We use cookies to make your experience of our website better. Please read our cookies policy to find out more. If you continue to use our site, we will assume that you consent to our use of cookies.
Cunninghame Properties - Property Management & Residential Letting Agents On Facebook Cunninghame Properties - Property Management & Residential Letting Agents On Twitter

01294 461911



Tuesday, 15th November, 2016

The attempt to seek a Judicial Review of legislation reducing the mortgage interest tax relief for landlords has failed.  In a case, which was brought by landlords, Steve Bolton and Chris Cooper.

In a joint statement, Bolton and Cooper said they were "outraged" by the decision.

"It has completely missed the opportunity to protect tenants, landlords and the housing market from the disastrous consequences of Section 24.  Sadly it will be tenants who are hit hardest; they are set to see unprecedented rent increases over the coming months and years, which will be a very clear and direct consequence of this ludicrous legislation.

"For many, it will also mean the loss of their homes because vast numbers of landlords will be forced to exit the market.  Hard-working, responsible landlords will have their pension plans in ruins, but the large corporations and the wealthiest in society, who can buy property without the need for mortgage finance, are systematically excluded from this unfair tax policy.

"Now that the legal route has run its course, we will be focusing 100 per cent of our attention and resources on taking our case more forcefully, more powerfully and more directly, right to the heart of government.  Our goal is simple: to abolish this tax or to remove the retrospective nature of it."

The legal argument - concerns the alleged discrimination against individual landlords contained in Section 24 of the Finance (No 2) Act 2015; the core of this section was the phased reduction of mortgage interest tax relief for landlords paying higher rates of income tax.

The allegation was that individual landlords were denied the same rights as, for example, large scale corporate and institutional landlords which can set their finance costs off against their income and be taxed only on their profit.

The campaign led by the landlords claimed individual buy to let investors would have to pay extra tax of 20 per cent or more of their mortgage interest payments.  The tax they pay might be greater than their real profit, leaving them with a rental loss and a cash shortfall.

This tax would only have affected individuals who own rental properties in their own names, like the millions of small landlords in the UK.  Companies owning buy to let property and wealthy cash investors were excluded from the tax.


Our Accreditations