Buy to Let v Buy to Sell

This is a topic that has been cropping up a lot for me lately.  I currently only buy to sell, I have rented properties in the past and found the income (or lack of) really didn't make up for the time and stress.  I think I might just have been unlucky with bad tenants and bad letting agents, but thats a post for another time when my blood pressure is lower!

As with anything there are pros and cons.  

For me, the pros are that I buy, I get in and renovate in usually 6 to 10 weeks (I'm a mum first and do this part time so it could be quicker) and then get it on the market. So far, I have always received offers within the first week of it being on the market, the problem is converting the offer into completion, but it always gets there in the end.

I have come across a problem where buyers struggle to get a mortgage because I have owned the property for less than 6 months.  However, there are some lenders who don't have this rule. (Yet another example of rules to make developing more difficult than it needs to be)

Both selling and renting have their financial risks, a rental income is not guaranteed, the cost of damage is unpredictable, but it is likely over a long term that the overall value of the property will increase.  With selling, its a quick turnaround for (in my case) a moderate income, where all the value comes from the purchase price and the work carried out, rather than the market.

At the moment, where being a mum is my priority, buying to sell is the right choice for me.  I choose 'low risk' properties where I am confident of a quick turnaround and a swift sale.  When my daughter is in school and I can dedicate more time to it I will take on higher risk projects, for higher return.  Buy to let would be too slow as an income at the moment, but ask me again in a few years!!