- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
You must log in or # to comment.
The Negotiator is a trade magazine that “serves the residential property industry, specifically targeting estate and letting agents and their suppliers”. The original source for this news is https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buy-to-let/landlords-quit-rental-market-at-fastest-rate-in-a-decade, which is mirrored by https://www.aol.com/articles/landlords-quit-rental-market-fastest-094056000.html .
In addition: The Telegraph is a rightwing rag who are automatically against anything Labour does. Apart from their right-wing bias, in the last few (3?) decades they’ve seen a decline in quality to the level of gutter journalism, so they have no credibility and their claims are basically meaningless.
I must be used to American rightwing media because this Telegraph article seems downright neutral by comparison haha. Also, I have a question. It says that one of the things this bill does is abolish “fixed term tenancies”. Does that mean, for example, that someone could just move in for a month and then move out?
Yeah the Telegraph is subtle about it. They exercise their bias more through selective reporting, rather than slanted language.
I’d be careful before crying victory. This most likely means those houses will be bought by PE, not individual buyers. The end result will be higher prices still.
In a lot of European countries, small private landlords are relatively rare and apartments are owned and let out by corporations that own (and in many cases build) entire developments, like Deutsche Wohnung in Berlin. Given that continental Europe typically has a more stringent regulatory environment than the Anglo-American world, this does not end up with the sort of predatory monopolies one sees in the US where private equity have cornered regional markets, and the landlord companies have support desks and maintenance contractors that can be more responsive and professional than your typical small landlord.
what a majority actually wants: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Wohnen_&_Co._enteignen
Why would PE buy them if not to rent & be subject to the same renter’s bill of rights? Holding a vacant house isn’t a good 😊 investment, they have upkeep costs, are subject to property taxes, and depreciate faster when unoccupied.
Why? This will increase supply of housing available to buy and reduce the supply available to rent. So house prices will go down slightly, and rents will go up slightly.
Because there isn’t a free market in housing anymore, they’ve all been caught colluding to keep pricing up even when there’s a huge glut of available units/houses in an area. They have been caught using apps to do it, and when faced with threats to stop that practice were found to use traditional means to collude. The free market is a myth in 2026, stop believing in fairy tales. Ayn Rand was a charlatan and capital isn’t going to ever be allowed to work for the poors.
I think you’re thinking of a case in the USA that colluded on rental prices? I don’t know of any evidence that there is collusion on house prices in the UK. People separately talk about investment companies buying up housing in the US as if that will have much impact on prices, but the proportion of housing under discussion is miniscule and unlikely to have any effect on prices - at least, outside of limited areas.
I’m guessing at what you’re referring to here so feel free to get specific. But cases in the USA are not that relevant to the UK, where the government is far more willing to enforce free market conditions than the “free market” idiotlogues in America who think that you can have a free market without regulation.
How would having lower demand increase prices?
Artificial scarcity got hands
Hooray!
How does a landlord quit?
They own the property, don’t they?
I imagine they’re either selling their properties to corporations or hiring someone to manage the rentals for them.
Quitting means selling, yes.
I wish quitting meant a six figure windfall in my profession…
If you’re quitting because of this, it probably means you have a buy-to-let mortgage, quite possibly on a long term/interest only. You might therefore not get that much back, and what you do get back is essentially a liquidation of your savings asset.
But I guess what you’re getting at seen another way is that it’s nice when your savings can pay enough for you to retire.
If you had a fixed interest only mortgage from several years ago that is now expiring you are also about to get fucked by the increased interest rates. Not as bad as they were a few years ago but could still be a lot worse than a decade ago.
No need to feel any sympathy for them, they are still making a shitload of money for little to no actual work from the whole thing.
Yeah I would imagine this would lead to slightly reduced property prices and increased rent prices as the market adjusts.
They were already renting, and when someone sells that pushes the property value down.
Right, but if landlords are exiting the market that probably means they are selling to someone who wants to live there, meaning rental properties are going off the market. Which is good for first time homebuyers but bad for renters. Either that or this is just landlords consolidating which which wont make much of a difference either way.
When someone decides to sell a good because market conditions have changed, the price of the good goes down.
Rental prices are proportional to overall housing prices. In general, more homeowners is correlated with lower rents. Renters are also removed from the market.
The first time buyer was previously renting though, so the renter could go there. Total number of people and houses hasn’t changed in this simplified example.
Right but a lot of renters cannot or do not want to buy property. Thus, rental units leaving the market creates a supply demand imbalance in the rent market, driving up prices (and driving down property prices, for the inverse reason)
Plenty of renters do want to buy and house prices coming down would allow that for some of them. If no one buys it and the landlord wants to sell, all they can do is lower the price until someone does buy it.
You overlooked the most important outcome: landlords selling property to individuals who will live there.
This is a good thing because it reduces property prices, moves the market away from rentier capitalism towards people owning their own homes, and reduces economic inequality and insecurity.
They’re going to get sold to corporations who rent out even higher with no value add
Yall this doesnt mean theyre letting people live in these houses for free, it just means theyre off the rental market. Considering poorer people generally rent and richer people generally buy property, this is probably a regressive change.
What is in the new law?
No more banging young impressionable tenants
That’s like half the movies I watch
Before, landlords could evict you because they feel like it.
Oh NO! Won’t ANYONE please think of the Landlords that Take your Money and do Nothing in RETURN?
They’ve withdrawn their labour? 🫢
so it’s working better than expected!
That article has so little information, that it is effectively a big trust-me-bro. It does not mention, what the new law contains or how this is connected to the law. They tell ums some numbers without proper context explanations. So, ok, over 500 rental properties get sold off per day. What does this number actually contain. If they are not available to rent anymore, what happens with them? And then the semingly rising numbers between this year, last year (looks only like a moderate rise to me) and 2020, which is during the pandemic. No mention about different effects on the numbers and the causal connections.
Sorry, this is just a low effort article telling us nothing but what this property guy whats us to think.
And to the people being happy about this news: If this would really happen, then it would just mean more consolidation of the market into bigger corporations, which would make the situation even worse. I’m not against renters protections. Though celebrating less rental properties without having a significant public housing rise would not help rentners.
Good direction but not enough, no private entity must be allowed to hoard housing. All rental properties must be under local council control to allow proper maintenance, fair pricing and finally getting rid of landlord scum
My neighbor has been trying to get their house rented after it didn’t sell for 1.3million. Now they’re paying the monthly mortgage for several months now. It doesn’t seem like anyone is interested at practically $4000/month. Who would pay that mucho wonder. I bet the previous generation felt exactly the same as inflation was swallowing them into homelessness… I.e. me, I could be underpaid and not know it. CuzI had to pay that rent I would not be able to afford where we live. We would need two incomes over $120,000 each. Crazy.
That’s brain dead thinking they can sell any house at 1.3 millie. I hope that house sinks them.
Typical houses in my area start at $1m. Anything under that is a fixer-upper.
They… quit? So they’re letting people buy the places people should live in without a middleman leech profiting off of them?
More likely to be property management companies, not individuals
We’re cheering a bunch of rental properties being removed from the market?
Sure, some homes will enter the market for private buyers, so those doing quite well might have a slightly cheaper house but a lot are going to be sold to less scrupulous/more corporate landlords who feel they can extract more value, or in packages to developers.
I get it, we hate landlords hut this feels like cutting off one’s nose to spite the face.
But we can 🎶
You know we can 🎶🎶
