We know what is squeezing the life out of the rental market

[Learning]

Two children?! And I suppose they’ll both be wanting their own accommodations in 15/20 years or so? That’s another two houses out of thin air then. People should just stop having babies until we have enough houses for everyone. I’ll lead by example, I wish to send my two teenagers back! Can I have a full refund please?

[JBM]

Keeping a roof over my kids' heads is impossible
23 April 2018


Who's to blame if there's a shortage of dwellings?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12036269

Parker said she had always been a good landlord during her 20 years in the business.

"All of my houses are really nice, beautiful homes," she said. "I pride myself on the fact that if I can't live in them, I don't want anyone else to. But 90 per cent of tenants just slowly wreck them over time."

She was in the process of selling off her houses and getting out of the business. Rules had turned against landlords and were increasingly on the side of the tenant, she said. In the past year the company had dealt with four cases of P contamination.

"I'm so over it. I'm exhausted by all this and I just think I'd rather get into something now that's less stressful."

[flyernzl]

. . . But 90 per cent of tenants just slowly wreck them over time."

Slowly?

She's lucky.

My lot seem to be able to do it quite quickly.

[Keys]

That's why tenants like to move in 18 - 24 months. Move into a nicely cleaned property as landlords are "expected" to clean in between tenancies.

[Don't believe the Hype]

That's why tenants like to move in 18 - 24 months. Move into a nicely cleaned property as landlords are "expected" to clean in between tenancies.

In this market that works for me... paint, clean, re-tenant same week for $100+/wk more. But what we're finding is that tenants are not moving on at the frequency they used to as when they look at the market rent for an equivalent property they're up for a big price jump they stay put.

We don't hike rents on current tenants preferring to do regular smaller increases but in this market small regular increases still results in a huge gap to market rent.

[eri]

am discovering

many tenants

apparently unaware

vacuums can be emptied

[Davo36]

What is this 'vacuum' you speak of? Sounds like a made up word to me!

[eri]

bet your maid sucks Davo

better not answer that

[JBM]

This government is increasing compliance /costs on several fronts... In talking with Homebuilders figures of $15k-$20k more under new Govt Regulations (who in there right mind would be building rentals at present ?)

New minimum standards coming via the Healthy Homes Guarantee Act, only for rentals though.

Revision of the Residential Tenancies Act which will include increased tenant rights (as announced).

Ring-fencing rental losses would be a biggie for a new purchase with high interest payments. This is coming next year, details to be announced.

And capital gains tax probably if the current government is back in 2020....

Why oh Why would any kiwi what to buy NZ Res. Rental property at the peak of the market ? and even hang onto rentals worth thousands more than they paid ... top of the market has been reached IMHO

I see US bonds spiked overnight ... Debt is going be forced to become more expensive...

Something like 20% of US businesses have to raise funds through Debt(Bonds) every year just to pay the interest on their debts

It's breaking down ..2019 not going be pretty

Still am looking to buy another property but it's commercial - 14% net yeild long term tenants(which pay all outgoings)

Personal if I still held Res. rentals I'd be looking to exit ASAP

[Don't believe the Hype]

I'm not a Labor voter but they've been fantastic for my profitability over the past 6 months.

Ring Fencing = increased demand for high margin properties to balance out the portfolio of low yielding properties (increase buyer demand)
Ring Fencing = increased rents across the board to take negative properties to positive faster (increase profitability)

New Min Standards = capping the no. of rentals in the market by increasing the barriers to entry of becoming a residential landlord (increased competition for limited houses = increased profitability)

Support home buyers over investors = fewer rentals in market (reduced competition)
Support home buyers over investors = more renters displaced 170 renters looking for a home for every 100 rentals sold to home buyers (reduced options)

RTA changes to increase tenant rights = Change in landscape of rental market reduction in Mums and Dads and the rise of corporate landlords (think kiwisaver funds) - large scale landlords who expect increased returns every year (increased profitability)

I agree there are risky times ahead... but if you have enough scale, liquidity and long term view I think this business will only become more profitable over the coming years. Costs will rise (i.e. interest rates, insurance, rates etc) but my expectation is that residential landlords profitability will continue to improve.

[Perry]

Morons All

And the squeeze on residential rental tenants is only going to get worse. Mainly driven by gummint morons and ideologues and ill-considered laws and regulations from Comrade Taxcindarella et al. Along with the general vilification of landladies and PIs.

New Zealand's 'working poor' and the push to understand how many are struggling
16 May 2018

You could work all week and have only $20 to show for it. You could be mother-of-two Joanna, working a retail job in Henderson, with take-home pay of $550 eaten up by rent of $530 every week. This isn't a story about rental prices in Auckland. This is a story about low wages, high living costs, and the working poor. And it's a story that's increasingly told around the country.

Most people with even half a brain know that as the cost of new builds increase, so the prices of existing houses follow, along with the other factors mentioned in earlier posts. And rents will follow a similar pattern.

All this may lead to the socialist gummint actually interfering even further on the residential rental market.

A vicious circle.

[JBM]

I'm not a Labor voter but they've been fantastic for my profitability over the past 6 months.

Ring Fencing = increased demand for high margin properties to balance out the portfolio of low yielding properties (increase buyer demand)
Ring Fencing = increased rents across the board to take negative properties to positive faster (increase profitability)

New Min Standards = capping the no. of rentals in the market by increasing the barriers to entry of becoming a residential landlord (increased competition for limited houses = increased profitability)

Support home buyers over investors = fewer rentals in market (reduced competition)
Support home buyers over investors = more renters displaced 170 renters looking for a home for every 100 rentals sold to home buyers (reduced options)

RTA changes to increase tenant rights = Change in landscape of rental market reduction in Mums and Dads and the rise of corporate landlords (think kiwisaver funds) - large scale landlords who expect increased returns every year (increased profitability)

I agree there are risky times ahead... but if you have enough scale, liquidity and long term view I think this business will only become more profitable over the coming years. Costs will rise (i.e. interest rates, insurance, rates etc) but my expectation is that residential landlords profitability will continue to improve.

But will household incomes handle it ? I think much like the last 30yrs where housing costs have outpaced incomes = more homeless

[donna]

And the squeeze on residential rental tenants is only going to get worse. Mainly driven by gummint morons and ideologues and ill-considered laws and regulations from Comrade Taxcindarella et al. Along with the general vilification of landladies and PIs.

New Zealand's 'working poor' and the push to understand how many are struggling
16 May 2018


Most people with even half a brain know that as the cost of new builds increase, so the prices of existing houses follow, along with the other factors mentioned in earlier posts. And rents will follow a similar pattern.

All this may lead to the socialist gummint actually interfering even further on the residential rental market.

A vicious circle.

Yeah and it's everywhere - the UK, Aus etc. Unless Governments grow a pair and tackle the Banks cash grab and ongoing lack of support for Businesses; the housing crisis will be around forever. Here's an article on it.

Businesses need investment, funds etc - without it wages will remain low, so too staffing levels. It's just too easy for those in power to just say it's the landlords or point the finger somewhere else - the thing is they could make huge difference if they really were up for it. It's shame they're not and maybe their hands are tied by the banks.

The ultra rich are getting richer, the poor poorer and everyone in between is copping it at every turn with ma and pa landlords having to sell up which as we know as soon as you do you lose. So they're selling their rentals to FHBs who have whopping mortgages - which means more $$ for the banks!

Less landlords, = less work generated for property professionals like lawyers, etc, and other support businesses. So less ma and pa landlords and more rentals in the hands of big corp. landlords and on it goes.

cheers,

Donna

[pooky]

I'm still busy cracking up over the fact Phil Twyford thinks negative gearing actually has something to do with speculators. Kicking farmers and Landlords seems to be the name of the game at the moment. As stated before, losing landlords just means the private money which provided accomodation (landlords) suddenly turns into public money (tax) spent to provide more and more accomodation. 1.8 billion over 3 years (600million a year) to build 6000 new homes. Wait till that doubles. Hmmm.

[Don't believe the Hype]

But will household incomes handle it ? I think much like the last 30yrs where housing costs have outpaced incomes = more homeless

current tenants probably not. But there will be a shift, if people currently pay $400/wk and their rent goes to $500/wk they move to a smaller house or a cheaper location.

Harsh as this might be it is the reality.

lets not confuse the driver of homelessness- it's not the rent going up it's the sale of rentals to home owners who don't have the same level of occupancy

maybe we need to force home owners to fill their spare bedrooms or be taxed - an empty bedroom tax