatively small percentage of the rental market. If she really feels that Landlords are charging all they can she is way off the mark, and I, like many others rarely increase rents when a tenant is in situ, especially a good tenant. I have houses that would easily fetch 20% more rent were they to be vacant today. One of them would go on the market some 40% higher if the current tenants moved on. Please come and talk to us Generation Rent, you are so far off the truth.

From: John McKay 14 July 2015 10:33 AM

Hurrah, some sense at last!

From: John McKay 14 July 2015 10:21 AM

A friend had long email exchanges with Shelter about the 'retaliation eviction' issue. Shelter just refused to take on board that this sort of change in the law would seriously impact on landlords, who in the main, are just trying to make a living. They're not rogues or villains with waxed moustaches that are trying to screw every last penny out of someone. Yet Shelter just don't see it, nor do they see the long term negative effect of good landlords quitting the market, or enlarging their portfolio's. Or even worse (from Shelter's perspective) giving homes to LHA tenants because rightly or wrongly, in many people's eyes, they are the people most likely to pull such a stunt. Come on David Cameron, let's have some balance in the law please!

From: John McKay 30 June 2015 07:35 AM

As always, Shelter putting their own angle on things. How many of the evictions are down to tenants CHOOSING not to pay their rents because they put more value on cigarettes, alcohol, Sky TV and so forth. Most landlords I know try and work with tenants when they're in arrears. Shelter's comment re a tenant losing their job is completely ridiculous as they could then claim housing benefit, if they can be bothered to that is.

From: John McKay 18 May 2015 09:34 AM

Breaking News