And on top....

sparkychap - 2021-03-29 19:35:00

And underneath...
Wow what a long thread!

masturbidder - 2021-03-29 20:10:00

sparkychap wrote:

"it’s literally bankrupting the next generations"
"The front is literally on the footpath"
"it’s literally happening already and people don’t even know it."

Sometimes it's best not to take things some people say literally....

I literally agree with this.

rmdstar - 2021-03-29 20:45:00

lakeview3 wrote:

the main reason people get type 2 diabetes is lack of education and laziness.

BS on a topic you so obviously do not know

bumfacingdown - 2021-03-30 11:30:00

This message was deleted.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-30 11:40:00

kittycatkin wrote:

People shouldn't say 'literally' unless they mean it and know its meaning.

Another one for ya.

"This car is in mint condition! Only 15,000km"

keys - 2021-03-31 08:46:00

Landlords getting the chunky rent increases in early.......
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/upper-hutt-pensioner-devastate
d-at-135-rent-increase/AVUJPN6FAWFXPHR6FV3RTCK7BI/

apollo11 - 2021-03-31 21:39:00

apollo11 wrote:

Landlords getting the chunky rent increases in early.......
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/upper-hutt-pensioner-devastate
d-at-135-rent-increase/AVUJPN6FAWFXPHR6FV3RTCK7BI/

BS, just ONE landlord.
I'm humming and harring about a $50 increase!

Only because we increased it last year by $40 and that was the first in 3-4 years.

Edited by smallwoods at 10:43 pm, Wed 31 Mar

smallwoods - 2021-03-31 22:42:00

smallwoods wrote:

BS, just ONE landlord.
I'm humming and harring about a $50 increase!

Only because we increased it last year by $40 and that was the first in 3-4 years.

Or you could really screw with my data set and do a rent reduction .....

apollo11 - 2021-03-31 23:14:00

apollo11 wrote:

Landlords getting the chunky rent increases in early.......
Https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/-
upper-hutt-pensioner-devastate-
d-at-135-rent-increase/AVUJPN6-
FAWFXPHR6FV3RTCK7BI/

Where the landlord is the property manager they are working for, and paid by, their client. The owner. Sad stories might work for some owners, property managers not so much.

And the more rents rise, the more the market rents also rises. Rinse and repeat.

Good to see the renter in the article is taking Minister Robertson's advice and looking elsewhere. I'm sure he would be interested in her story and keen to help.

artemis - 2021-04-01 05:40:00

apollo11 wrote:

Landlords getting the chunky rent increases in early.......
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/upper-hutt-pensioner-devastate
d-at-135-rent-increase/AVUJPN6FAWFXPHR6FV3RTCK7BI/

Reads like the rent was well below current market value. If talk of rent controls is scaring owners then it would pay to get rents as high as possible quick smart. Hope tenants enjoy paying their new taxes.

pcle - 2021-04-01 07:49:00

pcle wrote:

Reads like the rent was well below current market value. If talk of rent controls is scaring owners then it would pay to get rents as high as possible quick smart. Hope tenants enjoy paying their new taxes.

I have no doubt anyone doing this will have the microscope put on them by the govt pretty quickly. I guess it depends how much they want to draw attention to themselves. After all the govt knows how much they bought the property for, how long they owned it etc etc etc

lakeview3 - 2021-04-01 07:52:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I have no doubt anyone doing this will have the microscope put on them by the govt pretty quickly. I guess it depends how much they want to draw attention to themselves. After all the govt knows how much they bought the property for, how long they owned it etc etc etc

The Bureaucrats will enjoy receiving all their new taxes. Probably give themselves another pay rise!

pcle - 2021-04-01 08:00:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I have no doubt anyone doing this will have the microscope put on them by the govt pretty quickly. I guess it depends how much they want to draw attention to themselves. After all the govt knows how much they bought the property for, how long they owned it etc etc etc

Government are still sitting on the edge of their bed, trying to find two socks that match.

apollo11 - 2021-04-01 08:50:00

Worthwhile read on rent control

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/300266649/
heres-why-rental-controls-arent-the-answer?cid=app-iPad

princess52 - 2021-04-01 12:19:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I have no doubt anyone doing this will have the microscope put on them by the govt pretty quickly. I guess it depends how much they want to draw attention to themselves. After all the govt knows how much they bought the property for, how long they owned it etc etc etc

What relevance does how much the landlord paid for the house or how long they’ve owned it for, have to do with rent increases?

Rent is related to the market. That is, what other similar properties rent for. The only actual records on market rents that the government receives relate to properties rented, via bonds received. They have little knowledge and it’s anecdotal about rent increases for current tenants.

On the other hand, landlords can only increase rent to the point that the market will bear. I could increase rent on a property in Auckland from $500 to $750 as an example

If I do that to current tenants they have 3 options. In no particular order:

Pay the increase
Go to the TT and argue it’s too much
Move out

If they move out and I decide to advertise with the $750 rent, it wouldn’t take long for me to find out whether the market will accept that rent.

The flip side of that is if I don’t increase rents in line with the market, when I advertise for new tenants I could easily double the amount a previous tenant was paying.

It’s a fine line and sometimes leads to what has been mentioned in the previous post about biggish increases.

princess52 - 2021-04-01 12:34:00

And. One other thing. In my rental area, time of the year matters for reletting properties. Peak season is early January to the end of February. Low season is August to October

As I’ve said before, we tend to keep tenants relatively long term too.

princess52 - 2021-04-01 12:40:00

pcle wrote:

Reads like the rent was well below current market value. If talk of rent controls is scaring owners then it would pay to get rents as high as possible quick smart. Hope tenants enjoy paying their new taxes.

exactly, such a big hike reads the rent was well below market rent value and this tenant admits this, and isn't thankful for the timeframe they received this discount at all but mad that they are now paying the same as everyone else ? which they could have been all along ?

fast_or_last - 2021-04-01 21:04:00

artemis wrote:

Where the landlord is the property manager they are working for, and paid by, their client. The owner. Sad stories might work for some owners, property managers not so much.

And the more rents rise, the more the market rents also rises. Rinse and repeat.

... "the more rents rise, the more the market rents also rises" ...

what you may not realize unless your renting is that many if not most rentals now are in the hands of property managers... lets say its a made up company called Barfeets .. Barfeets say to their tennants the rent has to go up, siting, the market ,...

yet its Barfeets who have raised these rents themselves . setting the "market rents"..

Edited by thornton1961 at 9:27 pm, Thu 1 Apr

thornton1961 - 2021-04-01 21:23:00

apollo11 wrote:

Or you could really screw with my data set and do a rent reduction .....

That ain't gunna happen.
This is our superannuation back up for when the Govt fails us (again)

Although saying that, the latest house is rented at 80% of market value and 60% of what they were paying beforehand.

Edited by smallwoods at 10:23 pm, Thu 1 Apr

smallwoods - 2021-04-01 22:15:00

thornton1961 wrote:

... "the more rents rise, the more the market rents also rises" ...

what you may not realize unless your renting is that many if not most rentals now are in the hands of property managers... lets say its a made up company called Barfeets .. Barfeets say to their tennants the rent has to go up, siting, the market ,...

yet its Barfeets who have raised these rents themselves . setting the "market rents"..

as I said above, if the rent increase is above market rates, it’s likely the tenant will move out into a cheaper place. Then, when the place is advertised the PM or LL will soon know if they’ve pitched the rent too high as they won’t find tenants and will have to lower the asking.

Most LLs avoid putting rent up higher than similar places in the area as it costs money getting new tenants.

princess52 - 2021-04-01 22:24:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I have no doubt anyone doing this will have the microscope put on them by the govt pretty quickly. I guess it depends how much they want to draw attention to themselves. After all the govt knows how much they bought the property for, how long they owned it etc etc etc

Such opinions amaze me.
Renting houses is a business, the purpose of business is to make profit, and the provision of housing requires investors to be motivated to put money into it. There is nothing secret about any of it.
But it is an open market; anyone who thinks it is easy to make money, or who wants to provide housing for less (try explaining that to the IRD !) is free to do so.

masturbidder - 2021-04-02 12:12:00

masturbidder wrote:

Such opinions amaze me.
Renting houses is a business, the purpose of business is to make profit, and the provision of housing requires investors to be motivated to put money into it. There is nothing secret about any of it.
But it is an open market; anyone who thinks it is easy to make money, or who wants to provide housing for less (try explaining that to the IRD !) is free to do so.

Quite so, usually known as putting your money where your mouth is.

artemis - 2021-04-02 15:07:00

masturbidder wrote:

Such opinions amaze me.
Renting houses is a business, the purpose of business is to make profit, and the provision of housing requires investors to be motivated to put money into it. There is nothing secret about any of it.
But it is an open market; anyone who thinks it is easy to make money, or who wants to provide housing for less (try explaining that to the IRD !) is free to do so.

using age/wealth/educational advantage to buy houses to rent to people less fortunate/younger/less educated than oneself should never have been classed as a business. Businesses should be productive not exploitive.

Things will change, have a look over to the UK, they are making changes already.

https://www.simplybusiness.co.uk/knowledge/articles/2021/03/
landlord-tax-burden-capital-gains-tax-allowances-frozen/

People can’t have their cake and eat it too. Eventually the govt will need to generate more income to pay for the heavy tax burden that is New Zealand superannuation. If anyone thinks making people who have little to no assets (renters) work to pay for pensions for people who own multiple houses is in any way fair or sustainable then think again.

Edited by lakeview3 at 3:33 pm, Fri 2 Apr

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 15:25:00

lakeview3 wrote:

using age/wealth/educational advantage to buy houses to rent to people less fortunate/younger/less educated than oneself should never have been classed as a business. Businesses should be productive not exploitive..

What planet have you been living on? That's how it worked since the stone age!

masturbidder - 2021-04-02 16:12:00

masturbidder wrote:

Such opinions amaze me.
Renting houses is a business, the purpose of business is to make profit, and the provision of housing requires investors to be motivated to put money into it. There is nothing secret about any of it.
But it is an open market; anyone who thinks it is easy to make money, or who wants to provide housing for less (try explaining that to the IRD !) is free to do so.

Provide housing for less? It is called being competitive. All businesses try to provide the same service for less than there competitors in order to gain more business.

You can try and rent your house for more, but if it sits vacant for ages, it isn't making money. If you have 100% occupancy for years on end, it makes money.

tygertung - 2021-04-02 17:22:00

masturbidder wrote:

Such opinions amaze me.
Renting houses is a business, the purpose of business is to make profit, and the provision of housing requires investors to be motivated to put money into it. There is nothing secret about any of it.
But it is an open market; anyone who thinks it is easy to make money, or who wants to provide housing for less (try explaining that to the IRD !) is free to do so.

Yes. I don’t understand where people get the idea that what you pay for a property defines how much it will rent for. I also don’t understand people quoting “market rent” as some number dreamed up by PMs or LLs

princess52 - 2021-04-02 17:25:00

lakeview3 wrote:

using age/wealth/educational advantage to buy houses to rent to people less fortunate/younger/less educated than oneself should never have been classed as a business. Businesses should be productive not exploitive.
.

Have you tried telling farmers that their businesses are exploitive? Or sex workers? Or dog groomers? Or fill in the gap?

princess52 - 2021-04-02 17:29:00

lakeview3 wrote:

using age/wealth/educational advantage to buy houses to rent to people less fortunate/younger/less educated than oneself should never have been classed as a business. Businesses should be productive not exploitive.

Things will change, have a look over to the UK, they are making changes already.

https://www.simplybusiness.co.uk/knowledge/articles/2021/03/
landlord-tax-burden-capital-gains-tax-allowances-frozen/

People can’t have their cake and eat it too. Eventually the govt will need to generate more income to pay for the heavy tax burden that is New Zealand superannuation. If anyone thinks making people who have little to no assets (renters) work to pay for pensions for people who own multiple houses is in any way fair or sustainable then think again.

As I’ve said before, a number of landlords own rentals exactly because they wish to provide for their own superannuation

I’d like to know whether

A) you plan to live off government super when you retire? and
B) have you helped any of your adult kids to buy their own properties?

princess52 - 2021-04-02 17:31:00

princess52 wrote:

As I’ve said before, a number of landlords own rentals exactly because they wish to provide for their own superannuation

I’d like to know whether

A) you plan to live off government super when you retire? and
B) have you helped any of your adult kids to buy their own properties?

and round and round we go.

At least I can say having kids taught me to think about other people and what their future might look like.

I am poorer for the experience financially but richer in so many other ways.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 17:51:00

princess52 wrote:

Have you tried telling farmers that their businesses are exploitive? Or sex workers? Or dog groomers? Or fill in the gap?

you really don’t get it do you?

There’s certainly no point in me debating this with you at this stage.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 17:58:00

It would appear a lot of persons buying properties have been benefiting from having what amounts to interest free loans or even better getting massive reductions in their PAYE payments.."Nor louder cries to pitying heaven are cast'!!.

gazzat22 - 2021-04-02 18:12:00

upfront1 wrote:

It does worry , it means I will have to save a lump out of each rental payment, which I have been using to pay water costs, rates increases, garden maintenance, house maintenance for tenants benefit. I have been keeping the rent well below market rates as believe in being ethical as I intend to return once family obligations are met... don't want to increase rent, want security for the people 'borrowing' my home ... argh!!!

Those costs have been for your benefit too havent they?Whatever happened to claiming for expenses??

gazzat22 - 2021-04-02 18:17:00

masturbidder wrote:

What planet have you been living on? That's how it worked since the stone age!

no it hasn’t

When I bought my first house inn1993 in Auckland there wasn’t one other person looking at it. Not one. No investors, no foreigners.

Same when I bought my house here in late 1999. Not one other person was interested. In fact, I think I was the only one at the open home.

What happened was the internet. That changed the landscape of the situation.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:21:00

gazzat22 wrote:

It would appear a lot of persons buying properties have been benefiting from having what amounts to interest free loans or even better getting massive reductions in their PAYE payments.."Nor louder cries to pitying heaven are cast'!!.

interest free loans should never have been allowed for rental properties or even any property for that matter.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:24:00

lakeview3 wrote:

and round and round we go.

At least I can say having kids taught me to think about other people and what their future might look like.

I am poorer for the experience financially but richer in so many other ways.

Oh come on, that’s the way every normal human being thinks...

lovelurking - 2021-04-02 18:25:00

lovelurking wrote:

Oh come on, that’s the way every normal human being thinks...

no it’s not.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:30:00

lakeview3 wrote:

interest free loans should never have been allowed for rental properties or even any property for that matter.

Well it is an accepted deduction that all us sole traders use. If sole traders couldn’t make this tax deduction prices of goods and services would rise. hope you are happy with rising rents.

heather902 - 2021-04-02 18:37:00

lakeview3 wrote:

no it’s not.

Yes it is.

lovelurking - 2021-04-02 18:39:00

heather902 wrote:

Well it is an accepted deduction that all us sole traders use. If sole traders couldn’t make this tax deduction prices of goods and services would rise. hope you are happy with rising rents.

I am talking in regard to houses, not businesses.

I would never borrow money to start a business. Why would I when I can start one from scratch myself?

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:46:00

lovelurking wrote:

Yes it is.

well you can convince yourself that’s how it is, but I know differently

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:47:00

Actually this is wrong. Housing is not a business it is a human need. Anyone that has read Jean Auel's books about pre humans and finding caves for shelter would know that. We as a collective need to get back to that thinking. this property ladder thing is a new thing. even in my grandparents day a home was home a house to live in, not a vehicle for making money.

kamo631 - 2021-04-02 18:53:00

lovelurking wrote:

Yes it is.

is it panto season...????

sparkychap - 2021-04-02 18:53:00

kamo631 wrote:

Actually this is wrong. Housing is not a business it is a human need. Anyone that has read Jean Auel's books about pre humans and finding caves for shelter would know that. We as a collective need to get back to that thinking. this property ladder thing is a new thing. even in my grandparents day a home was home a house to live in, not a vehicle for making money.

thank goodness someone gets it

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:55:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I am talking in regard to houses, not businesses.

I would never borrow money to start a business. Why would I when I can start one from scratch myself?

I take it you want your Adult children to live with you indefinitely? Or they will line up for Social housing. You aren’t making any sense with your would you call it ideology? You don’t want property investors other than people with ton of cash. Yeah enjoy your 40 year olds at home. Cosy.

Edited by heather902 at 6:57 pm, Fri 2 Apr

heather902 - 2021-04-02 18:56:00

who here read laura Ingalls wilder books in their young years and read how her father built one-room homes out of logs? what men did 200 years ago?

kamo631 - 2021-04-02 18:58:00

kamo631 wrote:

Actually this is wrong. Housing is not a business it is a human need. Anyone that has read Jean Auel's books about pre humans and finding caves for shelter would know that. We as a collective need to get back to that thinking. this property ladder thing is a new thing. even in my grandparents day a home was home a house to live in, not a vehicle for making money.

furthermore, back in the 1970s and 1980s and before, people starting out could buy a section (that wasn’t snaffled up by a group home builder) and put a house on with few covenants. They could do kitset or shell only and live in it. That’s not allowed these days. So it’s just not a level playing field any more.

lakeview3 - 2021-04-02 18:58:00

kamo631 wrote:

Actually this is wrong. Housing is not a business it is a human need. Anyone that has read Jean Auel's books about pre humans and finding caves for shelter would know that. We as a collective need to get back to that thinking. this property ladder thing is a new thing. even in my grandparents day a home was home a house to live in, not a vehicle for making money.

Still nothing stopping people owning their own shelter though is there? Yes it takes hard work, and going without, my 23 year old did it with property sharing and KiwiSaver plus a very small contribution from us.

heather902 - 2021-04-02 19:01:00

my 83 year old mother was telling me today about how she and my father capitalised on the family benefit (me) and built their home in west auckland, Neil homes was the bulider that built it. And that they was no garage or drapes or carport or concrete. They bought the bare bones of a home in west Auckland back in the 60s.

kamo631 - 2021-04-02 19:11:00

kamo631 wrote:

who here read laura Ingalls wilder books in their young years and read how her father built one-room homes out of logs? what men did 200 years ago?

Oh, I would love to see you explaining that one to Auckland City planners!

masturbidder - 2021-04-02 19:13:00