Tag Archives: Property Advice

By Mike Edwards

Asking rents have dipped for the first time in ten months, according to a November rent index. The drop is only a tiny 0.4% and so hardly means upgrading the Xmas dinner from turkey to a leg of beef, and means that on average so far this year rents have gone up by 3.5%. This means the average UK rent is now £717 a month but this of course masks massive regional variations, especially in London where the average rent is now 1,033 a month in London. In the index from LSL there appears to be a slight improvement in tenant finances, with 9.3% of all rent late or unpaid at the end of November, compared with 10.1% at the end of October.  Again welcome though this improvement is it is a very small change.              

Interestingly the survey estimates average yields for landlords at 5.3% but warns that landlords stand to make a loss on their properties. The average total annual return per property in November was 2.2%, compared to 1.4% in October. In cash terms, this was an average of £3,726 – equivalent to £7,700 in rent with a capital loss of £3,974. More worryingly despite these times of apparently insatiable tenant demand as would be buyers find themselves frozen out of that market, if property prices maintain the same trend as the last three months, an investor could expect to make a total annual loss of 0.7% over the next 12 months – equivalent to £1,144 per property. In terms of the arrears position although there are fewer tenants actually behind with their payments in some shape or form this in part is almost certainly down to a tougher line being taken by Landlords who themselves are finding their finances under pressure, so they are taking action sooner to ensure any new arrears cases are dealt with promptly.   

But again the picture looks bleak with a deteriorating labour market and unemployment at a 17-year high and likely to rise further. As it climbs, a growing number of tenants’ household finances (and Landlords?!) will come under strain, and overall tenant arrears are likely to climb in the coming year. 

There is no doubt that life for landlords is not as sweet as it looks and although not as hard for buy-to-let investors to secure mortgages as it is for first-time buyers, it is still very difficult. Indeed the apparent increased readiness of lenders to fund BTL again with higher LTV mortgages only make that market look healthy when compared to the residential mortgage market which in historic terms is all but flat lining. But even allowing for a slightly healthier look on the BTL front lending to property investors is still very low by historic standards. There were 34,500 buy-to-let loans in the last quarter this year compared to the same three months in 2011.

By Mike Edwards

Last week, both mayoral candidates, Ken Livingstone and the incumbent Boris Johnson, stirred up the debate on the private rented sector. Livingstone will set up a non-profit lettings agency, covering the whole of London, if elected, and would impose a rent cap of no more than one-third of the tenant’s wage. In polite terms these proposals have generally been received as coming from another planet, and totally unworkable and in fact a retrograde step. Boris Johnson on the other hand, so often considered lightweight and with his own zany comments and ideas, has confirmed his own plans to accredit private landlords and the publication of a rents map to give tenants information about rents in their area.  These proposals have been received much more warmly. 

Longer tenancies, accreditation of landlords, and incentives for landlords to use accredited agents are among new proposals being made by the London Assembly.  In its report, ‘Bleak House – Improving London’s Private Rented Housing’, it  is also calling for landlords to be given tax incentives to improve their housing stock, thought to amount to some 850,000 homes across the capital and which are lived in by one in four London households. The report, from the all-party housing and planning committee, says that a surprisingly high one-third of the properties are below standard, and estimates that one in three private landlords is a ‘rogue’ operator. This problem has always been exacerbated inside the M25 and especially in London itself by the increased numbers of Landlords who manage property themselves instead of using a regulated agent. Several years ago ARLA estimated that 40% of property within the M25 is not let through managing agents. Hence tenants also suffer, as many of the subsequent problems stay below the radar. Indeed so severe is the problem that the Assembly estimates over £1bn is needed as investment into the sector.

The report calls for the Mayor of London to develop a kitemark or accreditation ‘badge’ which sets out minimum standards of private rental housing, together with a publicity campaign to raise awareness of the scheme among tenants. It suggests that there should be standards in the private rented sector that are similar to the decent homes standard for social housing. Naturally and logically the report then urges councils to only place tenants in properties belonging to landlords who meet the standards. It also calls for agents to ensure that the properties they deal with also come up to the standards. Acknowledging that rogue landlords will never be swayed by any amount of incentives or encouragement, the report calls for the Mayor to consider greater use of selective licensing. Licensing requirements could be relaxed, it suggests, where the properties are managed by an accredited agent.      

But it is the call for longer tenancies which, if adopted, could have the greatest impact on the industry, with Assured Shorthold Tenancies a strong focus of the report. It criticises ASTs as not offering tenants sufficient security, with landlords having the right to give tenants two months’ notice to quit after four months, without needing to give a reason. The ‘Assured Longhold Tenancy’ has long been under consideration by The Law Commission and one wonders where they are while all this comment is being made on a subject they were specifically asked to look into. It says families, particularly those with school-age children, need longer security of tenure and it calls on the Mayor to lobby the Government for changes, including giving tenants protection from ‘retaliatory eviction’, possibly via the Localism Act.

The report says £400m is paid to private landlords in London annually by local authorities using the sector to house homeless people. In fact in many ways, London’s private rented sector can be regarded as a success story. The problem lies in the fact that private rented housing is increasingly acting as social housing, but without any of the standards and security. One thing is certain in these uncertain times, and that is families need certainty about where they will be living so that they can settle their children in schools and forge community links.  The London Assembly considers that in exchange for the hundreds of millions of pounds of public money they are receiving, private landlords must be compelled to provide certainty in the form of longer tenancies. They could have a point.

By Mike Edwards

Mortgages could become harder to get, with one in ten borrowers currently eligible for a mortgage being turned down in future. The Financial Services Authority has now published its long-awaited Mortgage Market Review. Its own impact assessment says that the proposed reforms could strip £2.9bn out of the economy because it would mean fewer people buying and selling homes, and lead to a dramatic drop in mortgage lending, affecting one million borrowers. The FSA’s final consultation paper is designed to put a permanent end to the lending excesses that were prevalent pre-credit crunch. But the crackdown could have a severe impact on the already ailing housing market. Among its many recommendations is a new ‘affordability’ regime, which will include looking at a borrower’s household spending plus a ‘stress test’ for how a borrower would cope if interest rates went up.

The incomes of older people, those aged 50-plus and coming up for retirement, would be particularly put under the spotlight. In effect the responsibility for checking affordability passes from mortgage adviser to lender, and most mortgage sales will have to be advised rather than simply executed.
The FSA’s proposals also stipulate that borrowers will not be able to factor in the possibility of future house price rises, but must be able to show other, more robust ways of being able to pay back their mortgage. In an environment where lenders are already being extremely cautious with their lending criteria and indeed cherry picking there is a danger that by placing all affordability assessments at the doors of lenders’ risk teams, this could create an even stricter lending environment.
For mortgage prisoners in negative equity, there is a ray of hope in the proposals, which suggest that the usual affordability tests are waived for such home-movers provided they have a solid track record of repayments.

However it is not just first time buyers who are suffering, next-time buyers are having it even tougher than first-time buyers, says a startling new report from Lloyds TSB.  It says that the housing market has become the most unaffordable for ‘second-steppers’ in 24 years. Many bought at the peak of the housing market in 2007 but are now unable to move on, having seen the value of their home fall by an average of 23%, leaving them £10,000 in negative equity. The second-steppers, typically aged between 25 and 34, also need to earn more than first-time buyers in order to make their move – and persuade someone to give them a mortgage. In the South-East, the average price of a second-time home means  a second-stepper would have to borrow nearly seven times average earnings – which of course the SA proposals above would not allow even if a lender was foolish enough to offer such a loan..   

Even in the Midlands – the most affordable region for second-time homes – someone trying to move up the property ladder would have to borrow four times their average salary. The home affordability ratio has risen to 5:2 for second-time buyers – the highest level since records began in 1987. The ratio for first-time buyers is 4:1. In 2007, the reverse was the case. The issue of second-stepper affordability is a key one in trying to get the housing market moving again, with the current difficulties in this segment of the market restricting the supply of starter properties for first-time buyers as well as preventing many of those who need to move from doing so.

By Steve Roulstone

This will not be a long blog, but I just could not believe the news today about the new Mortgage rules being discussed by the FSA. My immediate thought (after – is it me?) was where have they been for the last two years? Are they seriously saying that this change is going to be the answer to a problem which happened three years ago? What was the industry supposed to do for the last three years wait?

Answers in the reporting.

And then I read and watched on the news, Paul Smee, the Director General of the Council of Mortgage Lenders stating that these changes have actually been adopted and made by the mortgage companies themselves for some time. A fact the rest of us (especially people in the industry) are already aware of because we can see on a day to day basis the problems people have in getting a mortgage! Therefore the problem here is not what the FSA are saying it is how long it has taken them to say anything at all!

Even the FSA are aware!

Lord Turner, chairman of the FSA is actually quoted as stating ‘While the excesses of the pre-crisis period have largely disappeared from the current market’ in the actual report itself, so the problem, by their own admission, has virtually gone, and now they react? As I said, is it me?

Look at the track record.

The BBC reported recently that the FSA had been the major cause of the failure to control the banks in creating the boom and bust in the first place along with the rest of the press at the time and I can certainly remember more than one comment that the FSA failure in this regard was given as one of the main reasons for the organisations pending demise. In my opinion, if this is the best that they can achieve at the moment, then the sooner the day comes the better!

Polite response.

Mr Smee spoke gently (and it is very much to his credit) about the fact that this idea was nothing new, indeed an improvement on an earlier statement on the issue by the FSA but the fact you cannot get away from is that it is of no use whatsoever in dealing with either the problem or the solution, because it is far too late! The questions that spring to mind are numerous, but one of the most important ones is why this organisation is so distant from the real world?  And are we all mad for listening to them? Or are they losing so much credibility that actually nobody actually does listen anymore?

By Steve Roulstone

I sat and watched George Clark last night in his new programme designed to get us all up in arms about the number of properties that have been boarded up and have been left standing unused during a period when we have without doubt a massive housing shortage, but affordable housing is what the market needs and Mr Clarkes programme is designed to embarrass the powers that be into working with him and allow his Company to make the properties habitable once again.

Non Political statement.

In the main Mr Clarke managed to put a programme together which did not have a political edge and in saying what I want to say about the programme, it is my intention to do the same, because my comments are purely factual and based upon both the law as it currently stands and what I believe to be the powers that are needed to assist in raising quality of housing in the UK.

DIY I really don’t think so!

The first issue barely given time in this programme was the ability that people will have to affect changes themselves as a method of keeping the cost of renovating these houses down. But in every property visited or discussed, Electrical issues mainly with re-wiring were highlighted.  This of course is a job which just cannot be carried out by anybody who is not qualified (currently to Edition 17 of the IEE regulations) under Part P covering electrical installations in the home. Please Mr Clark, let’s get the facts right,  and let’s also be honest, electrical, heating including Gas and window replacement are the major jobs required when renovating a house, so without consideration being given to any possible structural work, there are regulations protecting people for all such services and they cannot be ignored!

Poor quality housing.

He then went on to take us around a rented property in poor condition (Could not help but wonder if the problems were the result of a failed DIY attempt?) and a property owned by people who had left it empty because they could not afford to rent it out (despite pointing out that the major problem with both properties was bad wiring!!) Sorry but I did not understand the point of this, because both houses on the face of it appeared to be in poor condition, so other than an appeal for cheap funding any point missed me by.

Proper controls needed.

What did strike me was here was yet another issue surrounding poor quality housing which would be addressed if licensed Agents were in a position to approve the property for the market prior to anybody being allowed to either let or rent the property. You cannot disagree, again from what we were shown, that both of these houses needed work, Surely this is a role that letting Agents would both wish to adopt and are in a position to carry out with ease and professionalism.

Large concern.                                                

Now far be it from me to throw a dampener on what Mr Clarke is trying to achieve here (Castle Estates joined forces with an attempt made by Prince Charles some seven years ago to resolve the same issue, which unfortunately failed) even though his own feelings about the subject seem to be the driving force, rather than any co-ordinated practical financial plan. But from the look of his web page, his own Business will be heavily involved in any solution, but the real source of the problem, which the area he covered in the first programme was created by the drive to build better housing in communities where property was emptied and or demolished, is much deeper and needs to be addressed on a much bigger format than this amicable gent will achieve, in the meantime I wish him well, providing he is realistic about what can be done under the label of DIY!

By Steve Roulstone

I am not a lover of the way the BBC report most issues, far too much political bias for my liking, but yet again this week one of my old chestnuts has risen its weary little head again, as the BBC news stated that house prices have dropped this year in total 2.6% according to the Land Registry and that the average price for a house is now around £162,347. I heard this report on the news as well as being able to read about it on the BBC web site.

House prices in dramatic rise.

The BBC have reported that average house prices are now at an average of £241, 461! Wow that’s good, when you consider the first report was dated September 2011 and the second November 2011, that’s a rise of just under 50% which gets even better when you see that the period reported upon was also September 2011!! But wait, what is this I hear?

House prices rise by 1.6%!

According to the BBC in a report dated today! House Prices have risen by 1.6% in the last year, now I know that these reports are all from differing institutions and organisations, but please somebody explain what is the truth? Are prices falling? Is the average price rising? When will we ever know? What are we supposed to believe?

When will the BBC explain?

This to me is exactly the style of reporting which the BBC (this organisation that was once trusted to be the eyes and ears of the nation) now use in all areas of news reporting, in trying to compete in TV world, that proves just how far they have dumbed down to the extent that they are only interested in sound bites with no depth what so ever. No doubt other markets are treated with the same scant regard. Proof for me for our industry, is that whenever they have an ‘In house representative’( to discuss this important issue in less than 30 seconds) it is never the same person, proving that they do not have an ‘in House’ expert when it comes to housing issues!

There to report the news.

I know this is not all their fault, because they did not publish the figures in the first place, but it is a fact they like bad news (which is why I probably only heard about the average price drop) and they never give an argued or reasoned debate about what the figures represent and why such figures differ. To me this is the crux of the matter, because if Mr and Mrs Average are ever to understand what the BBC is telling us, then if they quote so many figures, they should explain so many figures and why they use them all, because they SHOULD be the organisation we rely upon to explain matters to us! That surely is what we pay our license for, is it not?

By Steve Roulstone

The new Housing Policy released earlier this week, makes specific reference to two areas that I feel are linked, in the standards being set in one and the Government requirements for the other. I am referring to Decent Home Standards and Energy Performance levels.

Walking away from business.

This week alone, as a Letting Agent, we have walked away from two properties where the standard of accommodation that the Landlord was offering, we felt, dropped below what should be offered in our market place. As I pointed out in my Blog earlier this week, self policing, because we are professional Agents. The fact that other Agents (Estate Agents) were prepared to market the properties, in one instance without basic instruction which could result in the Landlord being the result of a financial claim against him, is both alarming and a subject that I repeatedly Blog about until blue in the face, if you do not legislate for fitter and proper Agents, the market will continue to suffer from bad Management!!

Market protection.

So with the knowledge that professional Agents will advise Landlords what should be done before they will market property, let’s just confirm, we now have a situation where we are raising standards automatically – just what the Government are asking for!! But wait, what do we have here? A comment in the same release, stating that Rented properties that do NOT reach certain energy standards will, by 2016, NOT be allowed to be offered to the market!

Is it the financial link?

So why are the Government targeting the rental market and not the sales market? There appears to be reference to review Building Regulations, which ensures new properties reach these energy standards, but nothing to address property sales, so why not? To me it is purely because they can and for no other reason. I would guess that the reason given would be that if Landlords are to make profit from renting property, then the profit must be gauged against the standard of the property. A good argument and I am not saying I disagree, but if that is the case, why not apply the same regulations to Mortgage Companies who profit from providing a Mortgage to the ‘House buyer’?

Too radical?

This to me is not a level playing field and we as an industry have five years to address it. The facts are quite clear in both statements included in the Government release on the rental market, the best standards of properties can be found in the rental market and the best energy efficient housing can be found in the rental sector. And yet in this report they further target (an easy target?) our sector for improvement. My point has to be, that under a heading of a thriving market sector, rules are being introduced which will place further unbalanced costs on the Landlord, when set against any decision against selling.

 

Action Needed.

We have plenty of time between now and 2016 to ensure this is not the case, so I ask our Industry representatives to ensure that our market will not be given a disadvantage at such a critical time in its popularity and development. If I am right and if this is left unattended we could be left with a problem, the time to act is now!

By Steve Roulstone

Today the Government have released their Housing Strategy for England, which is designed to give a kick start to housing sales across the UK, which most would agree is something that is badly needed and a view point that I totally agree with and have commented so in these pages on many occasions over the last eighteen months. But Housing Sales are not the only consideration nowadays and for once the Government have acknowledged this, with a section and strategy purely designed to encourage Landlords to start buying more property for the rental market.

Rounding a square peg.

I recognise that one problem the Government had to address was how to encourage growth in an area that had come under such criticism (Profit from rising property prices) for the perceived effect profit on Property values had had on the current financial situation and current property price de-valuation. What I did not expect but can perfectly understand is the decision to encourage growth through Business organisations rather than individuals. This very comfortably  delivers possibility of growth, which according to conversations I have recently had with Management at one of the larger National Property houses, whose clients include the organisations targeted by this policy, who are actively buying property in numbers at the moment, will be well received.

Using Council powers.

What I still cannot understand and accept, is that Local Government will be the answer to what is described as the ‘rouge Landlords’ who still flaunt such legislation as the Tenants Deposit Scheme and Houses of Multiple Occupation standards or as mentioned, the Decent Housing standards, for certainly where we are based in the Midlands, all Councils that I have come in too contact with have confirmed that they do not have either the man power or time (ability) to pursue Landlords and therefore deliver a local deterrent.

Working with the Industry.

It is very encouraging to see a whole section giving information about what the Industry can deliver and I am sure the ringing endorsement of the ‘Safe Agent scheme’ has been well received by the Industry in general, but I cannot make comment about this situation without pointing out that if the Government really wanted to get rid of rouge Landlords at the same time as increasing standards, then the Industry is here with open arms! Surely the fact behind the figures quoted that more property in the rented sector is of better quality than in the hands of owner occupiers says it all. I know that all of the properties in our Management would pass with flying colours, because we would not manage property that failed these standards.

Where does the problem lie?

I am also well aware that the figures state that some of the worst quality housing is in the private rental sector as well. Now with the information that we do not manage them and with the firm belief that neither do other professional Letting Agencies, it does not take such a massive leap of imagination to realise where these properties do actually lie! So what is the answer? Simple, involve us in managing or looking at these properties, so that all Landlords have to be connected with some professional licensed Agent. There are further issues raised for the rental sector by this statement especially surrounding Green policies, which I will address through these pages later this week.

By Mike Edwards

There is no relief for tenants as rents rise in all regions for the first time on record, according to the latest buy-to-let index from LSL Property Services plc. September figures show the average monthly rent in England and Wales rose by 0.7% to £718, surpassing the previous record high of £713 in August. With annual rental inflation at 4.3%, the average rent is now £29 per month higher than September 2010.

Rents rose in all regions of England and Wales for the first time on record and as a result rents hit record highs in six regions. Not surprisingly rents increased the fastest in the South East and the East Midlands, where they rose by 1.8% and 1.1% respectively compared to August. The smallest increases were in the West Midlands (0.2%) and the North East (0.3%). However, over the course of last year, London’s rents have risen at a faster rate than any other region, increasing by 5.8%. However the appetite for UK property investment outside of the capital also remains subdued, with 12.5% of investors looking to acquire over the coming year.

LSL also report that annual returns on rental property dropped back in September after property prices fell annually. The average total annual return in September was 1.8%, the equivalent of £2,995 being £7,661 in rent, with a capital loss of £4,666. However, property prices in the last quarter have held up better than in the previous twelve months, and if this is maintained, a property investor could expect to make a total annual return of 8% over the next year.

Rising rents may prove to be a headache for tenants, but they are improving the outlook for investors – which may in turn encourage further investment in the private rented sector. Despite capital losses after house prices fell annually, growing rental incomes means returns are still in the black. The average yield rose from 5.2% to 5.3% in September, the highest level since the housing downturn, and outstripping many investments. So with house prices yet to resume their upwards climb, there are opportunities for prospective investors to secure profitable bargains.

Figures this week from Hamptons show that investors in the shape of cash buyers are being enticed back to the market. They have reported a yearly increase in cash buyer applicants (from 11.86% in September 2010 to 12.46% in September 2011) emphasizing the perceived strength of residential property as an investment asset. Marc Goldberg, head of sales at Hamptons International says: “Due to the long-term nature of property as investment class, many of our buyers prefer to invest their cash in bricks and mortar rather than more uncertain assets such as stocks and shares. Although the current economic downturn may have caused uncertainty, vendors can take heart that we’re seeing an encouraging increase in cash buyers ready to complete quickly.”

However, this picture of positivity jars with the appetite for investment seen in the latest Young Index figures, which appear to more accurately reflect the wider sentiment of continuing economic uncertainty. This quarter’s figures show a fall in the proportion of investors seeking to acquire property in London over the coming 12 months to 33.3% (from 46.3% in the previous quarter and 59.3% in Q4 2009).

By Steve Roulstone

It is a real advantage to be able to comment on situations which arise through the daily activity in our office as letting Agents, because it means that the Blogs are always relevant. This week is no different. Once again a theme which crops up on a regular basis has been discussed and I felt would make a good subject to advice Tenants about what to expect at the end of a Tenancy.

A full month’s rent?

It is rare for a Tenant to pay a full month’s rent for both the first month or the last month of their Tenancy and this would only happen, if for example, the Tenancy started on the 1st day of the month and ended on the last day of the month! There are two ways of dealing with rent payments and at Castle Estates Stafford, we opted for the system of taking a payment for the first month for the days remaining in that month and from then on rent is due on the 1st of the month for each calendar month in full. The other is to always take a full month’s rent due on the date that the Tenant moves in and the due date remains as that day throughout the Tenancy.

Matter of choice.

The problems are present for both systems, for example having the date a Tenant moves in as a due date, causes problems for any move after the 28th, because of February and months that only have 30 days. With our system, it is explaining why they do not just pay for a full month on the day the Tenancy commences. But as it is our job to look after Landlords first and foremost, we find that arrears are easier to control if all rents are due on the same day, then all arrears are of the same length and letters are all sent at the same time.

Monies due at the end of Tenancy.

The issue that does arrive though is not when Tenants leave at the end of a month, in line with the required length of notice, but when they leave at any other day in the month and for some reason feel that for example, if they leave on the same date they move in, the rent paid at the beginning of the Tenancy covers the extra days – is does not!

Best solution.

Has got to be good communications! It is important that Agents make it clear to Tenants what is due when and why, and of course systems in place to cover this ensure all Tenancies are treated the same. With the Tenants Deposit Scheme ensuring both parties to a deposit are happy prior to any return, it is doubly important to get this right. Bad communication in my experience leads to people digging their heels in and unless we as Agents can show clear instruction and reasoning, our customers, our Landlords, may lose out.

Proper dues.

Of course it is only what is legally due that Agents will collect and the best solution when all else fails, is to add up in total the number of days associated with any part months (only ever the first and last months) and with a daily rate to hand, calculate the rent due for both periods. Of course the daily rate has to be in line with the manner in which the courts approve daily rates to be calculated which should be confirmed as well, hopefully then as is the case with most Tenants the calculation is both understood and accepted. Unlike the Tenancy that ended badly because the Tenant expected a full month’s rent to be returned as well as the deposit, because he paid his rent in advance, even though his last payment was at the start of the month and he left on the last day!