politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson starts debate day with punters rating his chances of a

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson starts debate day with punters rating his chances of a majority at 66%

One thing’s for sure – tonight’s debate will either confirm or raise doubts about Johnson’s chances of leading his party to an overall majority on December 12th. There will be a lot of betting on this market tonight.

Read the full story here

MarqueeMark

"a Johnson debate victory is almost priced in"

I thought the last thread was all about why Boris will be the debate loser? Does nobody read these threads?

Casino_Royale

That’s exactly the percentage chance Sir John Curtice rated it the other day.

StuartDickson

How do people view the exclusion of the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party from tonight’s debate?

The accepted wisdom is that this is bad for Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. I disagree. I think a lot of people will be put off by two male dinosaurs grunting at each other.

paulyork64

MarqueeMark said:

"a Johnson debate victory is almost priced in"

I thought the last thread was all about why Boris will be the debate loser? Does nobody read these threads?

And Corbyn is Coral's 8/11 favourite to win the debate. I think viewers might just say who they agree with and plan to vote for so Boris has a bigger pool to fish from on current polling. Last time Ed Miliband was voted the winner of a debate I thought Nicola Sturgeon easily performed best in. Think he was 7/1 in running before betting suspended.

ydoethur

StuartDickson said:

How do people view the exclusion of the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party from tonight’s debate?

The accepted wisdom is that this is bad for Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. I disagree. I think a lot of people will be put off by two male dinosaurs grunting at each other.

I think it will make SFA difference as nobody will watch them. The only thing people will see unless Corbyn or Johnson says something really daft will be a few snippets on the news. Since those will be meaningless clichés, nobody will be swayed by them.

Casino_Royale

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

OldKingCole

I seem to recall that Johnson has a reputation as a skilled debater, but wasn't that youthful reputation gained in school and university debates, where the object of the exercise was to 'win' on a subject on no great import, and a clever speech would be appreciated.
I just wonder whether, unless he's clear and concise, he might reinforce the bumbling persona he has.
Corbyn comes across as civilised and coherent, if you accept his basic premises

MarqueeMark

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Dickson, that's possible. Could also be the case that negative votes (ie against a specific candidate) will become stronger, helping Corbyn tactically and further reducing the attractiveness of voting for TBP.

tlg86

I’m out tonight so will miss the debate. It’ll probably be fairly inconsequential, but given the state of the polls, I wonder if Corbyn will come out swinging (metaphorically). It could get very lively if Johnson retaliates.

ydoethur

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

My mother once let a property to somebody with a cat. When he moved out, she found he had removed an entire window so the cat could go in and out freely. Somehow, the letting agent hadn’t noticed.

kamski

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

logical_song

Completely off topic.
But we could probably do with some (potentially if it proves to be genuine) good news.
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/11/18/israeli-startup-ubq-says-it-has-the-answer-to-recycling-the-circular-economy/

peter_from_putney

Since OGH has recently gone on the record as a seller of Labour seats on the spreads and the SNP are generally regarded as a shoo-in to win all but a handful of Scottish seats and therefore their further upside potential appears severely limited, then logically Mike must be basing laying the Tories against achieving a majority on the LibDems suddenly starting to surge and recovering at least a good part of the 18 or so seats they have fallen by on the spreads (from 48 to 31) over recent weeks ,,,, if so, as they say in the principality - there's brave!
Or perhaps more likely,, he's simply protecting his sell of Labour seats, should they start to attract more support.

Casino_Royale

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

TheScreamingEagles

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

Even a well behaved dog craps and pees everywhere during Bonfire month.

YBarddCwsc

MarqueeMark said:

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

An important difference in Wales between 2017 is that Carwyn Jones has been replaced by Mark Drakeford.

The long, slow death of Scottish Labour began with the passing of Donald Dewar, and SLAB's inability to find politicians of comparable stature for Holyrood.

Llafur have been very, very fortunate with the choices of Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones as leaders in Wales. They were both excellent politicians, with widespread appeal across Wales.

Carwyn in particular played an important role in 2017, turning round a difficult polling position and converting it into 3 Labour gains.

Llafur are now beginning to have the problems of SLAB. Drakeford himself is a poor imitation of the leaders that came before. Labour's disastrous management of Welsh health and education since 1999 is coming under increasing scrutiny.

If Labour get out of 2019 with 5 Welsh losses or less, then they will have done really well.

Foxy

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

MikeSmithson

peter_from_putney said:

Since OGH has recently gone on the record as a seller of Labour seats on the spreads and the SNP are generally regarded as a shoo-in to win all but a handful of Scottish seats and therefore their further upside potential appears severely limited, then logically Mike must be basing laying the Tories against achieving a majority on the LibDems suddenly starting to surge and recovering at least a good part of the 18 or so seats they have fallen by on the spreads (from 48 to 31) over recent weeks ,,,, if so, as they say in the principality - there's brave!
Or perhaps more likely,, he's simply protecting his sell of Labour seats, should they start to attract more support.

As I noted here a couple of days ago I took my profits on my LAB seats sell bet and I've not been tempted into the main LD seats spread markets.

I have no bets on the Tories buy or sell.

DavidL

I certainly intend to watch the debate tonight but I am not expecting much. Politicians of all strands have been disciplined and coached how to do these things. They have their soundbites for social media and the News channels that they will squeeze in whether on topic or not. They have prepared answers on most topics and use bits of their stock speeches to fill them out.

Inevitably the interviewer will try to cover too many topics with the result that even the most banal responses won't be adequately tested or challenged. Most of our interviewers seem to go out of their way to stop actual interaction between the candidates because it is so much about them.

I'd better stop now or I might change my mind and not bother.

ydoethur

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

Since raising the deposit is frequently a problem for tenants, I think that might conceivably negate these new regulations.

Edit - also, even unfurnished properties would normally include at least carpets.

Charles

StuartDickson said:

How do people view the exclusion of the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party from tonight’s debate?

The accepted wisdom is that this is bad for Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. I disagree. I think a lot of people will be put off by two male dinosaurs grunting at each other.

They weren’t exclude - they just didn’t qualify

Jonathan

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, that's not necessarily the case. Every dog I've had has, at one time or another, been scared by fireworks. None took part in interior defecating as a result (or urinating).

ydoethur

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

And yet it's still better than the university sector...

Casino_Royale

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

It might be. Ultimately, this would have to be a deal struck between the landlord and the tenant. I don’t see it as the business of the State - it’s not their property, and they carry neither the risk nor liability.

If i were feeling generous in future I’d want to see a reference from any previous landlord about their pets, and I’d probably want either myself or my agent to visit their current property/rental to see how they and their pets kept it and then decide accordingly.

DavidL

My most painful debating experience was watching the second debate between Alastair Darling and Alex Salmond. Darling had had quite a lot of success on the currency question in the first debate and tried to make the second debate a complete repeat. Salmond made sure this did not happen and everyone else, including Better Together supporters, really wanted to discuss other things.

It was excruciating. Better Together supporters had their heads in their hands and were genuinely fearful about the result the next day almost for the first time. At the end of the day I am not sure if it made a difference. It might have made it closer than it would have been but if a performance like that has a marginal effect those building their hopes of a Labour recovery from tonight are likely to be disappointed.

MarqueeMark

YBarddCwsc said:

MarqueeMark said:

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

An important difference in Wales between 2017 is that Carwyn Jones has been replaced by Mark Drakeford.

The long, slow death of Scottish Labour began with the passing of Donald Dewar, and SLAB's inability to find politicians of comparable stature for Holyrood.

Llafur have been very, very fortunate with the choices of Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones as leaders in Wales. They were both excellent politicians, with widespread appeal across Wales.

Carwyn in particular played an important role in 2017, turning round a difficult polling position and converting it into 3 Labour gains.

Llafur are now beginning to have the problems of SLAB. Drakeford himself is a poor imitation of the leaders that came before. Labour's disastrous management of Welsh health and education since 1999 is coming under increasing scrutiny.

If Labour get out of 2019 with 5 Welsh losses or less, then they will have done really well.

Thanks. Really excellent insight.

Casino_Royale

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

IshmaelZ

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

It's not as if the country is suffering a massive dogshit deficit. If grumpy landlords cause people not to own dogs when otherwise they would, that is a win win.

Casino_Royale

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

IanB2

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

There also seem to be some landlords who expect to get back their properties in pristine condition and even make a fuss about trivial matters like picture hook holes. If you are renting a property to someone, they are allowed to live in it, and that implies a fair degree of wear. A young child could easily do as much damage and mess as a pet.

AdrianFrancis

I’m not sure if this has been discussed yet, but the Tories have had to axe their candidate for Aberdeen North. Given that it is surely too late to find a replacement candidate, Labour may be a value bet at 5/1?

Jonathan

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I onlyof the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places landlords and Tennants in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Casino_Royale

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

peter_from_putney

Any chance of one of those rich bookies putting up a relatively few hundred pounds of prize money for a PB.com GE competition given the betting business they derive from adherents to this site ... it seems ages since we last had one and btw where is Shadsy these days.
This could be based on something very straightforward, such as the number of seats won by the Tories/ Labour, with a tie-breaker being decided on say the extent to which Boris' majority in his Uxbridge & South Ruislip seat increases or decreases.
How about it Mike?

IanB2

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

Even a well behaved dog craps and pees everywhere during Bonfire month.

Nonsense. For mine’s first November, I had done everything right including playing the noise CD at low volume during his meals, and ensuring exposure to bangs and the like during his early weeks, and he coped with fireworks day pretty well. I took him out onto the balcony to watch the display and he was hardly bothered. Unfortunately since then I made the mistake of assuming job done, and this year at two years old the fireworks worry him, but only to the extent that he will look around and then come and sit near me.

IanB2

OldKingCole said:

I seem to recall that Johnson has a reputation as a skilled debater, but wasn't that youthful reputation gained in school and university debates, where the object of the exercise was to 'win' on a subject on no great import, and a clever speech would be appreciated.
I just wonder whether, unless he's clear and concise, he might reinforce the bumbling persona he has.
Corbyn comes across as civilised and coherent, if you accept his basic premises

The sort of sneering condescension and pointed humour that wins debates in the Oxford Union isn’t going to work on ITV.

MarqueeMark

AdrianFrancis said:

I’m not sure if this has been discussed yet, but the Tories have had to axe their candidate for Aberdeen North. Given that it is surely too late to find a replacement candidate, Labour may be a value bet at 5/1?

He's still on the ballot paper as a Conservative though. Presumably there is no central support or finance and if by some miracle he won, he would not take the party whip. But I suspect he'll still get a chunk of votes.

MarqueeMark

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

I seem to recall that Johnson has a reputation as a skilled debater, but wasn't that youthful reputation gained in school and university debates, where the object of the exercise was to 'win' on a subject on no great import, and a clever speech would be appreciated.
I just wonder whether, unless he's clear and concise, he might reinforce the bumbling persona he has.
Corbyn comes across as civilised and coherent, if you accept his basic premises

The sort of sneering condescension and pointed humour that wins debates in the Oxford Union isn’t going to work on ITV.

Except, it's just the sort of stuff that will rile Corbyn. And a riled Corbyn is not a good look....

noneoftheabove

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

Of course you could sell it. Just not at the price you wanted or at a price you thought it would be more profitable to rent out at instead.

Ditch the pretence that you did not make a decision and were forced to become a landlord.

Jonathan

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public,.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

Not ideology, just experience. For example, my last rental I had to take the agent to court and engage bailiffs to recover my deposit.

The market is utterly failing and needs serious reform. I feel sorry for you.

IanB2

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public,.

I ng to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

Not ideology, just experience. For example, my last rental I had to take the agent to court and engage bailiffs to recover my deposit.

The market is utterly failing and needs serious reform. I feel sorry for you.

Having rented for a few years in middle age, my experience puts me with Jonathan. Too many middle aged people think they can get easy money from their property, aren’t bothered about actually being a landlord and don’t know what they are doing, so the dump the management onto lettings agents who are truly the scum of the earth.

HYUFD

I doubt tonight's debate will get that high viewing figures and it is up against new drama 'golddigger' on BBC1 and the minor parties leaders have been excluded. However Corbyn should benefit from low expectations and the fact incumbents tend to perform less strongly in the first debate, both here in 2010 and 2015 and in the US in 2004 and 2012. If Corbyn does not make a breakthrough tonight hard to see where else he will and he will have to rely on another dementia tax style own goal in the Tory manifesto, unlikely under Boris and Cummings

timmo

Tried to get some cash on a couple of constituencies last night..most bookies wont allow more than £150 without moving the price..its pathetic

Pulpstar

Staggeringly it seems 68% of landlords accept fish as pets which means 32% don't. How on earth can fish damage the property, unless the tank bursts I suppose ! But that has to be a small chance - anyway home contents should be able to cover that.
It's the likes of that fat fuck Carrick Fergus and his ghastly wife along with the grasping, greedy agents that have turned it all into a hot mess.

OnlyLivingBoy

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

LostPassword

StuartDickson said:

How do people view the exclusion of the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party from tonight’s debate?

The accepted wisdom is that this is bad for Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon. I disagree. I think a lot of people will be put off by two male dinosaurs grunting at each other.

People may well be put off the two men, but if they don't see the two women then they don't have much of a chance to form a better opinion of them instead.

Swinson in particular would have benefited from the notability parity her participation would have implied.

IshmaelZ

noneoftheabove said:

Of course you could sell it. Just not at the price you wanted or at a price you thought it would be more profitable to rent out at instead.

Ditch the pretence that you did not make a decision and were forced to become a landlord.

Or better still he could have given it away to some kind of loosely structured anarcho-syndicalist lqbqt collective. What a scumbag.

Charles

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

Fundamentally the change is requiring landlords to take on more risk

To maintain balance this needs to be compensated for: higher returns (rents) ir reduced risk (higher deposits) would both achieve this. Limiting the new rights to unfurnished rentals would limit the increased risk but doesn’t change the fundamental balance.

Foxy

AdrianFrancis said:

I’m not sure if this has been discussed yet, but the Tories have had to axe their candidate for Aberdeen North. Given that it is surely too late to find a replacement candidate, Labour may be a value bet at 5/1?

Presumably the Tory is still standing, albeit whipless.

Pulpstar

timmo said:

Tried to get some cash on a couple of constituencies last night..most bookies wont allow more than £150 without moving the price..its pathetic

I've had my £1.27 (all I was allowed) move the market. Colchester for the Lib Dems (Paddy) from 22-1 to 5-2 if you want to know. Hopefully Tissue Price can start to get justice if/when he gets into parliament. All the focus on gambling debate in the HoC is around people with problems so the other side (Limited punters) never gets a look in.

YBarddCwsc

IshmaelZ said:

noneoftheabove said:

Of course you could sell it. Just not at the price you wanted or at a price you thought it would be more profitable to rent out at instead.

Ditch the pretence that you did not make a decision and were forced to become a landlord.

Or better still he could have given it away to some kind of loosely structured anarcho-syndicalist lqbqt collective. What a scumbag.

I remember poor old Tyson explaining to us on pb.com that he had to rent out his property empire in Oxford because of Fatcha.

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

The Tories need a swing of 3.39% to get 31 Labour seats, the latest poll from.ICM gives them a swing of 4% from Labour, the latest poll from Survation a swing of 5% and Deltapoll and Yougov higher still. The LDs are also only gaining 3 Tory seats with ICM with a swing of just 3% from the Tories

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

noneoftheabove

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

kle4

MarqueeMark said:

"a Johnson debate victory is almost priced in"

I thought the last thread was all about why Boris will be the debate loser? Does nobody read these threads?

Fun fact, I'm completely illiterate. So no.

Here's expecting an overreaction to the debate, whatever happens. I expect corbyn will land some blows and Boris will bluster, and people will say he looks terrible and corbynites will share many vital clips. But the tory share will probably stay the same and the labour one increase only a little.

Pulpstar

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

kle4

Judging from last night Corbyn should bring up the pet policy, some people go from 0-100 on it in about 5 seconds given the hyperbole on display, Boris'll probably blow his top.

Barnesian

MarqueeMark said:

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

@MarqueeMark You make good points about Wales. I note that the MRP has the Tories making ten gains whereas my model has only one gain. That is a hell of a difference in total Tory seats. It would increase my estimate to 329 from 320.

There are (at least) two flaws with my model. It doesn't use regional swings (it excludes Scotland) and it doesn't have local knowledge.

It provides a basic framework that then needs the application of local knowledge to fine tune it. It is not intentionally biased and I would expect the lack of local knowledge to even out in terms of total seats but produce anomalies in individual seats.

Barnesian

PaulM said:

Thanks Barnesian. Does beg another question on the model though. You "have Lab voting tactically for the LDs if the Labour vote is less than the LDs", but the determination is made AFTER accounting for the swing. In the event that Labour led the Lib Dems last time, is it reasonable to assume that the Labour voters would realise that the potential swing to the Lib Dems had put the LibDems in a better position and hence vote tactically ? I'm not so sure. Southport is perhaps an example of this in your model.
Really appreciate the work you are putting into this, and I believe you are highlighting opportunities in the spreads seats market (Sell Con buy Lab)

@PaulM
Good question. If I assume the answer is "No" then the tactical votes would be based on the 2017 position. If the answer is "Yes" then the tactical votes are based on the potential swing to the LibDems. It depends on how successful the LDs are in using MRP, Euroelections, constituency pols etc in their barcharts in individuial constituencies. Again local knowledge is helpful. I don't know about Southport.

dyor is not a mindless exhortation particularly if betting on individual constituencies. My model is just the starting point.

noneoftheabove

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

another_richard

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Philip_Thompson

The corollary to Mike's thread is that in 24h it could be value to bet against whomever is judged to be the "winner" of the debate.

Ultimately I think the debates, barring an absolute clanger from someone, will do little to swing the vote. People will vote how they want to and if they see the debates are probably already politically engaged and will see what they want to see primarily.

The two 'big moments' from debates that struck me as symbolising what later happened in the actual election were in 2015 Ed Miliband being asked did the last Labour government overspend and he started his reply with "No" and there was an audible intake of breath from the audience at that . . . and in 2017 the nurse speaking to May and she dismissed her with a reply of "there's no magic money tree". But how much did those actual influence votes and how much was it that May was deemed unlikeable the more people saw of her through the campaign and Ed Miliband simply wasn't that liked anyway?

HYUFD

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

Help to buy and shared ownership have actually helped a lot of people get on the housing ladder who would otherwise not have done so

Nigelb

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - after having let to multiple tenants in the past, always stipulating no pets, I let my property out to one who did in 2018 during a particularly dry time in the rental market.

Never again.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt but it proved all my worst fears, and underlined to me why so many agents default to “no pet” clauses.

Her two dogs pissed and weed all over the carpets, and the whole property stank of dog hair. I tried two deep cleans (she had just hoovered) but the carpet was so badly damaged in the living room I had to replace the whole thing. I only got half of that back from her deposit. I had to also replace several of the curtains which, for some reason, I could never get the smell out of.

Now, I’ve put the property on the market for sale. If you want a pet (which is a privilege, not a right) you first need to be able to afford to keep one and look after it, and I’d recommend you get your own place too.

While I understand that some tenants can be really terrible, I think it's bad form for landlords to complain about tenants in public, especially if you're going to generalise like in the last paragraph.

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

Even a well behaved dog craps and pees everywhere during Bonfire month.

And Boris isn’t even well behaved....

another_richard

Casino_Royale said:

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

Where are the 15 Conservative losses to the LibDems ?

Its a lot easier to find the 31 Conservative gains from Labour.

Stocky

Does anyone have insight into Richmond Park constituency? I was surprised to get a small stake on the Tories to hold it at 4/1 yesterday. I realise that it`s remainery but I think Tory price should be much shorter.

Philip_Thompson

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

How does Help to Buy make a property 20% more expensive? New builds are in the same property market as the rest of the market and make a small percentage of the overall market. Supply and demand determines prices and we have ever more households and need more properties or prices must rise. More new builds = more supply of homes = lower prices.

Eliminating help to buy would not cause prices to drop 20% and if fewer homes got built as a result would likely send prices up not down. That's basic economics!

Beibheirli_C

Pulpstar said:

... It's the likes of that fat f**k Carrick Fergus and his ghastly wife along with the grasping, greedy agents that have turned it all into a hot mess.

Who? I know Carrickfergus well and it's not married, but it does have a big Norman castle...

IanB2

Stocky said:

Does anyone have insight into Richmond Park constituency? I was surprised to get a small stake on the Tories to hold it at 4/1 yesterday. I realise that it`s remainery but I think Tory price should be much shorter.

LibDem nailed on

HYUFD

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

Where are the 15 Conservative losses to the LibDems ?

Its a lot easier to find the 31 Conservative gains from Labour.

Indeed, only Richmond Park, Cheltenham and St Ives Tory losses to the LDs on the latest polls

IshmaelZ

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Selling at firesale prices tends to enrich the already rich, because assets tend to get snapped up for cash by those with instant access to cash. And guess what they are going to do with the property when they have bought it?

IanB2

Philip_Thompson said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

ting an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

How does Help to Buy make a property 20% more expensive? New builds are in the same property market as the rest of the market and make a small percentage of the overall market. Supply and demand determines prices and we have ever more households and need more properties or prices must rise. More new builds = more supply of homes = lower prices.

Eliminating help to buy would not cause prices to drop 20% and if fewer homes got built as a result would likely send prices up not down. That's basic economics!

It boosts demand, hence boosting prices.

MattW

>Jonathan said:
» show previous quotes
The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

Yet the evidence that satisfaction with their amongst private tenants is in the 80-90% range, and is as high or higher than the social sector. See English Housing Survey. Don't believe everything that Shelter tells you.

OnlyLivingBoy>There are just too many information asymmetries involved. We rented for a year after moving back from the US. We had been renting out our London flat while we were away, and were looking to sell it in order to buy a house, so for about six month as we were landlords and tenants at the same time, and also dealing with incompetent and dishonest agents in the middle. The whole experience was awful, and we were screwed at both ends - blamed for things that weren't our fault by the landlord and had our flat destroyed by the tenants. The whole experience made me thankful to own our own home and never have to deal with this shit ever again. The private rental market is a bad place - both home ownership and social housing should grow at its expense.

I honestly don't think you can generalise one anecdote.

Why should social housing help that? Ask some tenants to see how poor Councils can be at managing their properties. I have a couple of Ts who are essentially refugees from the social sector as they do not like being micromanaged by bureaucrats.

I think a lot of people have some kind of mythical belief in the goodness and beauty of local councils and council houses, who have never lived in one or been controlled by one, where they are not able to choose their neighbours.

One of my Ts had the local council used as a harassment channel, as they did not have good enough procedures to screen out malicious complaints.

Not sure what "this shit" is - but there's a good deal more shit involved than there used to be. They have been salami slicing landlord rights for years and years. Time was when their was only 600 pages of regs from the OFT and 120 Acts of Parliament.

There are just too many information asymmetries involved.

The specifics of this interests me. Could you elucidate?

noneoftheabove

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

Help to buy and shared ownership have actually helped a lot of people get on the housing ladder who would otherwise not have done so

Just calling it help to buy does not mean it helps the buyers. It clearly helps the seller.

The govt provides ultra cheap subsidised loans to the purchaser on top of (not replacing) what the banks are loaning. With an undersupply of new homes, buyers are forced to spend this additional credit to compete with other potential buyers. It just moves up the price by the amount of the government builder subsidy (aka help to buy). Buyers have to eventually pay this extra 20-40% back (along with their student loans and forced pensions which no previous generations have been asked to do).

another_richard

Beibheirli_C said:

Pulpstar said:

... It's the likes of that fat f**k Carrick Fergus and his ghastly wife along with the grasping, greedy agents that have turned it all into a hot mess.

Who? I know Carrickfergus well and it's not married, but it does have a big Norman castle...

Fergus Wilson and his wife Judith are a British couple who, until December 2015, were among the UK's largest buy-to-let investors. As of 2013, they owned nearly 1,000 two- and three-bedroom properties around Ashford and Maidstone in Kent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fergus_and_Judith_Wilson

Barnesian

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

Where are the 15 Conservative losses to the LibDems ?

Its a lot easier to find the 31 Conservative gains from Labour.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yIHH_ZtcH9w9JF5e8WwYD6QuhOhlVwCO_GboafT6kfc/edit?usp=sharing

This shows 15 Conservative losses to the LibDems and 25 Conservative gains from Labour. There could be another 9 gains in Wales making 34 in total and a Tory majority of 8.

GarethoftheVale2

It's worth pointing out that Boris and Corbyn will debate Sturgeon and Swinson in some of the later debates.

Casino - Surely with the LD share dropping and the Con share rising in the polls, 15 LD gains from Con look a lot less likely now? Electoral Calculus now only has 2 LD gains from Con (Richmond Park and Cheltenham). If this is the case the Conservative baseline is a lot higher.

rottenborough

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1196705550307921920

OnlyLivingBoy

Barnesian said:

MarqueeMark said:

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

@MarqueeMark You make good points about Wales. I note that the MRP has the Tories making ten gains whereas my model has only one gain. That is a hell of a difference in total Tory seats. It would increase my estimate to 329 from 320.

There are (at least) two flaws with my model. It doesn't use regional swings (it excludes Scotland) and it doesn't have local knowledge.

It provides a basic framework that then needs the application of local knowledge to fine tune it. It is not intentionally biased and I would expect the lack of local knowledge to even out in terms of total seats but produce anomalies in individual seats.

I think one has to use separate Scottish and Welsh polls given the different dynamics there including the participation of nationalist parties (other than the English Nationalists or Tories obvs).

noneoftheabove

Philip_Thompson said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

How does Help to Buy make a property 20% more expensive? New builds are in the same property market as the rest of the market and make a small percentage of the overall market. Supply and demand determines prices and we have ever more households and need more properties or prices must rise. More new builds = more supply of homes = lower prices.

Eliminating help to buy would not cause prices to drop 20% and if fewer homes got built as a result would likely send prices up not down. That's basic economics!

The housing market is driven primarily by credit availability and interest rates not supply and demand. That might not be basic economics but it is accurate economics.

Barnesian

Stocky said:

Does anyone have insight into Richmond Park constituency? I was surprised to get a small stake on the Tories to hold it at 4/1 yesterday. I realise that it`s remainery but I think Tory price should be much shorter.

Why do you think it should be much shorter? Tory majority of 45 votes and a national swing from Con to LD. I don't think the bet is value at 4/1.

IanB2

noneoftheabove said:

Philip_Thompson said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

How does Help to Buy make a property 20% more expensive? New builds are in the same property market as the rest of the market and make a small percentage of the overall market. Supply and demand determines prices and we have ever more households and need more properties or prices must rise. More new builds = more supply of homes = lower prices.

Eliminating help to buy would not cause prices to drop 20% and if fewer homes got built as a result would likely send prices up not down. That's basic economics!

The housing market is driven primarily by credit availability and interest rates not supply and demand. That might not be basic economics but it is accurate economics.

Those are key drivers of demand. In an economic sense, "demand" means the amount of money bidding for housing, not the number of people who fancy owning a home.

another_richard

IshmaelZ said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Selling at firesale prices tends to enrich the already rich, because assets tend to get snapped up for cash by those with instant access to cash. And guess what they are going to do with the property when they have bought it?

I rather doubt CR's house was ever at risk of being sold at a firesale price.

KentRising

Boris needs to lose the bluster and the wordplay and just play calm and statesmanlike, look reasonable, no raising of voice. It's the way that he carries himself that will be the most important thing.

Jonathan

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

Barnesian

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Barnesian said:

MarqueeMark said:

FPT: Re Barnesian's model. I really appreciate you sharing this with us and I believe it is a very useful tool.

However, I reckon where it falls down is in modelling regional swing differential.

Take Wales. You have it as the Tories making a net gain of 1 seat over 2017. Both their gains are from dead heats.That flies in the face of regional and by-election polling, where Labour is seriously off its historic positions. For example, I don't see how the LibDems hold Brecon and Radnorshire where the by-election was at the time of national polling highs for them, there will be no Brexit Party or UKIP this time and Labour was bled from 17.7% to 5.3% by the LibDems. There's nothing left for the LibDems to squeeze from Labour to counter the extra Brexit/UKIP votes.

I will be astonished if the Tories don't retake The Gower, which you have as a dead heat. And I will be equally astonished if the Tories don't pick up seats plural in North Wales. Labour has proved remarkably sticky with its Welsh seats, but the signs are all there that they have finally run out of road.

Any Welsh posters wish to comment?

@MarqueeMark You make good points about Wales. I note that the MRP has the Tories making ten gains whereas my model has only one gain. That is a hell of a difference in total Tory seats. It would increase my estimate to 329 from 320.

There are (at least) two flaws with my model. It doesn't use regional swings (it excludes Scotland) and it doesn't have local knowledge.

It provides a basic framework that then needs the application of local knowledge to fine tune it. It is not intentionally biased and I would expect the lack of local knowledge to even out in terms of total seats but produce anomalies in individual seats.

I think one has to use separate Scottish and Welsh polls given the different dynamics there including the participation of nationalist parties (other than the English Nationalists or Tories obvs).

Yes. I exclude Scotland from my analysis for that reason. Maybe I should do the same for Wales and use Baxter/Flavible for the Scotland and Wales predictions. It's a good point.

noneoftheabove

GarethoftheVale2 said:

It's worth pointing out that Boris and Corbyn will debate Sturgeon and Swinson in some of the later debates.

Has either leader confirmed that they will? Or are they still considering sending a stand in?

noneoftheabove

Jonathan said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

But the Aunt or her power of attorney could have sold the flat to fund the care. It was a choice, even if it was in difficult circumstances.

Jonathan

A friend let her flat to someone who unfortunately died and was left in the flat for some time before they were discovered. Whilst the primary tragedy was the deceased, because there was no money our friend had to clean the flat themselves including ripping up the floor.

Casino’s dog issue is relatively minor. Don’t rent!

IshmaelZ

another_richard said:

IshmaelZ said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

The market is appalling and places Landlords and Tennant’s in horrible positions, which neglects the parasitic agents in the middle. I know of no one with a wholeheartedly good experience. It seems like a source of stress. Too much unavoidable personal baggage. To be avoided at all costs. If you want to make a business from property stick to commercial rent.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Selling at firesale prices tends to enrich the already rich, because assets tend to get snapped up for cash by those with instant access to cash. And guess what they are going to do with the property when they have bought it?

I rather doubt CR's house was ever at risk of being sold at a firesale price.

You may not realise it, but you were in effect suggesting that it should have been.

Beibheirli_C

another_richard said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Pulpstar said:

... It's the likes of that fat f**k Carrick Fergus and his ghastly wife along with the grasping, greedy agents that have turned it all into a hot mess.

Who? I know Carrickfergus well and it's not married, but it does have a big Norman castle...

Fergus Wilson and his wife Judith are a British couple who, until December 2015, were among the UK's largest buy-to-let investors. As of 2013, they owned nearly 1,000 two- and three-bedroom properties around Ashford and Maidstone in Kent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fergus_and_Judith_Wilson

What an unpleasant pair!

Jonathan

noneoftheabove said:

Jonathan said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

But the Aunt or her power of attorney could have sold the flat to fund the care. It was a choice, even if it was in difficult circumstances.

Sometimes you need to raise cash quickly. It may have been a choice, but not an unreasonable one not knowing the market and having church approved Tennant ready to go.

Cookie

Jonathan said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

...

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

Just discovered that a friend of mine - who is ceaselessly posting pro-Corbyn tropes on facebook - is in the midst of starting her rented property empire. People are endlessly surprising.

sirclive

noneoftheabove said:

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

For those we have help to buy which basically means you have to pay 20% more or (40% more in London), to buy a new home. Thanks a lot for the "help". The Persimmon CEO and directors thanks might be a lot more genuine.

Those kind of millionaires, guess one or two might be billionaires, paid for within a decade of state subsidy, are the ones Corbyn should be targetting, not the ones who have started genuine transformative businesses.

Help to buy and shared ownership have actually helped a lot of people get on the housing ladder who would otherwise not have done so

Just calling it help to buy does not mean it helps the buyers. It clearly helps the seller.

The govt provides ultra cheap subsidised loans to the purchaser on top of (not replacing) what the banks are loaning. With an undersupply of new homes, buyers are forced to spend this additional credit to compete with other potential buyers. It just moves up the price by the amount of the government builder subsidy (aka help to buy). Buyers have to eventually pay this extra 20-40% back (along with their student loans and forced pensions which no previous generations have been asked to do).

In my area (Cheshire) to get on the house ladder you need a huge deposit and significant help to even get started. There are few affordable homes and those that are need work.
Yes, new homes are expensive, but you can buy a 40% share at say £100k and rent the rest. Unfortunately builders restrict the supply to only a few per development.

noneoftheabove

Jonathan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Jonathan said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights and wrongs of this policy on the previous thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I have heard plenty of stories of nightmare tenants, so believe you. There are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interesting one. Would it be reasonable to require a larger cleaning deposit for pet owners for example? Or for the rules to apply only to unfurnished rentals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

But the Aunt or her power of attorney could have sold the flat to fund the care. It was a choice, even if it was in difficult circumstances.

Sometimes you need to raise cash quickly. It may have been a choice, but not an unreasonable one not knowing the market and having church approved Tennant ready to go.

Of course, it sounds like a much better decision than selling in the circumstances, even if turned out to be a disaster. Making a decision is not accidental though. And that is important because many (but definitely not all) of those who in their mind think it is accidental, think that somehow exempts them from the regulatory demands of being a landlord.

ozymandias

Jonathan said:

noneoftheabove said:

Jonathan said:

another_richard said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

I haven’t complained in public. I haven’t shared any details of the tenant nor the letting agent nor my property.

We were debating the rights andrevious thread. It’s wholly appropriate to share anonymised experiences that might contribute to that discussion.

The trouble is you’ll be told what you want to hear about ‘well behaved dogs’, but you never know what you’re going to get.

I hav are plenty of nightmare landlords too.

Nick's law is an interestingntals?

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

I’m going to have to object to that. I was an ideal landlord (and generous) - I responded to every issue of my tenants within 24/48 hours and never interfered with inspections (except annually) or imposed onerous conditions.

There are bad landlords (and property companies are amongst some of the worst) but many are just decent normal people.

Like many others I wasn’t trying to make a business, I just couldn’t sell my property and had to let it out instead. And the whole country would be f*cked without a private rental market.

Ditch the ideology.

You mean you couldn't sell your property for the price you wanted but you could rent your property for the price you wanted.

'Accidental landlords' aren't victims but rather people who view the application of supply and demand of property in a certain way.

Accidental landlords do happen. My wife’s mother’s aunt had to go into care. Her flat was rented out to help pay for that. There was a religious dimension to the care and a tennant was found via the church. Ultimately the aunt died, meanwhile the tennant stopped paying the rent and vacated the flat as a wreck. All that happened at the same time they were grieving. The stress was unimaginable.

The market is a cesspit.

But the Aunt or her power of attorney could have sold the flat to fund the care. It was a choice, even if it was in difficult circumstances.

Sometimes you need to raise cash quickly. It may have been a choice, but not an unreasonable one not knowing the market and having church approved Tennant ready to go.

Your experience sounds horrific.

There have always been bad landlords and bad tenants - since time began. Renting is a managed risk l, I think, by both parties.

Unfortunately government can never legislate away human nature, or indeed personal living habits.

peter_from_putney

Casino_Royale said:

I wonder if the Tories effectively start this election on about 295 seats, once you strip off 5 losses to the SNP in Scotland and about 15 losses to the LDs and one or two Labour Gain surprises.

So, they need 31 gains from Labour to get back up to an overall majority again.

Where (precisely) are these coming from, and how do we know the Labour vote isn’t very sticky in those seats?

Do you know Casino, that's precisely what worries me. I suppose that should those double digit leads remain it place then lots of Tory seat gains will result, as surely as night follows day. But if the Tory lead narrows very appreciably, as it did in 2017, not only do Labour hold onto far more seats, but the LibDems win many more also ... awkward. Such a scenario may not be very likely, but it does seems entirely possible. Which of Ladbrokes' bets would you then prefer to be on: the Tories to win 250-299 seats at 18/1* or the Tories to win 400+ seats at 4.2/1*?
More realistically an evens money bet on them winning between 300-349 seats looks pretty good value to me.

* = incl. Ladbrokes' daily boost

GarethoftheVale2

noneoftheabove said:

GarethoftheVale2 said:

It's worth pointing out that Boris and Corbyn will debate Sturgeon and Swinson in some of the later debates.

Has either leader confirmed that they will? Or are they still considering sending a stand in?

I assume that Boris and Corbyn would both turn up, after May sending Rudd backfired.

noneoftheabove

sirclive said:

noneoftheabove said:

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Pulpstar said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Jonathan said:

Foxy said:

Casino_Royale said:

kamski said:

Casino_Royale said:

.

.

The private rental market is a cesspit and wherever possible best avoided.

.

Agreed, there is a space for a private rental market but it should be much smaller than it has become. It has reached this stage through government subsidies via housing benefit, QE, state run and subsidised mortgage banks creating an almost religious belief in property prices being guaranteed to increase, combined with a complete lack of education about investment alternatives such as shares and bonds.

Landlord benefit - don't get me started on that one !

At least those overpriced shitty Persimmon newbuilds (with all their issues) start to solve the rental nightmare the UK has become.

Help to buy and shared ownership have actually helped a lot of people get on the housing ladder who would otherwise not have done so

Just calling it help to buy does not mean it helps the buyers. It clearly helps the seller.

The govt provides ultra cheap subsidised loans to the purchaser on top of (not replacing) what the banks are loaning. With an undersupply of new homes, buyers are forced to spend this additional credit to compete with other potential buyers. It just moves up the price by the amount of the government builder subsidy (aka help to buy). Buyers have to eventually pay this extra 20-40% back (along with their student loans and forced pensions which no previous generations have been asked to do).

In my area (Cheshire) to get on the house ladder you need a huge deposit and significant help to even get started. There are few affordable homes and those that are need work.
Yes, new homes are expensive, but you can buy a 40% share at say £100k and rent the rest. Unfortunately builders restrict the supply to only a few per development.

Those schemes again tend to favour the builders not the purchaser in the long run. There are often restrictions on who you can sell it on to and at what price, fees for this, that and the other. It is at least another option available but the t&c become crucial and are complex. There is so little education provided on being a savvy consumer, that the builders can focus on finding naive consumers.