Deltic22

Deltic22

70p

372 comments posted · 4 followers · following 0

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Rosalind Beck: Extendi... · 0 replies · +1 points

You've misunderstood. They don't pay less because of the price of the property - they underbid the market. The investor needs it to be a deal, the homeowner doesn't, which is why the truth of the situation is that investors lose out to homebuyers, not the other way round (as often erroneously reported in the media). Also, you may be interested to know that FTBs, apart from 2008-10, have always been the biggest buying sector since 2000, and currently run amongst their all-time highs of a shade under 400,000 transactions a year. (Note also that the PRS is shrinking at a rate of 4000 properties a month, but those tenants being evicted to enable the sale are not translating into buyers themselves, but are instead chasing fewer rental properties at higher rents and/or succumbing to homelessness, which is the key cause of the rapid rise in homeless numbers over the last 4 years).

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Rosalind Beck: Extendi... · 0 replies · +1 points

+1

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Rosalind Beck: Extendi... · 1 reply · +1 points

This is another spot-on article from Dr Beck. We know for sure that child abuse, domestic violence, depression and arrears are all increasing under the lockdown. But banning evictions does the opposite of helping people escape these situations. I have a tenant (two, in fact) in extremely difficult domestic situations. The one in question is desperate to be evicted and is beyond inconsolable at the delay. Every day in the house is another day at risk and in fear. I'm doing everything I can to assist but without an eviction order from the court she is trapped without LA help. If she isn't evicted through no fault of her own, she gets no correct or official help. Not only do cases like this keep emerging, but delaying evictions further only builds them up for the future, with all the subsequent problems that will bring.

3 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Rosalind Beck: Extendi... · 0 replies · +1 points

Where do you get these figures? The PRS is a net contributor of £16.1bn a year. You're not confusing the Housing Benefit figure of £25bn are you (like most do) - because £17bn of that goes on social housing.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil O'Brien: Five way... · 1 reply · +1 points

You don’t seem to realise who funds the new builds which wouldn’t happen otherwise. Familiarise yourself with the English Housing Survey - 83% of all new dwellings created are from the advanced investment, conversion, or restoration from derelict, of private investors and landlords. No new build in cities even starts without investors stumping up large deposits, sometimes years in advance. Show me a homeowner willing to do that - they don’t!

And to get tax relief on a privately owned dwelling would require being taxed on your ‘imputed rent’ first - see how many people will go for THAT idea!

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil O'Brien: Five way... · 0 replies · +1 points

Well said Gromit! O’Brien seems to have had an attack of the double-standards. He was quite happy to change rules retrospectively in 2015 and gloated on these very pages of the forthcoming demise of rented housing. Now he seems to be saying you *shouldn’t* make such changes. Very odd. Maybe he’s noticed the queues of homelessness outside his surgery door, whilst charities claim (obviously wrongly) that landlords selling up are contributing to the homeless crisis, for which they try to ban Section 21?! You really couldn’t make this level of idiocy up.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil O'Brien: Five way... · 1 reply · +1 points

Isn’t it funny that O’Brien, PRS hater extraordinaire, has no interest in where the evicted tenants go when their landlord is forced into selling. Doubly funny is the fact that he peddles the usual ‘landlords inflating house prices’ fallacy when a) house prices doubled every 7.5 years (averaged) from 1948 - 50 years before BTL took off, and b) that landlords selling in droves - 4000 houses a month - has, according to the Halifax, seen house prices accelerate at the fastest rate in years. Anyone who thinks the debunked theory of landlords causing HPI still holds true ought to explain why a mass sell-off by those landlords hasn’t caused price deflation.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil O'Brien: Five way... · 0 replies · +1 points

How has it made it nearly impossible for a homeowner to buy? Home-owners - FTBs in particular - are the largest portion of the buying market and have been for years. FTB numbers are almost back to all-time highs after the credit crunch put them at all-time lows. They were never held back by BTL, as the WORST EVER purchasing figures for home owners were 84% of all transactions.

As for your second paragraph, you do realise the biggest driver of homelessness is landlords selling, right? Just explain to me where those evicted tenant families go. I’ll give you a clue: it isn’t into home ownership.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil O'Brien: Five way... · 5 replies · +1 points

Ludicrously stupid statement from someone who clearly doesn’t know the difference between business expenses to create a taxable profit, and personal ownership; nor, it would seem, the history of MIRAS, Schedule B taxation, nor why we had it in the first place. This kind of comment gets repeated endlessly, and always by people who don’t seem to have a clue about the history involved.

4 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Howard Flight: Busines... · 0 replies · +1 points

Indeed VS. And the thing about MIRAS for homeowners being abolished, that nobody ever seems to have a clue about, is that the reason we had MIRAS in the first place was because homeowners were originally taxed on their ownership ‘benefit in kind’ for not having to pay rent. It therefore became equitable to offer MIRAS as a counterbalance under Schedule B taxation. Once the Imputed Rent ceased to be taxable, MIRAS became anachronistic and was correctly withdrawn. But most people fail to understand the differences between MIRAS, current tax-free homeownership, and business expenses which are used to create taxable profit.