Give renters a break, landlords warned..!!

I know I couldn't live on $187 a week before other expenses, could you?

Power, car or two, gas, internet and so on.
Not to mention ongoing costs for having a house....even putting fuel in the mower or getting a pizza would be a big deal.

The husband bought in $1900 (take home) and the wife $2000.

Monthly mortgage payments = $1970.

They have $1930 mth for living expenses or $445 per week.

It may be tight, but it would be possible for them to keep up with their payments.
 
Last edited:
The lattes, dinners out, trips overseas, DVD's, surround entertainment systems, label clothes and italian shoes....all helps.

Oh yes, these could be the tipping point! It's ashame the article didn't give a detailed break down of all their expenses, then we could have offered them some tips!

Regards Jason.
 
Even if it wasn't the toys. I went out with friends on Friday night. Dinner was about $70 per person, and then we took a taxi home. Don't get me wrong: it was a great night, but if you do this twice a week, it's going to hurt.
Alex
 
I think they should ALL get food vouchers instead of cash AND the rent assistance should go AUTOMATICALLY to the landlord as that is what it is designed for. I will also note that there are MANY welfare recipients who don't find it at all humiliating for them to spend their food vouchers at the checkouts. In fact, some of them have got it down to a fine art as they know how to rotate the charities to get the most amount of assistance possible.

I agree rental assistance direct credits is the only fair way to deal with the situation. Why should the landlord subsidise rents because a few are finding it difficult surely, the public has a moral obligation?

The article is just another media beat up, preying on public conscience.

In a free market economy rentals are set by market forces. I am sure its not the norm as there are lots of landlords who continue for one reason or another to rent their properties at under market rents.
cheers
 
Even if it wasn't the toys. I went out with friends on Friday night. Dinner was about $70 per person, and then we took a taxi home. Don't get me wrong: it was a great night, but if you do this twice a week, it's going to hurt.
Alex

I have read main meals in Sydney have hit the $50 mark, and not far behind in Melb. & Bris. at $40-$45. The same article said that entrees were now about $22 in Sydney. WOW!
 
I have read main meals in Sydney have hit the $50 mark, and not far behind in Melb. & Bris. at $40-$45. The same article said that entrees were now about $22 in Sydney. WOW!

Sounds about right. It's gotten a lot more expensive in the last couple of years. But so have London, New York, etc.

We walked around the city a bit, and I know it was a Friday night, but the bars were pretty packed. People just seem to have so much money. The interest rate rises, as others have discussed in other threads, aren't really hitting the renting young crowd. It will when it starts affecting jobs, though.
Alex
 
Sounds about right. It's gotten a lot more expensive in the last couple of years. But so have London, New York, etc.

Not sure about London, New York but I just did a work trip to the LA and found eating out exceptionally cheap. Maybe it was the inflated $AUD that was tricking me and its not really that cheap.
 
Not sure about London, New York but I just did a work trip to the LA and found eating out exceptionally cheap. Maybe it was the inflated $AUD that was tricking me and its not really that cheap.

Did you try In n Out burgers? Highly recommended.

American food IS generally cheaper (not least because you can order one main and share between two people), and the high AUD helps. New York and London are much more expensive, though the AUD has been rising against the GBP too.

Part of the increase is from actual food prices rising, but of course rising wages, and general popularity of eating out is also contributing to it.
Alex
 
If the yields are fine then why the complaints about low rents in this thread?

I didn't say that yields were fine. Certainly not for people looking to buy right now. I think that in many areas they are pathetic, but there are some areas where they are still reasonable, and they are on the improve at the moment.

For those of us who have had properties for a while, the yields are yummy, and getting yummier.

What I am saying is that you focus on the yields and assume that every property investment has a neg cashflow.

That is not accurate.

If you were an active investor you would know that.
 
The husband bought in $1900 (take home) and the wife $2000.

Monthly mortgage payments = $1970.

They have $1930 mth for living expenses or $445 per week.

It may be tight, but it would be possible for them to keep up with their payments.

You forgot the Beemer and Merc repayments.
 
Gross generalisations

Why is it that everyone seems to think renters are people, who are have expensive toys (relative to their means), bad spending habits, frivalous with their money and no cares about the future?

I think the comments recently on this forum are quick to denigrate those renting, assuming behaviour that suits their arguments.
 
It's unlikely people will sell and rent, even though that might be the best option financially How often do people do what's financially best for them? More likely, they'll scrimp and save and try to stay in the house. Many will, but the resultant drop in consumption will hurt the economy. Some won't be able to stay in their houses, and the resultant repossessions may depress markets for a while.
Alex

in the main probably not .. but everyone has a breaking point.. the higher the rates (and other prices go) the more peoples breaking point is reached. Also those with partners and families dont have the luxury of seeing "the end goal" and living on crumbs today to have a easy future tomorrow.

also you dont need the whole suburb to be sold before the "assumed price/value drops" .. if my neighbor is financially distressed and ends up selling for 10% below current assumed price, then it impacts the future sales of the whole street, including my house .. just like on the way up..
 
Why is it that everyone seems to think renters are people, who are have expensive toys (relative to their means), bad spending habits, frivalous with their money and no cares about the future?

I think the comments recently on this forum are quick to denigrate those renting, assuming behaviour that suits their arguments.

Buzz, I am trying really hard to think of someone I know who rents (long term) that doesn't fit that description and I'm not coming up with anyone... though I am certain that they do exist...somewhere.

Louise
 
also, the rent rises wont be 10%+ across the board..

most likely massive rises (15-20% + ??) in high demand inner/lifestyle suburbs and 0-2% in outer and high supply suburbs ...
 
also, the rent rises wont be 10%+ across the board..

most likely massive rises (15-20% + ??) in high demand inner/lifestyle suburbs and 0-2% in outer and high supply suburbs ...

I have IP's in both inner and outer areas. The rent in the outer areas are increasing by a lot more than 2% - in my case, one IP will be increasing by 10%, and she will still be under market value. I could increase the rent by 20% to bring her up to full market value.
 
Buzzlightyear:
Gross generalisations

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it that everyone seems to think renters are people, who are have expensive toys (relative to their means), bad spending habits, frivalous with their money and no cares about the future?

I think the comments recently on this forum are quick to denigrate those renting, assuming behaviour that suits their arguments.

Buzz, good that you mention this, it has had me very curious about society and different people's attitudes for a loooooong time!

It has sent me into some (self/solo type) research in answering questions about why do folk gross generalise, stereotype and denigrate:

Different socio economic groups

Different castes

Cultures

Sexes

Age

Race

Religions

Intelligence

Physical Appearances

and so on...

I thought you might like a bit of a read of just a small bit of work I am currently reading; there is a lot more but not really appropriate to this thread topic...I hear what you are saying Buzz, I feel I understand a little better for myself why this goes on:

http://books.google.com/books?id=XE...ts=NSx06b7pUv&sig=iW0hfwnJPYhjVBNFiny6Exrgh48

Thanks very much everyone.

Sorry to butt in, carry on.
 
I think a lot here criticize/judge renters because of the impact it has on them.

I don't think any investor here would say a bad word about a renter if they paid on time,didn't complain about things needing repair that they broke.If they left the property clean, like they found it when they moved on.
In general, if they complied with their side of the lease contract.
In fact, most investors might even say good thing about renters in general.
 
I don't spend too much time focusing on what others are doing.

As a landlord who is also a renter - I just look in the mirror and yell at myself... :p.
I figure I must be the problem... if the problem is either Tenants or Landlords :)

As mentioned earlier - renters do have it well in general compared to Investors, you just have to look at the basic figures. Of course, many Investors are in it for the CG or +ve Cashflow.

$400k Property
Purchase at 80% LVR, 8% int Rate - $585wk
Market Rent (Cairns - I know, Regional) - Prob around $325-$400
Yearly Savings to Rent - Approx $12,220

So I then take my $12,000 and leverage into Shares & MF's :D


That said, my renter is very good. Never hear anything from him. PM takes a look every 3mths and take their 8% cut. Gave him 6 months at same price recently, (Upped it 10% 6 mths prior), but will up it again 10%, still below market.
 
It has sent me into some (self/solo type) research in answering questions about why do folk gross generalise, stereotype and denigrate:

Different socio economic groups

Different castes

Cultures

Sexes

Age

Race

Religions

Intelligence

Physical Appearances

and so on...
Went and read the referred page - their research is consistent with what I was just about to observe: those who admit to having done the "hard yards" financially in the past, are much harsher judges of those that they think are poor now (tenants, welfare recipients, etc).

By setting up a construct of "I came from that background and I rose above it", they're able to assert their superiority over those who are still in the same circumstances, and boost their ego.

On a slightly different note, given that nearly every financial whiz recommends renting a PPR rather than buying (investing the difference between rent and mortgage payments), I wonder if it's ever occurred to many of these landlords that perhaps their tenants have followed this advice and are setting themselves up for a financially secure future. Maybe the tenants think that we investors are the fools, paying out hundreds of bucks every week (in many cases) for them to have a roof over their head!
 
Why is it that everyone seems to think renters are people, who are have expensive toys (relative to their means), bad spending habits, frivalous with their money and no cares about the future?

I think the comments recently on this forum are quick to denigrate those renting, assuming behaviour that suits their arguments.

In my case, I have been inside quite a few of my properties while tenants have been living there & the one thing that I have found in each & every one of them without exception is that they ALL have had expensive toys. Some more than others. Some of these tenants have been on welfare & have found it extremely hard to pay their rent, yet can still afford the plethora of "stuff", whether it is expensive clothing, leather lounges, designer furnishings, new cars, toys for the kids, or toys for the "big kids" (plasmas etc) there is a common theme & that is "They all have it".

I have also been inside my neighbour's home (rented) where they have told me the income (almost $100k) & seen the living conditions. These people chose to live in an area where homes are around $200k, yet they can't afford to buy. Why is that? Because the income gets spent, in full each week.

I am sure that not all long term renters fit into this sterotype, there are always exceptions to every rule, & most of us had to rent at some stage, but I have found from personal experience that they are few & far between.
 
Back
Top