Love to be the one to Make good property decisions?

Then register for free and get exclusive, personalised benefits that will help you achieve all your money goals.

Join the lovemoney.com experience

Register Now

Confused?

Why Register?

You must be mad to be a buy-to-let landlord

Published 5 March 2010 in Make good property decisions

Harvey Jones reckons you must have a screw loose if you want to become a landlord.

There was a time when everybody was either becoming a buy-to-let landlord, or talking about it. I even considered jumping on the bandwagon myself, which is always a sure sign that an unsustainable bubble has developed.

One thing stopped me then, and one thing will always hold me back. Quite simply, you would have to be mad to be a buy-to-let landlord. It is a crazily effortful investment, and here are seven reasons why.

1) Tenants from hell

Most tenants are highly responsible folk who will treat your property with care and respect. But at some point, you will attract the tenant from hell.

Shave years off your mortgage

They won’t pay their rent on time, if they pay at all. Or they will upset the neighbours with loud parties. Or trash the property. Or maybe all three.

And after you finally eject them, they will leave behind imaginative graffiti and a curious fishy odour. Your faith in human nature will be knocked. So will your bank balance.

Alternatively, your tenants might be the loveliest people in the world, but can’t make the rent because they’ve lost their jobs. What do you do then? And there might be times when you can’t find tenants at all. Void periods can cost you dear, because you have to keep feeding that mortgage.

Remember what Sartre said: “Hell is other people.”

2) No growth

Before the credit crunch, the hassles of being an amateur landlord were offset by the rewards.

House prices were soaring and rental yields were solid. It was a heck of a return, but now those days are over. The property market has been been kept afloat by a public deficit so big even the Greeks are shocked and a currency that is losing value against the Zimbabwean dollar.

The true pain will come after the election, when the new Cable-Osborne-Darling Treasury coalition will hike taxes and slash spending. If that doesn’t hit property prices, then I’m Gordon Brown’s hole-punch.

3) Maintenance woes

Perhaps I’m a little jaundiced about property ownership.

Three years ago, I bought a charming old house that turned out to have rot in the basement, rats in the cellar and mice all over. It all cost me tens of thousands of pounds. Most landlords won’t be so unlucky (or stupid), but if you buy an old property you might need to spend more than you think doing it up, and won’t be able to rent it out until the last builder leaves.

Even if it’s in decent nick, a strong wind can blow off roof slates, a neglected bath can flood half the house, a cold snap can freeze the pipes, and you’re the person responsible, day and night. You will also have to repair or replace freezers, washing machines and boilers when they go bust. It all adds up.

4) Lousy letting agents

I’m even more jaundiced about letting agents, who will take 15% of your rental income as payment for mismanaging your investment.

I’ve had several friends who rented out their homes and still rant about incompetent agents. Unpaid rent, bunking tenants, lengthy void periods, unreported damage and mislaid deposits are all to be expected, as one spotty and bored trainee after another takes over your account.

Of course, you don’t have to use a lettings agent, you can always do the work yourself. That’ll be fun.

5) Pricey finance

Setting yourself up as a landlord is expensive.

You may struggle to get a competitive buy-to-let mortgage with less than a 25% deposit, and rates can be around 2% higher than on a residential loan. Plus you have to pay a mortgage arrangement fee, which may be up to 3% of the property’s value - that’s £4,500 on a £150,000 property.

Finally, you have to pay Stamp Duty on any property costing more than £125,000, plus legal fees.

Property isn’t just expensive, it is also illiquid, you can’t sell in a hurry if you need the cash. Why go to all that expense and trouble?

6) Red tape hell

And then there’s the red tape. Landlords have to meet stringent new regulatory demands when renting out houses in multiple occupancy (HMOs), and comply with tough new standards on fire regulations.

Yawn.

7) Easy street

Why go to all that trouble and effort when you can buy a FTSE 100 share yielding 6% a year with the prospect of capital growth? It’s a no-brainer. Or an investment fund that pays rising dividends year after year. And all without having to worry about tenants, mortgages, roof slates, stamp duty, letting agents and red tape.

Why endure so much risk and effort when you can can get a fixed 5.1% a year for the next five years from The AA? You can find the Top 20 savings accounts and cash Isas here.

As I said, you would have to be crazy to get into buy-to-let. If you’re still tempted, try Googling “Grant Bovey, Anthea Turner, buy-to-let, bankrupt”. They went bust so that you don’t have to.

More: Britain’s greatest property investors | The biggest house price myth

At lovemoney.com, you can research all the best deals yourself using our online mortgage service, or speak directly to a whole-of-market, fee-free lovemoney.com broker. Call 0800 804 4045 or email mortgages@lovemoney.com for more help.

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Share this lovemoney.com content on any of the social networks and utilities below by simply clicking the site of your choice.

  • You can subscribe to all lovemoney.com articles via our RSS feed.

Comments

Avatar

Swarbs said

  • 12 recommendations

"Why go to all that trouble and effort when you can buy a FTSE 100 share yielding 6% a year with the prospect of capital growth?"

Which share? Woolworths, RBS, Northern Rock, HBOS or Bradford and Bingley? Yes property may be difficult, but you are unlikely to lose all your investment due to the actions of someone else. You have control and you make the decisions. In fact:

1.Tenants from hell

Shares equivalent - managers from hell. Most managers are great, but some will gear up the company with far too much debt and disappear with a massive payoff when the company collapses, and your shares are used to pay the creditors.

2. No growth

Shares equivalent - erm, no growth? Or how about ten years of negative growth? Anyone for a -30% return on investment over ten years? No? You sure?

3. Maintenance woes

Shares equivalent - new share offerings. Our company is in trouble. Please buy three more shares for every share you currently own, or we'll go bankrupt and you'll lose everything. See RBS for details...

4. Lousy letting agents

Shares equivalent - lousy investment fund managers. Letting agents charge between 10 and 15% of your total rent, which is around 0.75% of the total value of your property. Fund managers charge up to 2% of the total value of your investment. Even when they have driven it down in value by 50% over two years. Not to mention that if you invest in a company you probably pay the CEO and board of directors a hundred times more each year than you get back. And then pray they don't fall asleep at the wheel...

5. Pricey finance

Shares equivalent - lack of finance. Ask any bank to give you a loan to buy shares and see what they say. Don't be hurt when they laugh you out of the door. Even now property is seen as a reliable asset against which to lend. Shares have never been seen as that. Doesn't that tell you anything?

6. Red tape hell

Ok, there's probably no shares equivalent to this, but you can usually get a professional to deal with all your EPC, Gas safety, HMO licensing etc. Much like companies do with their auditors. You may think shareholders don't have to pay for that, but they do - it comes out of the company's profits.

7. Easy street

Easy, but higher risk on almost all measures. The only long term risk in pretty much any investment is that you take on too much debt and can't afford to pay it back. The crucial difference between property and shares is that in property you choose how much debt to take on. In shares, the managers choose how much debt to take on, and are often more concerned with their own bonus package than with you investment.

And anyway, why settle for a share yielding 6% when you can buy an HMO and rent it for a yield of 8% to a registered charity. Who pay rent via standing order and manage all the tenants themselves. Just goes to show that an anecdote offers no proof at all.

I should of course point out that, having fully vented my spleen ;), I don't consider either shares or property to be notably superior. Horses for courses Harvey, hourses for courses... Property will make you wealthy quicker and arguably more certainly in the long term, but is more work and with more risk if you get careless. Shares will make you wealthy much slower, but much less effort. and you are much more likely to suffer a damaging contraction. Anyone planning to retire off their shares in 2003 or 2009 would have been in for a very rude surprise with 50% of their investment disappearing within two years. Makes the 15-20% fall in the property market in 2008 seem like a drop in the ocean doesn't it?

Avatar
  • 5 recommendations

Hi Swarbs.

Now that's the kind of reply I like! Dismantling my argument with logic and precision, and no abuse! Plenty of good points there. I accept BTL can still work, if you go in with your eyes open, understand the risks and put in the hours. But it isn't the easy path to riches that many believe (or used to believe).

Cheers, Harvey

Avatar

Swarbs said

  • 2 recommendations

(takes bow) ;)

I completely agree that BTL is not an easy route to riches, unless you are very speculative and very lucky. And even then you can mess it up (Anthea and Grant being an exceptional example).

Although I would go farther and state that there is no easy path to riches (with the obvious luck and speculation caveats). Even with shares, when you just invest and wait for them to grow, there is work involved. Some of it by you in picking the right share, but lots of it by the managers and employees of the company. In that case, you are effectively outsourcing the work to them, and hoping that they don't turn out to be another Fred Goodwin, Kenneth Lay or Nick Leeson. To slightly mangle a quote I once heard:

"If you see a big fortune, someone did a lot of work, or took a very big risk"

Avatar

Chorlton1 said

  • 0 recommendations

People like property because it is relatively easy to understand and they feel in control. Shares on the other hand like everything which involves banks appears very complicated to most investors and the peaks and troughs are much harder hitting in the short term.

Avatar

emz said

  • 0 recommendations

But it isn't the easy path to riches that many believe (or used to believe).

There is no such thing as an easy path to riches is there!

We currently have tenants from hell who are a hassle and the place is a mess. Luckily with no mortgage on it the expense of redecorating will be covered easily by their rent. We inherited the property in May so with the property market so bad decided to rent it for a time. I'm not sure its worth the hassle at all!

Avatar

sbeadon said

  • 0 recommendations

I have 3 BTL properties and have found over the past 15yrs that most people who rent are decent people who look after the properties.  Yes I have had one instance of a tenant not paying the rent for 3 months and when I thought the agent would deal with this they said they could not as I did not have rent gurantee Insurance.  I then decided to take the tenant to court for the outstanding rent and legal fees which he paid eventually. I must admit it was a hassle but I learnt ALOT from this experience. 

Now I only use the agent to find the tenant and do the credit check and check in report and  I manage the properties on my own.  I now ensure that with every new tenant I have Rent gurantee, full Landlords Insurance and Emergency call out cover.  These three charges are minimal compared to what I would pay an agent to manage each property.  I have also found that once I stick to the same agent each time to find the tenant, that if I need a painter or repair man I can always call the agent for advise and they are VERY helpful.  So manageing the properties isn't that difficult.

Two of my properties are on variable rates as their fixed rates have ended, one is at 2.5% and the other at 4.5% but I do agree that all the new rates are VERY high but I expect with time these rates will come down just as the residential rates have done recently.

I still believe in BTL as a good investment especially if you're in it for the long run. 

Avatar

MrPound said

  • 0 recommendations

Swarbs - Your answer no. 1 was probably the best reply to an article I have ever seen on this website. Fantastic!

Avatar

mdhart said

  • 0 recommendations

Difference between property and shares - you can leverage with OTHER PEOPLES MONEY.

Find a distressed house for say £60k, spend £10k doing it up, and have it valued at £100k - raise a mortgage for say 65% - you put in a net £5k.

Rental income - say £6k, mortgage interest say £3.5k - return £2.5k per year on a £5k outlay. Simplistic I know, but illustrates the point. Risks - of course - void periods, bad tenants, repairs and rising interest rates, but rates can go down and give you additional returns to cushion that. 2 of my loans are older and cost me 1.65% only at present. As previous poster says - you try borrowing money to buy equities!  In the long run, property always goes up - not in next 5 years maybe - but on a 10 year+ view - always up.

Avatar

Iniq said

  • 0 recommendations

Swarbs puts it very well.

It depends whether you really mean "Buy to Let" or actually mean "Borrow to Let" - i.e., acquiring the property in question with borrowed money.  The phrase "Buy to Let" is frequently (and deceptivley) used to describe the latter.

Harvey's points are very largely applicable to "Borrow to Let" landlords.  There would be equally strong reasons against borrowing to buy shares, as Swarbs points out.

But "Buying to Let" as a way of investing capital you already have is a perfectly reasonable alternaive to buying shares, especially as part of a diversified portfolio.

If you genuinely are buying to let (as distinct from borrowing to let) you don't really worry about short-to-medium property price fluctuations, any more than an investor in gilts worries about fluctuations in the price of gilts.  Your main interest is the income stream.

I own un-mortgaged investment property which brings in about 3% (on current valuation) every year, after all expenses and tax.  I'm content with that!  The value may fluctuate in the short-to-medium term, but who cares?  Its value has grown 1,500% since I bought it 35 years ago (which means the annual yield on my original investment is currently 50% pa.  I like it!)

And in the LONG term ï»¿ï»¿ï»¿the value is far more likely increase rather than decrease ...     

Avatar

Wallis57 said

  • 0 recommendations

Even Alistair Darling could have made money in BTL until he flew the country into the mountain of debt.

It now requires savvy investors who do their homework and thus can make money at it. Property is and always will be a long term investment and historically even though there are dips along the way it will double in value every 10 years. So no personal pension for me, just a steady acquisition of BTL properties. Harvey stick to your shares and leave the property to us.

Avatar

bungalow said

  • 0 recommendations

1 tenants form Hell No mine came form Zimbabwe- white displaced farmers I felt sorry for.

2 Growth -yes house 1 1980 cost £11k worth £210k, house 2 1988 £33k worth £160k, house 3 2000 cost £80k worth £180K house 4 2007 cost £80k worth maybe £120k my ttl mort £140k inc my own house.

3 set aside money each month form rent, and get a survey ( or be a surveyor ) when u buy

4  I pay 7% but I have had lousy agents

5 You can get a B2L mortgage at 4.5%

6 buy in a bad area and yep you will have more red tape or HMO yes same but the returns are at least 2x with students  you takes your chioce.

& don't over borrow -

I bought the privatisation shares as I bought my council house so I grudgingly I now have to thank Mrs Thatch for a £.75m value portfolio.

I would not have any saving otherwise... so I would say YES do be a B2L landlord. or maybe do holiday lets....but those agents take 33%!

Avatar

Steve Sims said

  • 0 recommendations

So much for the facts. I suspect Anthea Turner is consulting with her solicitors as I type because she most certainly is not bankrupt and neither did she play any part in Grant Bovey's business according to official reports from the bankruptcy hearing.

Poor writing, poor fact checking, poor editing and a legal claim on the way to boot for publishing a libel...why should I believe anything else you write?

Avatar
  • 0 recommendations

I fully agree with Harvey Jones who is far too polite to say things rather bluntly - that is to say that amateurs who try to imitate the professionals without the know how or appropriate and sufficient resources frequently get their fingers burnt and then rather badly.

There is a place for "buy to let" both on the supply as well as the demand side.  But if it were really so profitable more professionals would be moving in. And as with anything, supply and demand would eventually balance things out.

Private investors who are up to their necks in it without having other activities to attentuate the fluctuations of the market, without appropriate safeguards in place and often without any sound exit strategy have simply ignored that it is a risky business.

AS all wise investors know there is no gain without risk, but before jumping in both feet first it is necessary to evaluate the risks of an operation and to minimise them, even if one is aninveterate gambler ! 

As Harvey Jones indicates those that fail to do so need their heads testing, even if they have limitless amounts of money to burn.

Avatar

Pitachok said

  • 1 recommendation

The reason buy-to-let is always worth considering is because the finance is actually very good. With a 25% deposit I can quadruple my investment for a 5% fee (the mortgage). Even if house prices and rents just creep up with inflation my debt diminishes and my return on investment grows - and I'm getting 3% inflation on the whole value of the property, not just the money I put in.

You can get rid of agents altogether. I advertise on free websites and get extremely good tenants (after weeding out plenty of bad ones). I can still check their references and credit rating myself and it costs far less than handing over 10%+ to an agent (who probably wouldn't check very carefully). I find that if I actually meet (and effectively interview) the tenants I have a good chance of finding considerate and reliable tenants.

Maintenance can be a problem if you know nothing about it. I'm lucky that I do, otherwise I'd be at the mercy of cowboy builders and I can imagine paying way over the odds. But when I think about it maintenance isn't such a big expense. If you have a flat you don't have to worry about basements and roofs or anything particularly costly. You have to paint it every seven years (which you can do yourself for next to nothing) and you might just have to get someone in to re-do the kitchen and bathroom once every twenty years.

It's true the biggest hassle is the people. Some can be demanding if only because they don't seem to have any common sense and end up overloading washing machines, blocking sinks with food, ruining carpets with candle wax or locking themselves out. But if you spend half an hour showing them what to do (and what not to do) at the beginning of the tenancy they tend to work it out. Besides, most of it can be covered in the agreement.

In fifteen years I have yet to have tenants trash my flats - I might be lucky but I might just have rejected such people when other landlords were more desperate to get a tenant. In fact the biggest issue I've had in recent years is when my excellent tenants complain about the noise made by the people living in the flats around them!

Avatar
  • 0 recommendations

Iniq,

50% yield on original investment is not a good way of looking at it because you cannot compare it to anything today.  1,500% over 35 years is 8.25% compounded growth per year.  Still decent, especially if you add on the 3% yield.

Or look at it this way: my great-grandfather puts £10 in a gilt fund in 1910 which returns 3% per year indefinitely.  Today that capital will have become £192.  3% yield on £192 is £5.8 or 58% yield on my original investment.

Is that good?  Well, it's still only 3%!  I always have the option of cashing in the £192 and putting it into a good BTL making 8.25% + 3% instead ;-)

Avatar

Richardo said

  • 0 recommendations

I agree with MrPounds and take my hat off to Swarbs - by far the best reply to any article I have ever read on any website.

A pensions advisor told me 12 years ago to do some buy to lets and only put the minimum into my Company's money purchase pension scheme run by Scotish Equitable now Aegon.

12 years later the buy to lets produce a net monthly income after all costs and mortages of £2,000 and the capital value has grown 44%. I have remortgaged twice to buy more properties, syndicated some to raise deposits for my children to buy their homes (they pay the market rent on my share), bought an Audi TT outright to comfort me when tenants where difficult, have lived in one of the properties for a year whilst in between houses and more or less enjoyed every minute of this part time business now worth £1.4 million

My pension fund stands at £150,000 which is worth less than the money paid into it by my employer and myself. The pensions guy reckons every person he has advised on pensions in the last 10 years has lost money.

B2L isn't difficult, but like everything you need to understand what you are setting out to achieve before you start

Avatar
  • 0 recommendations

I'd really like to ask sbeadon whom s/he is using as rental landlords. I've been digging and digging as I need to renew my insurance - followed some reasonable leads - but when I download and read the detailed policies there are always holes in the insurance such as

- if property empty for more than 14 days not insured at all for any risk (so the tenants can't reasonably go on holiday for a full two weeks including all weekends because that's 16 days!)

- not covered for accidental damage by tenant

- not covered for malicious damage by tenant

- not covered if empty more than x days and even if I get a tenant within x days I'm supposed to visit every week while it's empty, switch off all utilities (including those that supply the central heating!) yet simutaneously make sure I keep the place warm enough not to freeze (anyone spotted the logical impossibility here yet?.)

I'm not scared to pay a decent premium to get decent insurance, and I use an agent and get references for tenants etc - I just want to get a policy that covers me in case of worst case scenario without lots of holes.

Any ideas from your experience, sbeadon or anyone else?

Avatar

Landlord said

  • 0 recommendations

Yes I am mad as my wife, brothers, sisters, friends all know.  And I have suffered from all the negatives described by Harvey since I chose to become a hobbyist landlord ten years ago when I mortgaged up to my neck and bought several houses.  And yes too I have had to put in a great deal more effort than with my ISA and SIPP shares.  BUT my wealth has been growing healthily during that time (more than doubled) thanks more to the properties than the shares.  In fact the shares have dragged my wealth performance down.  I still like both shares and property but especially property.  The maddest thing to do is to leave your hard earned savings in a bank account.   

Avatar

matchmade said

  • 0 recommendations

Valory - the same argument can be made about exclusions on owner-occupied property - the insurance company is just covering itself. You can get any cover you like if you're prepared to pay enough. Just get a quote from Lloyds of London via a broker. Most landlords will just use a firm like Hamilton Fraser (HFIS) and get a large discount by also joining the National Landlords Association.

As regards the topic at hand, anyone who compares the returns from property with the returns from shares over the last 10 years or even the last 20 will say the hassle of being a BTL landlord is well worth it. It's not a good time to start from scratch now, but plenty of experienced landlords are still adding to their portfolios for the long term.

One extra negative I'd add to Harvey's list is the sheer contempt and disdain shown to landlords by innumerable people, but especially council officials, anyone from social services, the 99% nutters at housepricecrash.co.uk, and Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians. The amount of new legislation targeting landlords is simply vindictive, and all to catch the tiny minority of "rogue landlords" who councils seem incapable of dealing with, despite the enormous range of powers they already have. The intention of the Government seems to be to drive small landlords out of the market, so they can bring in "professionals". However, quite who these white knights are, prepared to deal with toilets and tenants day-in day-out, is unclear. The PRS has long been seen as an unattractive area of private business simply because the returns are so low compared to the risks and the guaranteed damage that will be done to the properties, however well-behaved tenants may be.

The latest negative? The Government is rushing through legislation to force all new shared housing to apply for the nightmare that is getting planning permission. Who will buy a house to let to students or young professionals now, if they cannot be sure they will get permission, that once granted, they can return the house to a normal family property when they want to sell?

Avatar

DP130132 said

  • 0 recommendations

Buy-to-let ABROAD!!  Buy a HOME, good climate, infra-structure, etc., where you enjoy holidays and might eventually like to retire, or over-winter.

Harvey's 3  Very little on concrete, tiled floor, tiled roof properties in good climate.

4. Agents not necessary  DIY on line, plus e-mail

5. Properties can be bought/sold in 24 hours - fixed price.

6. No hassle.

I am not talking about  "holiday boxes", amongst thousands of others on the Costas, but a "proper" decent spacious HOME.  I started this on North Coast Tenerife years ago, and now live a "spoiled" ideal lifestyle. No council tax, no VAT, petrol 80c litre, 26C on the patio today, as usual. There is still plenty of potential.

Avatar
  • 0 recommendations

mmmm sensationalist journalism, you got to love it! Seems to have got the interest. Imagine if Harvey had said: "BTL can be good in the right circumstances but there are other options which may be better for some people". I guess there wouldn't have been so much discussion.

Avatar

DP130132 said

  • 0 recommendations

Create a Company - holiday by inspecting your investment assets twice a year.

What are you missing . get with it!!!   Who wants to retire/over-winter in UK???

Avatar

honkeytonk said

  • 0 recommendations

Being in a fortunate position, following the sale of half my house (it was 90ft wide, and is now 2 x semi's), I was going to buy a property and let it out to the local council. Their demands are very sensible, and they pay a reasonable rate (£675 per month on a one bed home I could buy for about £125,000). Rent is gauranteed for 3, 4 or 5 years (my choice), they look after the property and tenant (the council become the landlords, not me - though I do have to pay for an electrical certificate;- there is no gas to worry about).

However, like some others, I'm convinced house prices are set to drop. To the extent that the one bed starter home mentioned above will be available for about £100,000. So I wait.

Meanwhile, I managed to get in on the AA savings account at 3.3% (£80,000), bought £50,000 in shares mid January (currently worth 5.18% more - in just 6 weeks, and all paying at least 5% dividend), and the rest is in premium bonds (got to have some fun !) and Zopa (paying 8+%).

So reading this article, and the responses, has me thinking. Should I forget about buying the property, even if it falls to £100,000 ?

Because if house prices fall that much, I think it would generate so much business when first time buyers get their foot on the property ladder and start decorating, furnishing and equiping their new homes, not to mention the "feel good factor" it might create, that shares would be driven higher, as would profits (and dividends ?), no doubt interest rates would increase, so better returns on savings....

Am I in the real world ?!

Avatar

nickpike said

  • 0 recommendations

The property prices referred to here are based on peak. I don't see it's good business sense to get involved with property when the economy is so volatile.

Prices in Ireland, Spain and the USA have dropped 50% or more, and that's what the market forces want to do here. When the fake economy is allowed to unwind, prices will tumble. Why not wait a couple of years to see what will happen. I'm convinced prices will halve over the next 2 or 3 years.

It makes no business sense to take that sort of gamble on tens of thousands of pounds.

With the economy in meltdown, assets should be kept liquid.

Property is a bad bet at present.

Avatar

jonbrad said

  • 0 recommendations

The journalism on this site is going down hill very fast. Could somebody please pass me a copy of 'The Sun' as they will undoubtedly have more astute financial commentators than this clown.

Avatar

smiler said

  • 0 recommendations

Hello you knowledgeable entrepreneurs out there. Very good and believe buy to let is still a good way to genarate money for the future compared to shares. Why are elderly fokes taking their money out of the stork market and buying a property to let. This is not what many of them what to do with thier time managering, renovating etc to provide income to live on but thier investments as not provided them income over the past couple of years.

However, is there anyone out there can advise me on my differcultly in getting a buy to let or offset mortgage. The mortgage financial advisers I have entertained in the past few weeks have not been able to get me a mortgage under 5% due to my late mortgage payment (due 1st August 2009, and paid `14th September. 6 weeks late)|

This is the only problem on my credit report which proving bank do not what to lend to me. My loan to value is 44% property portofolio.

I await your advice, to help me to SMILE again. 

Avatar
  • 1 recommendation

Steve Sims.

Did you try Googling “Grant Bovey, Anthea Turner, buy-to-let, bankrupt”, like I suggested. If they were going to sue anybody, it would be the Daily Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1255688/Anthea-Turners-husband-Grant-Bovey-humiliated-declared-bankrupt.html

But they won't.

Jonbrad. See Swarbs' reply for how to respond to opinions you don't agree with. He does his best to pick my arguments apart using reason and debate. You just call me a "clown". Impressive.

Avatar

FireBlade said

  • 0 recommendations

A truly excellent reply by Swarbs. I think he/she should write for this website. I'd rather have balanced and objective comments than sensationalism any day of the week!

Avatar

SiGl26 said

  • 0 recommendations

Yep, I'm mad...  Wealthy, but mad.  Now is probably a reasonably good time to get into residential letting, so long as you buy at a sensible price (auction, anyone?), fix up well but inexpensively (get the skills, or find a tame tradesman who recognises that doing a good job gets repeat business), and vet, vet, vet your tenants.  I've had no tenant turnover in my four properties (all on AST or equivalent) for the last 6 years.

Property market may still have a way to fall, but even if it crashes you don't have to sell so what does it matter; it will come back some day?  Crashing market usually due to repossessions, which in turn increase rental demand.  Conservative govt (or at least less powerful Labour govt) on the way so some hope of more equitable regulation.

Main message (as with any investment) is understand the risks, don't put at risk more than you can afford to lose, make sure you're realistic about the costs and returns, and don't put all your eggs in one basket... 

Avatar
  • 0 recommendations

Swarbs, a classic post worthy even of the Fool website and much appreciated.

Harvey Jones - you're bound to get brickbats, I'd rise above it rather than respond directly. I think most people accept that the approach of this site's journalism is generally now more tongue in cheek than factual.

My take on this is that much of what the agent does, I can do. The stuff that I really want input on is finding a tenant and sorting out inventory and damages re the deposit. The impression I get is that agents will do the former for a hefty chunk of the rental income up front (ie a percentage of all of the rent that would be due, irrespective of whether it is eventially paid) and won't help out with the latter save as a mediator.

So in reality a BTL is better off doing it all, unless extenuating factors apply e,g. lack of time or living far from let property.

What would be useful here is other landlords' experiences of sites that they've used to offer property to let. For my part I've used Gumtree in the past with some success but do find that prospective tenants from that site try to haggle a fair amount on rent and push back on deposit deductions for damages caused (this may be a general thing for tenants to do though I suppose).

Join the conversation

Please sign in or register to add a comment or recommend.

Our top deals

Provider & account name AER/Gross Interest paid Apply
now

ING Direct (UK)
Savings Account

2.75% /
2.72%
Monthly Apply

Sainsbury's Finance
Easy Saver

2.70% /
2.70%
Anniversary Apply

Chelsea BS
e-Saver Reward

2.60% /
2.57%
Monthly Apply
W3C  Thank you for using One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest