13:11 PM, 6th September 2012, About 14 years ago 34
Text Size
Categories:
The Banker is back, this time he’s trying to upset by hoisting us by our own petard – he’s asking the question “should missed mortgage payments be a criminal offence.”
Is his last anonymous correspondence with Property118 readers The Banker caught our attention with the title “The Property Boom of 2012” and then went on to tell us all why we are doomed. His message this time around is no more friendly either. However, I’ve published his ramblings yet again as some might feel there are some pertinent homes truths in his arrogant musings! We can also say pretty much whatever we like to an anonymous banker as he can’t possibly take legal action for defamation as he is anonymous LOL.
The Bankers says:-
“The naivety of some landlords astounds me, I read your comments for amusement, sometimes the comments posted on your Property118 website are so childish they ought to be published as a comic.
Why on earth should missed rent payment be a criminal offence?
Why should landlords be able to bypass the court systems to repossess somebody’s home just because they have missed a few rent payments?
These are YOUR readers desires – not mine!
I intend to demonstrate to you how pathetic your arguments and justification are by presenting the flip side of the argument.
For all you landlords borrowing money, stretching your finances too far and crying out for the rules to be changed just think about this ….
Who is taking the the lions share of the risk?
YES! It’s the bank isn’t it?
And yet you landlords get to keep any rental profits and you also get to keep 100% of the capital appreciation.
I’d say that’s unfair, and there’s enough there to convince me that providing mortgages to landlords is a terrible investment.
However, if you want your rules to be put in place, consider what mine would be.
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Next Article
Too Good For Students?
Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118
Read Full Bio
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12120 - Articles: 1361
0:13 AM, 11th September 2012, About 14 years ago
How much do you think would need to be raised to be heard and how would you suggest the money is spent?
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Member Since January 1970 - Comments: 1108
1:27 AM, 11th September 2012, About 14 years ago
I think the other section of society that are deemed to be pretty good at ‘not popular’, are LL!!!!
I cannot see a public outcry amongst the 4 1/2 million existing tenants for LL to be given even more rights over their lives.
I think it is known and used to their advantage by tenants the facility that the law allows for tenants to remain rent free in property until evicted.
The more astute wrongun tenants have a rather nice lifestyle as a consequence of taking advantage of the existing law.
After all a tenant only has to arrange a 6 month AST with a mug LL not prepared to use LRS or RGI checking, then pay the 1st month’s rent and a deposit and then stop paying.
It could take 10 months to evict them.
Would the LL bother with a CCJ?, would the tenant employer details be correct for an AOE order?
Basically a tenant could live rent free for 9 months at a time.
Say rent was £1000 pcm then that is £18000 the tenant would have saved in rent payments.
Most LL use LA referencing which is known to be useless.
I have the experience of a fraudster tenant who does this all the time.
She was caught courtesy of me but she made an arrangement with the authorities and is at it again to the extent she created a new ID and had a new NI no, but again she slipped up and I think I have been able to stop her again.
In fact I’ll put the warning out there again for all LL to avoid this woman at ALL costs.
Google
**MODERATED (breach of name and shame policy)**; she will be the 7 th entry down.
She also has a wrongun son, a **MODERATED (breach of name and shame policy)** who is complicit in her crimes.
That is her Polish police wanted poster.
I reported her whereabouts to British police but nothing ever happened.
Under no circumstances should ANY LL take this person on as a tenant unless as a LL you don’t mind using a baseball bat to put her beyond use.
She must be the bigggest tenant from hell and would make a fascinating TV documentary as to how wrongun tenants abuse the Housing law that we LL are continualy victims of.
Perhaps an investigative reporter would be interested in the abuses that tenants perpetrate on LL to stay in a property rent free before evicted.
**MODERATED (breach of name and shame policy)**
She is Polish by the way.
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
3:44 AM, 11th September 2012, About 14 years ago
to get to see the housing minister would cost about £100K.
we, that’s you and me, will have to talk privately regarding an agenda.
You're Missing Out!
Members can reply to discussions, connect with experienced landlords, and access full member profiles showing years of expertise. Don't stay on the sidelines - join the UK's most active landlord community today.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
4:54 AM, 11th September 2012, About 14 years ago
1. ref your polish friend; get in touch with propertytribes. they are very keen on videos/online TV.
2. bad tenants are only 5% of the total 41/2 million. and that 5% cost the other 95% by way of increased rents to pay for the damages they do. and that is how we sell it to the 95%.
good tenants should not be forced to pay for the damages the bad tenants do.
perception is reality.
it’s down to how you sell it. not what you sell.