Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'government'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Property Hub
    • Housekeeping
    • Property in the news
    • Introduce yourself
    • General property discussion
    • I need advice!
    • Progress journals
    • Property Podcast discussion
    • Property Hub University
    • Chit-Chat
  • The Property Hub Summit


There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



Areas I invest in

About me

Property investment interests

My skills

My goals

Interests outside property

Found 6 results

  1. Hi All, My wife and I own a flat in London which we initially purchased (with a mortgage) in 2005 to live in and we now rent out. It's in a redeveloped (in 2001) ex council block (built 1969) which has been done up to a fair standard now (gym in basement, 24h concierge) and is all privately owned. There has been issues with the concrete in recent years which, to our knowledge was why lenders would no longer lend on it. There has just been a lot of expensive work done on the building to fix this problem, and we've been issued an EWS1 certificate. However, having just been through the painful process of applying to remortgage with a few lenders, we've been turned down by all when the valuer visits and says, 'oh, it's a PRC building' and values it at £0. Does anyone know if there's any other options to get finance on such a building, or if not, if there's currently any lobbying of the government to put pressure on lenders to start to lend on these buildings again that I could follow/add my voice to? Any help appreciated. Regards, Ben
  2. The government is about to put forward another new law that will once again make them very unpopular with landlords. There are currently plans being put forward (currently at the consultation stage) to introduce mandatory 3-year tenancies for all tenants within the private residential sector. What this means: Landlords - Longer tenancy agreements would mean a longer period of time for eviction of troublesome tenants. - With this in mind, under the new proposal, there would be a 6-month probationary period where the landlord can request termination of the tenancy agreement and regain the property. - Currently, a landlord can serve a section 21 after the probationary period has ended on the property (usually 6 months) and get their property back without giving any reason or going to court. However, with a longer tenancy, there would be a longer initial period whereby a section 21 could not be served, meaning a section 8 would need to be served. A section 8 has a lot more technicalities and does have to go through the court system. What this means: Tenants - Good tenants would be guaranteed more stability from their rented property in the long term. - Once the 6-month probationary period is up, the tenant is secure within the property for another two and a half years. If however, they want to leave, they can simply cancel the contract, giving a short notice period. Do you think longer tenancies are a good or bad idea? Original source: https://bit.ly/2OPz0Sx
  3. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/238071 10k signatures = govt must respond 100k signatures = debate in parliament
  4. Hi all, You may already have seen the Law Society's comments and subsequent news coverage of the latest amendment to the Finance Bill 2016. Clauses 77 and 78 give rise to an income tax liability for property disposals in the United Kingdom. The Law Society was concerned that: the clauses were introduced hastily and with no formal public consultation; and the wording of the clauses implies that buy-to-let investors could be affected If so, property disposals could attract income tax bills as high as 45%, rather than capital gains tax bills of 28%. We have covered the topic in depth on our website, including: the background to the legislation the intention behind it the potential issues it causes existing guidance on REITs that provide insight into HMRC’s processes HMRC's current guidance on ‘intention at acquisition’ https://www.commercialtrust.co.uk/news/property-investment/new-tax-on-btl-property-sales/ The landlord community has been understandably alarmed by the news. Note that the government has stated that the legislation will only affect overseas property developers; it is not intended to catch out buy-to-let investors. The NLA has obtained clarification from HMRC to this effect. The issue is not with the policy intention, it is with the wording. This is why the Law Society is urging ministers to revisit the draft legislation. It is also encouraging HMRC to publish clear guidance around it. Hopefully this will provide assurance and clarification to anyone who was worried by the news.
  5. Having just seen the news about the junior doctors managing to crowd fund enough cash to appoint lawyers to challenge the Government over their imposed contracts, I wondered whether we landlords should consider doing something similar regarding the latest budget changes to prevent us from offsetting mortgage costs against profits. Assuming something like this isn't already set up of course! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35959865
  6. Hello all, A quick reminder that the government consultation on the expansion of mandatory HMO licensing closes this evening. If you wish to make your views known, you have until 11:45 this evening to respond. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/HMO_Licensing Best wishes
  • Create New...