EllsBellsWells
Chatty Member
She’s been mentioned a lot in Alexandra Stedman/The Frugality’s thread a lot recently. She currently only has a rave thread so this one may offer an alternative for us to discuss.
Interestingly she said her rental income was less than her mortgage. Hmm… was it in a bad location?
This was in 2021 before the interest rate hike but I am surprised that her rental income didn’t cover her mortgage paymentsIf she’s doing everything properly with a buy to let mortgage & has a high LTV then she’s probably in the red after costs each month as you can’t deduct mortgage interest in full anymore. A high LTV would also explain why they can’t sell it as they must be wiping out their equity.
This was in 2021 before the interest rate hike but I am surprised that her rental income didn’t cover her mortgage payments
Buy to let mortgages are more expensive than home owner mortgages & then there’s agency fees of about 10% of rent, insurance, repairs etc - for new landlords it’s not particularly profitable now you can’t deduct mortgage interest cost.
May I ask how much LTV do you need in order for them to offer you a let to buy mortgage?If you read my post, I was clearly talking about a let to buy mortgage - we had to do this last year when our sale fell through in order to complete on our house. Essentially, it’s a mortgage that allows you to release equity from a property in order to buy another, hence LET to BUY rather than BUY to LET, the latter is an investment whereas the former is usually a solution.
When it comes to renting out a property, you don’t have to use an agency, you can choose to let your property privately, although an agency often makes it far easier in regards to tenant quibbles, licenses etc. However, this is why banks insist that the rent is 125% - in order to cover both the mortgage repayment and additional costs.
If you read my post, I was clearly talking about a let to buy mortgage - we had to do this last year when our sale fell through in order to complete on our house. Essentially, it’s a mortgage that allows you to release equity from a property in order to buy another, hence LET to BUY rather than BUY to LET, the latter is an investment whereas the former is usually a solution.
When it comes to renting out a property, you don’t have to use an agency, you can choose to let your property privately, although an agency often makes it far easier in regards to tenant quibbles, licenses etc. However, this is why banks insist that the rent is 125% - in order to cover both the mortgage repayment and additional costs.
What I find it very annoying is the fact that she is the poster girl for renting. She has a home, albeit a flat, is very different from people who stuck in rental because they cannot afford to save up for a deposit due to raising rent and cost of living. They are different, for her is a choiceI’ve done Let to Buy (similar situation to yours) but the first one was still a BTL. I have little sympathy for her tbh- nothing stopping her selling it as far as I can tell, she’s just choosing to try and make more money by holding on to it. Understandable if she’s made a loss but I feel she’s not telling the whole story. She cut could her losses at any time and reduce it to sell but she’s obviously choosing not to.
If you read my post, I was clearly talking about a let to buy mortgage - we had to do this last year when our sale fell through in order to complete on our house. Essentially, it’s a mortgage that allows you to release equity from a property in order to buy another, hence LET to BUY rather than BUY to LET, the latter is an investment whereas the former is usually a solution.
When it comes to renting out a property, you don’t have to use an agency, you can choose to let your property privately, although an agency often makes it far easier in regards to tenant quibbles, licenses etc. However, this is why banks insist that the rent is 125% - in order to cover both the mortgage repayment and additional costs.
I’ve done Let to Buy (similar situation to yours) but the first one was still a BTL. I have little sympathy for her tbh- nothing stopping her selling it as far as I can tell, she’s just choosing to try and make more money by holding on to it. Understandable if she’s made a loss but I feel she’s not telling the whole story. She cut could her losses at any time and reduce it to sell but she’s obviously choosing not to.
Yea Plus her flat is not a new build, is a period property idk how it takes so long to sell. They probably priced it too high and aren’t motivated to sell.Glad she has a thread now. The moaning about renting has really annoyed me. I have 2 sons similar age to hers and live in London. We live in a 2 bed flat, but decent size with a garden. We are in a nice area but nowhere near as nice as Chiswick, probably about 2/3 of the price for property here. And when we decide we need a 3 bedroom house, we’ll move to a cheaper area - probably just outside London. Her narrative of being forced to rent just isn’t true, it’s only because they want to live in one of the most expensive parts or the most expensive city in the UK!
Also the property market has been good here recently, everyone I know with a flat on the market has sold in days so hers must be so overpriced.
Apparently it's very small and doesn't have two proper bedrooms.Does anyone know why they’re not living in the flat? Is it too small?
Apparently it's very small and doesn't have two proper bedrooms.
In addition to the points everyone else has made, the new house is HUGE! I couldn't get over the tour - she even forgot to include a room downstairs as there's so many . I can't imagine how much it costs to rent a house like that in Chiswick, even if it's not in tip top condition...