x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Matthew Payne
Matthew Payne
Business & Property Consultant, Coach & Mentor
11338  Profile Views

About Me

Business & property consultant, exec coach & mentor offering strategic consultancy services and executive coaching to property businesses and property people looking for guidance and support to fulfil their potential, become more compliant, commercial, effective and profitable. An ILM7 qualified Executive Coach & Mentor, a member of the Association of Business Mentors, and a Princes Trust Business Mentor.

Get in touch at aficionadoproperty.com t. 07970 773 847 e. matthew@aficionadopropertyconsultants.co.uk

my expertise in the industry

I worked in the independent and corporate property world for 25 years, working my way up from trainee estate agent to Managing Director of a multi-million-pound estate agency in London delivering record profits in the years that followed. Working closely with my teams, suppliers, clients and customers in sales, lettings, property management, land and new homes afforded me an intimate 360 degree understanding of how to create, maintain and improve a highly successful integrated residential property business benefitting all the stakeholders it served.

More recently I have used my 20+ years of coaching and mentoring experience to qualify as an ILM7 executive coach & mentor, having been selected to work with the government enterprise nation program and the Princes Trust and now work with a variety of business leaders in various industries helping them develop their leadership and operational strategies.

Matthew's Recent Activity

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 05 March 2024 08:22 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 06 February 2024 12:01 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 10 January 2024 11:04 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 13 November 2023 10:42 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 31 October 2023 18:53 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 14 July 2023 08:55 AM

Matthew Payne
The application of it, misunderstood, the realities poorly conceived, the practicalities ignored. On paper, which government touts in the press, it sounds like a good piece of legislation. Remove S21, but hey, we are giving landlords more grounds for possession through the Courts so don’t worry. It’s a fair argument in theory. In practice, it takes 5.5 months to get to Court now, when S21s are added to the queue, let’s call that 12 months to gain possession if you are lucky as HMG haven’t thought to increase the capacity of capability of the Court system or process to handle the huge increase in volume. On top of that, possession will effectively be denied to some landlords with anti-social tenants under the Bill. On paper, landlords will be able to take their tenants to Court for anti-social behaviour. In practice neighbours will understandably be too scared to testify meaning most cases will never get off the ground and landlords will be stuck with their problem tenants, or as I suspect will happen, a black market will develop from "contractors" who earn a living persuading these tenants to move on. As with the Tenant Fees Act, consultations are being ignored, ditto advice from those of us in the industry that know. What will now happen, especially as the CGT allowances go up at the same time, is we will look back to 2022-2024 and see a mass exodus of LLs, data for which we won’t be able to see for some time. Ministers endlessly quoting that the PRS hasn’t really shrunk that much as a % of housing stock in recent years is irrelevant, this will become known in the future as that "moment". With interest rates as they are, landlords are better sticking whatever equity they have in the bank, even an ISA will do better than a BTL. I know dozens of LLs who plan to do exactly that.

From: Matthew Payne 14 June 2023 08:41 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 14 March 2023 08:28 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 09 December 2022 14:03 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 25 October 2022 12:40 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 15 October 2022 15:42 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 12 October 2022 16:24 PM

Matthew Payne
"Well behaved" needs to be removed from this discussion. Its not dogs that behave versus dogs that dont, I am sure there are very few dilaps from crazy dogs losing the plot in a fit of rage and smashing the place up. Chestetons dog cv therefore simply confirms the dog isnt a rabid lunatic, and whose to say you can take its contents at face value anyway. Its about the fact dogs are animals, they have fleas, claws, they smell, cant clean themselves and whilst we all love our own pets and put up with the accidents, worn carpets etc, it isnt possible to return any property in the same condition after a dog has been in residence, and this pretence that a dog or its owner somehow has some control over this inevitability is wasting everyones time, we have been going round the houses on this for 3 years nearly already with passports, and vet certificates, now cvs. So in trying to persuade LLs and other agents to be more pet friendly, it would be helpful if those promoting it, address this point directly, and what their proposed solution might be, and dispense with all the irrelevant whacky ideas that wont make any difference to the tenants they are campaigning for. If they really want to make a difference if they care so much for this section of tenants, then start and mobilise a campaign to lobby government to amend the TFA. I would welcome and support that effort, as I agree we need to find a way to support tenants who do want to have a pet, but not at the expense of the property owner.

From: Matthew Payne 29 March 2022 11:09 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 24 June 2021 09:43 AM

Matthew Payne
Having studied politics at uni, one thing I learnt straight away is that the government spends much of its time pain stakingly and deliberatley choosing its words in statements and speeches, very very carefully, and it is what is not said that is often the interesting point, somthing that always goes straight over the head of the press as they hunt a story. Mr Sunak never said anyone would save money in the stamp duty window for example, yet that was what was reported by everyone. He knew they wouldn't, completely the opposite in fact, hence he said, stamp duty bills would fall. That's a very different proposition to saving money. This week, all press are junping about saying the aboliton of S21 was in the Queens speech. Complete speculation and no it wasn't. It is very interesting to note though that the government has chosen the particular words "enhancing renters rights". A lot has happened since the orginal announcement in July 2019, not least the governments now complete dependence on the PRS to underwrite the social housing sector after the pandemic, so this could be their discreet intention to throw a bone to Shelter and friends, but fall short of actually repealing section 21. Why did they not announce they were going to repeal S21 if that was their plan? It is a very popular policy after all especially with Labour voters and 8 million tenants. The press department miss an opportunity, or is that not the plan anymore.....? Don't be surprised if it stays for a bit longer.

From: Matthew Payne 13 May 2021 10:04 AM

Matthew Payne
This isnt about correctly managing a tenancy I am afraid, its simply that the skinny 5 week deposit can only do so much. The average deposit is about £1100 and is there to protect a landlord or idemnify a tenant against normal dilaps and rent arrears, as well now as pet dilaps and those are gauranteed with cats and dogs. This notion that you can have well behaved pets with responsible owners that cause no expense at end of tenancy is absolute nonsense, but MPs are too embarrassed to admit that their own interfering with the tenant fees act created this issue, so this is their preferred ruse to avoid that. They are by defintion animals, they smell, they soil, they scratch, they damage, its all part of the package when you have one. Believe it or not I have animals, but thats my choice knowing and accepting what they will do to my home, and it has plenty of scars from normal cat and dog activity as Nick alludes to above, but I strongly object to any motion to force pets on landlords without remedy. When you hire a DJ, a marquee, a holiday cottage, a hotel room, you pay for all damage, it isnt limited or capped. Why is a private rented property being singled out as an exception where you don't even have to pay to clean it when you leave? The strange thing is nothing will change as it wont on the DSS argument even if the bill is passed. Tenants declare lots of information in an application to rent a property and a landlord or agent doesnt have to give a reason for them being unsuccessful in their attempt to secure it, and quite often any reason is simply that its has been rented to another tenant. All this will do is stop landlords and agents overtly saying they cant rent their property because they have a pet.

From: Matthew Payne 05 March 2021 11:48 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 05 February 2021 10:10 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 24 December 2020 11:02 AM

Matthew Payne
A pet reference? Landlords have a socially distanced meeting with a pet as part of a pre tenancy checking process? To do what exactly? There is no due dilligence that can be done to establish how well behaved a pet is or how caring an owner is, and its missing the point, poor behaving pets arent the issue, and even if they were I'm not sure what the agenda for such a meeting would be to check this. Animals are animals the world over and behave like animals, and you either accept them or you dont. Lets not try and pretend there is a screening process that can paper over the huge crack the government has opened up with capping deposits and removing tenant cleaning obligations. I have never been into a dog owners house, mine included, where there isnt the obvious additional dog damage to the fabric of the property to one degree or another whether door frames, wooden flooring, carpets, sofas, window sills, lawns etc and the inevitable whiff of dog. Thats the nature of the beast. Meeting it or the owner wont stop it behaving like a dog during the tenancy, and a 5 week deposit, covers little as it is, let alone redecorating and steam cleaning/replacing carpets etc. Even a well behaved dog with a caring owner leaves behind hundreds of pounds of minor decorating and cleaning related dilpidations as 99% of exiting tenants wont consider the need or expense to make the property allergy safe for new the incoming tenants or are "dog blind" as many are, and so so caught up in their affection for their animal they can't see whats in front of their face. If the DPS or anyone else want to underwrite their "guidance" with cold hard cash, as landlords used to be able to do with 8 or 10 week deposits and contractual steam cleaning, then perhaps this constant lobbying might start to get a few more listeners, otherwise, lobby the government, it's they who have created the problem.

From: Matthew Payne 24 November 2020 12:09 PM

Matthew Payne
Rent arrears have to be handled by multiple means of communication for several reasons. Firstly, whilst the snowflake generation may not like it, having to discuss a debt of any sort with the person or organisation to whom you have missed a payment to, is of course going to be uncomfortable but that goes with the territory of being a responsible adult facing up to the challenges of life. Tenants should not be spared this discomfort just because it is a call they will find arkward, choosing to hide behind text messages. A call from an Agent or LL also adds gravity to the situation, a text is too casual. Of course calls need to be civil, professional and non confrontational, and dare I say it, I agree with Mark, it's much easier to get to the bottom of the situation and perhaps a bit of empathy if required can sometimes help resolve things more quickly. Landlords likewise should not cower from a call with their lender if they have missed a mortgage payment. Secondly, text messages went out with the Ark, whatsapp is the only reliable medium to exchange digital messages, and any conversation should be backed up with a whatspp message as a summary of what happened on the call. Texts get lost, sometimes take hours or even days to arrive, especially at the moment if people are at home more and don't have a signal. They are not a reliable way of date stamping correspondance. Thirdly, 7, 14, 21 day letters/demands by registered post as an additonal layer are good practice in the lead up to a possible s8 notice (or don't hurt with s21 either) and are often a requirement for insurance policies.

From: Matthew Payne 09 October 2020 16:44 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 16 September 2020 14:31 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 10 September 2020 10:41 AM

Matthew Payne
This is the thin edge of the wedge. The greatest economic threat we face is not the effect of the lockdown or the fear of the virus but the epiphanic moment for millions of businesses that they can massively reduce their costs by running their businesses differently, having been shown in the lockdown that their staff have been trustworthy and more productive working remotely. Whether leases or travel, the savings to be had are game changing for many industries, a catastrophe for others. Anecdotally, I know dozens of businesses that have already dramatically changed their strategies to reflect this and permanently, not just during the rest of this pandemic. The bigger the city or business that relies on the activities of the commuter/traveller, the more they are going to suffer until they themselves adapt as we have seen Pret try to do last week for example with coffee subscriptions. A similar challenge exists for countries and supply chains that rely on tourism or the more lucrative regular flow of business flights supporting their GDPs. Holidays will slowly return, but many businesses have worked out they don't need to fly people all over the place anymore and in fact in doing so have actually been harming their business, but they never would have taken the decision in normal times to stop flying. Heard a powerful stat the other day, from a large US engineering business that normally flies its' guys all over the world every day has increased its' productivity by 19% when none of them were able to fly. New strategy for the future - very little flying - now needs sign off at the very top. That absence will make a huge impact to the bottom line of many economies, ours included.

From: Matthew Payne 07 September 2020 13:47 PM

Matthew Payne
Anyone that has owned a dog in particular, the same can be said for a lot of cats, knows that high wear and tear and extra dilaps are guaranteed, it goes hand in hand with having a larger animal living in a property. I have owned many of both and my home and furnishings are always worse off for it, but if you are a pet lover you put up with it at home. Yes bay window sills, all window sills, door frames, doors, wooden floors, kitchen cupboards get scratched, get stained, carpets wear thin and get matted in hair, and often you are left with a pet odour that just no amount of cleaning will get rid of. Then there is the issue with allergies for the next tenants etc etc. There are degrees from 1 to 10, but it is never in the same condition as the check in. Someone however must pay to remedy it and we are not talking about a £100 pet deposit. Quite often a full redec is needed, new carpets etc, it can run into thousands if the tenancy is a reasonable length and you get a big smelly, hairy dog that the tenants treat like another human. You paint one wall in a room, you must paint them all. Similarly, you can’t replace only the worn or stained part of a carpet. Not only would there need to be a significant deposit, professional cleaning obligations would need to return which the TFA also knocked on the head. When I ran my agency, I made no large pets standard and advised my landlords, even the pet friendly ones of the possible expense and hassle in between tenancies if they were unlucky enough to get a 10. Even at a 1, I had more than enough tenants with no pets, why take the risk at all? The occasional one was allowed by clients, but we often took 10-week deposits, loads of extra clauses, prof clean including steam cleaning, regular inspections etc. Still not full proof but we are currently a million miles away from being able to offer any meaningful remedy to a landlord after the TFA has made it even worse. I don’t agree with Steve either that it is about compromise with pets. No, its not. The property must be returned to the landlord in the same condition, less normal W&T. You wouldn’t loan your car to someone with no financial remedy and agree in advance that there had to be an expected yet also unknown compromise on its condition when it was returned.

From: Matthew Payne 23 July 2020 15:25 PM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 22 June 2020 13:15 PM

Matthew Payne
Any sensible tenants will choose to let the status quo remain and continue paying their rent. The chancers must realise that they will simply be evicted as soon as the 3 months is up, and they will struggle to get through referencing when they have to move? With rents rising fast as well, even if they find somewhere else they will have a higher rent to pay. I have still only heard of one business, Virgin Atlantic who have forced people to take an unpaid period. Of course some businesses may fail, which is a different matter, and landlords will need to understand from their tenants what their plans are medium term and come to some agreement that works fairly for both parties. I dont see the economic argument for all these tenants to suddenly fall on hard times, and a lot of headline grabbing scaremongering is going on. Why do all tenants suddenly work in the supply chain of an airline, a pub or a failing fashion business? Yes Laura Ashley may go out of business but that has been on the cards for years. Yes pubs, theatres and airlines and others social sectors may suffer short term, but there are parts of the economy benefitting from this virus, some booming in fact. If you work in IT or phamaceuticals for example, they are less concerned about what is going on and see opportunity not threat. What about all the tenants that work for Andrex, Boots or Sainsburys? Life is good! A friend of ours works in Waitrose head office and she said last night, they are absolutely smashing their sales numbers. Noone there is worried about paying their rent.

From: Matthew Payne 19 March 2020 12:21 PM

Matthew Payne
One of the main reasons these tenants are rejected is the clawback system that penalises landlords and agents. Until such time as that is addressed, there will be no improvement. Clearly though depsite the fact that this point is raised again and again, it is ignored, by pretty much everyone other than those it affects. If there wasnt the label of a "DSS" tenant which I agree is not helpful anyway, would the government or TPOS expect a landlord or agent to accept a tenant who offers to pay the rent only on the understanding they may be forced to give it back at some point at their cost? Of course they wouldn't, so why are these tenants an exception? So they will ban the use of no DSS adverts, and what they incorrectly label and stigmatise as open discrimination. In the meantime, landlords and agents will simply have to comply and choose one of several dozen other possible legitimate reasons if they need to as to why those particular tenants applications are not acceptable and the current status quo will remain. It is not actually about rejecting tenants anymore though as the PRS is changing its dynamic under pressure from external influences. It is about choosing the best tenants in the current climate and with the tenant fees act and the aboliton of section 21 this will get worse. What are regarded by some as poorer quality tenants or even reasonably good tenants wont need to be rejected for any particular reason, they will simply be told the landlord chose to let the property to someone else - The "Alpha" tenant who represents as close to zero risk as possible.

From: Matthew Payne 05 March 2020 11:54 AM

Matthew Payne
Interesting that in the same report that he cites that lack of security of tenure for tenants in the PRS, discrimination by Landlords in not accepting tenants on Housing Benefit and increasing rents are all causing health issues, and that all 3 need to be tackled. Another reader quoted Le Chatelier's principle the other day that can be applied to commercial markets, and so many commentators simply dont understand or ignore the fact that the PRS is a marketplace, not a state owned commodity. Put pressure on a system in equilibrium and it will change just like squeezing a water balloon. Restrict a landlords rights to who can rent their property, how long they can stay, what remedies they have, they will naturally become more selective and rents will rise. If his recommendations are adopted it will give tenants even less choice and fuel rents to rise even faster if section 21 is removed for example. We have seen this cause and effect already with government policy in these areas which he fails to acknoweldge, instead implying it is unilateral landlord behaviour that is the driving force. The under publicised clawback system is a main reason many agents and landlords avoid tenants on housing benefit, not for any sinister social stigma that is implied. Likewise, the Tenant Fees Act has recently had repercussions for yet higher rents, younger tenants, families and pet owners. Similarly, landlords very rarely exercise section 21 (about 10% of tenancies), and where they do it is either to regain possession to sell, move into, or remove problematic tenants. Landlords do not evict well behaved tenants only to risk a void looking to replace them with other tenants who are an unknown quantity. If anything, most landlords are very accomodating with good tenants and often leave rents unchanged to reduce the risk of them leaving.

From: Matthew Payne 26 February 2020 10:49 AM

Matthew Payne

From: Matthew Payne 28 January 2020 14:10 PM

MovePal MovePal MovePal