51–60 of 62 posts
I wonder if there's buyer-side liability. If you purchase a property which then incurs vast costs due to a technicality in the deeds (example would be a duty to maintain something), who pays?
Leasehold https://leasehold.io/ is an alternative which uses a deflationary blockchain cryptocurrency to distribute profits to token holders. It distributes profits via a token buyback (and burn) mechanism which maximizes the reward for long-term token holders. When the buyback comes at the end of each month, you can sell tokens back to Leasehold Holdings on one of the exchanges and cash out or you can hold your toke…
That sounds like bitcoin "hodling" effect, but squared in a cryptographically verifiable way.
They even have a secondary market or exchange which is a regulated MTF (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/multilateral_trading_fa...) where you can trade your investment using limit and market orders.
Whilst this is no doubt innovative, everything that is abysmally wrong with property ownership in the UK stems from complicated ownership structures like that being proposed here. Just look at the leasehold scandal (and upcoming reform), the push for commonhold, and the things that go wrong (such as the cladding scandal following Grenfell). Homes are not investment vehicles to make people wealthy - they are a fundame…
> Proptee is responsible for managing the entire investment portfolio. Operating fully in-house allows us to keep your fees to the minimum. At the moment, we charge only a small management fee of 0.85%. So Proptree is going to find tenants, clear blocked drains and repair leaking roofs all for 0.85%? Or are they going to hire their mates to do it out of the capital amount, who will take massive commissions?
So for a £300k house that rents for £9,600 pa I read that as their fee is £2,550 pa, not £81.6 pa... A letting agent would probably take ~15% of rent so ~£1,450 pa. Repairs are generally charged in addition to the management fee and it's quit possible that they will do the same by deducting the costs from the fund.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the rent is disconnected from the property value, then there is a speculative bubble. If the rent goes up faster than wages, people become homeless.
It's hard to see how rent can be disconnected from the property value because if the achievable rent for a property skyrockets that will pull the property's value up. If rent goes up faster than wages, which cannot go on forever, it means an imbalance between supply and demand. The best way to address this is to rebalance supply with demand, not to be tempted to control prices or whatnot that do not resolve the root…
It's the other way around that disconnects happen: rents stay the same and property prices go up.
But that's not why you got downvoted, no. You misunderstand price controls. It doesn't mean that everybody should have access to a nice apartment in a sought-after area. It means that I should have access to a nice apartment in a sought-after area.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to see how rent can be disconnected from the property value because if the achievable rent for a property skyrockets that will pull the property's value up. If rent goes up faster than wages, which cannot go on forever, it means an imbalance between supply and demand. The best way to address this is to rebalance supply with demand, not to be tempted to control prices or whatnot that do not resolve the root…
> It's hard to see how rent can be disconnected from the property value because if the achievable rent for a property skyrockets that will pull the property's value up. It's the other way around that disconnects happen: rents stay the same and property prices go up. But that's not why you got downvoted, no. You misunderstand price controls. It doesn't mean that everybody should have access to a nice apartment in a so…
Yes, that sums it nicely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's hard to see how rent can be disconnected from the property value because if the achievable rent for a property skyrockets that will pull the property's value up. In a free market (the UK is about as free a market as you get in relation to property ownership and rental), this might be true. But it does depend on how regulated the market is, in terms of rent controls etc. I'm not sure this would hold for an olde…
Rent controls do not solve any issues. They certainly don't make it easier to find a home. They only tend to restrict supply and to discourage people from moving.
Whilst this is no doubt innovative, everything that is abysmally wrong with property ownership in the UK stems from complicated ownership structures like that being proposed here. Just look at the leasehold scandal (and upcoming reform), the push for commonhold, and the things that go wrong (such as the cladding scandal following Grenfell). Homes are not investment vehicles to make people wealthy - they are a fundame…
I live in India I had the same mindset "home or land isn't investment" but then I thought about trying investment in property and it paid vastly more than what bank or other financial instrument can fetch me when adjusted for risks.
In India, properties in good locality of the city is a storehouse of value.
Here most deals are 80-20 or 70-30, which means 80% of the value you show in official record while rest 20% is paid in all cash to seller. This helps save bit of tax and avoid scrutiny by tax department as you aren't drastically showing a low value. When everyone does this, the property value to government/tax agencies always appear at 80% of its actual value (the money actually being paid) for the transfer of property rights.
What happens to the cash portion? Usually the seller will use that cash to renovate their house or pay for other things in cash or use it for their everyday expenditure.
High value property here don't fluctuate much in price and are considerably safe investment to hold and move money when you want.
I am in the market and I am seeing the guys with money during lockdown are getting wayyy better deal now.
"Safer than stocks. The stock market is volatile and risky compared to property ownership" That's a bold statement. Property markets can crash too. And what happens if a crappy tenant trashes the place, or the property turns out to have subsidence, or asbestos, or covered in dangerous cladding? And insurance doesn't pay (for whatever reason, plenty of real world examples of this)