That makes no sense - if I am a landlord and sell a house the house doesn't vanish as someone still lives in it with a new owner!
Printable View
We are in the process of purchasing what is currently a crappy rental in another part of the country. But once we have purchased it we are not planning to rent it out. In fact it will remain vacant for a year possibly (the cost of holding assets is pretty much nil now with these interest rates) and do it up when we have the time to go and visit.
When the government introduces rental regulation changes that increases compliance costs for landlords and tenancy security for tenants, some landlords will decide to sell up.
Sure, some of the houses may well be sold to former tenants or to those who remained at home with parents - probably many of the purchasers would have been former better-than-average tenants? However as has already been said, in the absence of an increase in house building the remaining tenants will probably face further overcrowding problems.
Of course these tenancy reforms come with a cost. Only part of that cost (for example decreased profitability, fewer capital gains) will be borne by the landlords. The rest of the cost will be borne by society either by having to provide social housing or by picking up the social costs in other ways as increased overcrowding or homelessness take their tolls.
If you think the rental reforms are worth it, then you should also expect to pay for them in one way or another.
Good post, and not just because I agree with it!
An additional factor in landlord decisions is hassle - another cost that is part financial but part is just hassle thus extra work and stress.
Sure there are hassles for tenants as well, especially when tenancies are terminated and they need to find somewhere else to live, or dealing with dodgy landlords.
The hassle factor is worst for landlords with 1 or 2 rentals - that's 80% of them. The point is - they have options.
Number of vacant Auckland dwellings were published as part of the last census, and was a bigger number than yours but similar to previous census counts. There was a fair bit of discussion about definitions at the time. Turned out that the national count was a pretty blunt instrument as it counted all sorts of empty places including holiday homes, occupants on holiday, renovations, waiting for new tenants or buyers to move in.
Even if there is not a shortage some prospective tenants are never going to find a private rental unless the landlord is a charity or not very sensible.
That is a good point. There is a newly completed housing development near where I live in Auckland. As far as I am aware all the houses have been sold. Yet when driving around it seems that many are unoccupied. Some may be waiting for new occupants, but probably some are closed up as owners remain out-of-town, abroad or being kept as an investment without the hassle of having tenants.
With rental reforms, the number of empty houses could increase. If this is undesirable, there would need to be other tax and other reforms or levies.
Auckland may have more "ghost houses" than London
https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/h...nto-the-market