Hopefully, and No. Government needs to actually get behind more social housing.
Video-More on
Yes. – the English public will have no choice- but to pay more for less housing. with corporations taking the property. UK = non stability for its citizens.
420ball-sniffer69 on
Nope. I’d go one further and say we should reverse the right to buy policy. Social housing is not a commodity and should serve those who need it most.
KernowKermit on
Are “buy-to-let” landlords a special category of landlord? I was under the impression that all landlords let property that they have, at some point bought.
BaBeBaBeBooby on
Tenants and those with kids – who will very likely be tenants in early adulthood – should care as rents will only go up with govt interference. The govt could of course build millions of new homes, reducing rents, but this is very unlikely, and certainly won’t happen in the next few years.
PM_ME_SECRET_DATA on
We are shifting to a market where corporate landlords will hoover up properties instead.
There’s going to be a lot less property available for a lot more demand imo.
The OBR predicts rents to rise quite a bit due to this over the coming years.
hitanthrope on
I’ve never been convinced that it is a particularly ethical investment, and I am currently a private tenant. The question I suppose is, “to be replaced with what exactly?”. The answer to that, in any practical sense is, a few very large companies will own huge portfolios of rental properties and push house prices up further as they attempt to corner the market.
The number of the people willing to and in a position to buy a house doesn’t change so these landlords get replaced with new landlords.
Seems some of you would like the state to be your landlord. I’d rather they weren’t because I spent most of my time on here reading and engaging in conversations about how fucking awful they are.
FaceMace87 on
Hopefully and no. It is dangerous for a government to have so few assets because it has flogged them all to the rich, if the government can get its foot back on the social housing ladder that is one step to getting the housing situation fixed.
Accomplished_Pen5061 on
Fantastic.
All BTL landlording did was artificially inflate house prices.
CedricTheCurtain on
A few initial thoughts…
If this led to a contraction of the housing market, homeowners should care especially when it comes to renewing a mortgage.
But also, maybe not. If buy-to-let doesn’t exist, those that have made their portfolio already have the money to buy outright. Then we’re looking at if they find it financially viable.
Third, this can be good for first time buyers who may be able to buy more cheaply. Depends on the above.
One way or another, it’s going to come at a potential huge cost to some. In particular those with a single home and a mortgage.
RelevantCucumber6305 on
Yes the small landlord is disappearing to be replaced by worse industrial owned rental companies. That care little for the property as they own a couple of hundred.
How long before the old company store returns and pay comes in tokens rather than actual wages.
andymaclean19 on
So according to the article half of properties rented out make a profit of over £10,000 per year. That’s a massive amount to make given you are essentially doing nothing and just profiting from some other family because you happen to own a house. I don’t think this is a bad profit at all. I don’t really think landlords should be able to literally pay off their mortgages with somebody else’s rent. If it pays for interest, repairs and makes £10,000 profit that’s a nice business to be in, right? And the landlord gets to keep the value from any house price rises.
squigs on
I’d really like to see the end of private landlords. Seems a ridiculous way to run the rental housing market.
Makes a lot more sense to have housing associations and treat housing as a utility rather than relying on what’s essentially a side hustle for people with spare homes.
MajesticCommission33 on
The problems of renting and bad landlords will mostly disappear if the restrictions on property were significantly reduced. The problem is supply, fix that (and I don’t mean taxpayer subsidised social housing).
TheDawiWhisperer on
No but in typical monkey paw curls fashion it just means people with deeper pockets can buy all the houses and rent them out instead
civicnational on
Of course no-one feels sorry for a landlord, but the UK’s anti-landlord policies are not good for tenants and ignoresthe fact that there are crap conditions in social housing as well as the private rented sector.
Once a small number of big players have a stranglehold on the private rented market the service will be completely enshittified and prices fixed – that’s how monopolies and oligopolies work. The big players know exactly how to provide the minimum service at maximum cost and stay within the law. And they will focus on the areas where there is the most profit and the least risk – young professionals with impeccable references.
It’s the lower income tenants who will suffer the most as dwindling supply and less choice raises prices, making it harder to save for a home, while landlords cherry pick the tenants who represent the safest bet to minimise their risk of non-payment in an unforgiving market.
The POTB are not going to be building nice single family dwellings to house those left behind at affordable rents except in small numbers in areas with left-leaning, pro-development local authorities. It will be student halls/B&B type accommodation for those left behind.
-info-sec- on
Buy to let is a thing where an individual owns the property. Instead, they’ll be owned by a corporation.
InsecureInscapist on
Kind of?
They weren’t a force for good by any measure. But the corporate mega land lords they are being replaced with are arguably worse.
explax on
What I find funny in this discussion is how previously it was ‘landlords can only charge what the market can bear” and now landlords are being squeezed out theyre like “rents gonna rise.” Am I to believe that lettings agents didn’t have a hand in the market in the same way corporate landlords do? Theres a slight difference in the way that the investment will be valued as a multiplier of rent which will resist rent increases but even still..
srogijogi on
Such a great news, Guardian at their best! So there will be less individual landlords, so for sure the market for renters will be better. They are going to be replaced with corporate landlords, which, for sure, will do everything they can to make renters’ life nicer. In the meantime there will be less rental properties available to rent, which for sure is another great aspect of this situation.
So Reddit renters, how’s your deposit savings going?
Ok-Inflation4310 on
I was talking to a call centre today and the guy was very chatty. He mentioned he’d sunk every last penny he had into his first buy to let. He seemed extremely enthusiastic about it, I just hope he’s going into it with his eyes open but it didn’t seem like it.
Fit_Owl_2909 on
Something needs to replace private rentals though. We need to build more social housing, or buy existing properties and rent them out socially. Until then, the private rental sector is essential to the supply of housing in this country. It should never have been allowed to get like this in the first place – and now it will take time and public investment to reduce reliance on private landlords.
CharmingCatastrophe on
Buy to let council houses/landlords is fine but it should come with conditions..mainly you can’t buy the house for the first 5-10 years because too many people get a council house then suddenly get back with a partner who suddenly has enough money to put a bid in for the house..it makes sense to have a family in the house for 5-10 years let them make it their home and then give them the opportunity to buy it when it comes close to the time they no longer qualify for it and then reinvest that money into another building plot/house
parkway_parkway on
What we need is a large scale joined up philosophical discussion about how housing should be provided.
Just hammering private landlords might feel good in the short term, but where does it lead?
Ideally if you want better prices and conditions it’s about supply and demand and we can all see which way that is going.
Are corporate landlords or councils better?
This is the biggest problem with the country is none ever seems to want to look after big picture and make a proper plan. We just fiddle faddle round the edges of a broken system and sigh about how broken it is.
I mean when was the last time you heard someone in the government say “this is how many houses we need per person, this is how many people we have so here is our plan to build enough to get to that level”.
Deepmidwinter2025 on
On so many platforms they suffered a complete lack of self awareness.
Folk buying up houses to fund their retirement – and justifying their actions to young people who pay the rent – who can’t afford a deposit or a pension.
Uk landlord Reddit feed daily posts from folk who think they can buy somewhere cheap – rent it out – and cream off the profits – with zero responsibilities.
Brushing away any concerns about an ageing population – expecting the state to take them off their hands.
Bemoaning high taxes – when more than a fair wack makes it back via housing benefits.
Trying to spin it that the are “entrepreneurs” and create a “market”. But much like privatised trains – they have a captive market and pretty much had a great time until tax changes.
badjetwash on
No tears are being shed (currently) for anyone with 7 properties that has to take a 2.5k hit. Something being slightly less lucrative will obviously draw sneers from ‘have-nots’ (I’m a ‘have-not’).
Consistent tax crackdown on independent property owners will only force sales towards corporation type landlords though. That’s not so good.
26 Comments
Hopefully, and No. Government needs to actually get behind more social housing.
Yes. – the English public will have no choice- but to pay more for less housing. with corporations taking the property. UK = non stability for its citizens.
Nope. I’d go one further and say we should reverse the right to buy policy. Social housing is not a commodity and should serve those who need it most.
Are “buy-to-let” landlords a special category of landlord? I was under the impression that all landlords let property that they have, at some point bought.
Tenants and those with kids – who will very likely be tenants in early adulthood – should care as rents will only go up with govt interference. The govt could of course build millions of new homes, reducing rents, but this is very unlikely, and certainly won’t happen in the next few years.
We are shifting to a market where corporate landlords will hoover up properties instead.
There’s going to be a lot less property available for a lot more demand imo.
The OBR predicts rents to rise quite a bit due to this over the coming years.
I’ve never been convinced that it is a particularly ethical investment, and I am currently a private tenant. The question I suppose is, “to be replaced with what exactly?”. The answer to that, in any practical sense is, a few very large companies will own huge portfolios of rental properties and push house prices up further as they attempt to corner the market.
The number of the people willing to and in a position to buy a house doesn’t change so these landlords get replaced with new landlords.
Seems some of you would like the state to be your landlord. I’d rather they weren’t because I spent most of my time on here reading and engaging in conversations about how fucking awful they are.
Hopefully and no. It is dangerous for a government to have so few assets because it has flogged them all to the rich, if the government can get its foot back on the social housing ladder that is one step to getting the housing situation fixed.
Fantastic.
All BTL landlording did was artificially inflate house prices.
A few initial thoughts…
If this led to a contraction of the housing market, homeowners should care especially when it comes to renewing a mortgage.
But also, maybe not. If buy-to-let doesn’t exist, those that have made their portfolio already have the money to buy outright. Then we’re looking at if they find it financially viable.
Third, this can be good for first time buyers who may be able to buy more cheaply. Depends on the above.
One way or another, it’s going to come at a potential huge cost to some. In particular those with a single home and a mortgage.
Yes the small landlord is disappearing to be replaced by worse industrial owned rental companies. That care little for the property as they own a couple of hundred.
How long before the old company store returns and pay comes in tokens rather than actual wages.
So according to the article half of properties rented out make a profit of over £10,000 per year. That’s a massive amount to make given you are essentially doing nothing and just profiting from some other family because you happen to own a house. I don’t think this is a bad profit at all. I don’t really think landlords should be able to literally pay off their mortgages with somebody else’s rent. If it pays for interest, repairs and makes £10,000 profit that’s a nice business to be in, right? And the landlord gets to keep the value from any house price rises.
I’d really like to see the end of private landlords. Seems a ridiculous way to run the rental housing market.
Makes a lot more sense to have housing associations and treat housing as a utility rather than relying on what’s essentially a side hustle for people with spare homes.
The problems of renting and bad landlords will mostly disappear if the restrictions on property were significantly reduced. The problem is supply, fix that (and I don’t mean taxpayer subsidised social housing).
No but in typical monkey paw curls fashion it just means people with deeper pockets can buy all the houses and rent them out instead
Of course no-one feels sorry for a landlord, but the UK’s anti-landlord policies are not good for tenants and ignoresthe fact that there are crap conditions in social housing as well as the private rented sector.
Once a small number of big players have a stranglehold on the private rented market the service will be completely enshittified and prices fixed – that’s how monopolies and oligopolies work. The big players know exactly how to provide the minimum service at maximum cost and stay within the law. And they will focus on the areas where there is the most profit and the least risk – young professionals with impeccable references.
It’s the lower income tenants who will suffer the most as dwindling supply and less choice raises prices, making it harder to save for a home, while landlords cherry pick the tenants who represent the safest bet to minimise their risk of non-payment in an unforgiving market.
The POTB are not going to be building nice single family dwellings to house those left behind at affordable rents except in small numbers in areas with left-leaning, pro-development local authorities. It will be student halls/B&B type accommodation for those left behind.
Buy to let is a thing where an individual owns the property. Instead, they’ll be owned by a corporation.
Kind of?
They weren’t a force for good by any measure. But the corporate mega land lords they are being replaced with are arguably worse.
What I find funny in this discussion is how previously it was ‘landlords can only charge what the market can bear” and now landlords are being squeezed out theyre like “rents gonna rise.” Am I to believe that lettings agents didn’t have a hand in the market in the same way corporate landlords do? Theres a slight difference in the way that the investment will be valued as a multiplier of rent which will resist rent increases but even still..
Such a great news, Guardian at their best! So there will be less individual landlords, so for sure the market for renters will be better. They are going to be replaced with corporate landlords, which, for sure, will do everything they can to make renters’ life nicer. In the meantime there will be less rental properties available to rent, which for sure is another great aspect of this situation.
So Reddit renters, how’s your deposit savings going?
I was talking to a call centre today and the guy was very chatty. He mentioned he’d sunk every last penny he had into his first buy to let. He seemed extremely enthusiastic about it, I just hope he’s going into it with his eyes open but it didn’t seem like it.
Something needs to replace private rentals though. We need to build more social housing, or buy existing properties and rent them out socially. Until then, the private rental sector is essential to the supply of housing in this country. It should never have been allowed to get like this in the first place – and now it will take time and public investment to reduce reliance on private landlords.
Buy to let council houses/landlords is fine but it should come with conditions..mainly you can’t buy the house for the first 5-10 years because too many people get a council house then suddenly get back with a partner who suddenly has enough money to put a bid in for the house..it makes sense to have a family in the house for 5-10 years let them make it their home and then give them the opportunity to buy it when it comes close to the time they no longer qualify for it and then reinvest that money into another building plot/house
What we need is a large scale joined up philosophical discussion about how housing should be provided.
Just hammering private landlords might feel good in the short term, but where does it lead?
Ideally if you want better prices and conditions it’s about supply and demand and we can all see which way that is going.
Are corporate landlords or councils better?
This is the biggest problem with the country is none ever seems to want to look after big picture and make a proper plan. We just fiddle faddle round the edges of a broken system and sigh about how broken it is.
I mean when was the last time you heard someone in the government say “this is how many houses we need per person, this is how many people we have so here is our plan to build enough to get to that level”.
On so many platforms they suffered a complete lack of self awareness.
Folk buying up houses to fund their retirement – and justifying their actions to young people who pay the rent – who can’t afford a deposit or a pension.
Uk landlord Reddit feed daily posts from folk who think they can buy somewhere cheap – rent it out – and cream off the profits – with zero responsibilities.
Brushing away any concerns about an ageing population – expecting the state to take them off their hands.
Bemoaning high taxes – when more than a fair wack makes it back via housing benefits.
Trying to spin it that the are “entrepreneurs” and create a “market”. But much like privatised trains – they have a captive market and pretty much had a great time until tax changes.
No tears are being shed (currently) for anyone with 7 properties that has to take a 2.5k hit. Something being slightly less lucrative will obviously draw sneers from ‘have-nots’ (I’m a ‘have-not’).
Consistent tax crackdown on independent property owners will only force sales towards corporation type landlords though. That’s not so good.