So the final danger is that the regulator could become a paper tiger, and lose its power of influencing good behaviour, even in areas that are not subject to judicial review. Am I arguing that no checks and balances are needed? Certainly not! But there are already checks and balances in place, including review by constitutional courts like high courts through writ petitions.
Second, for a high proportion of these investors, tax considerations drive the profitability calculations and so provide an incentive to maximise debt. Thirdly, borrowing for investment purposes is inherently riskier than for owner-occupation, in that the investor cannot be sure of who is going to occupy the dwelling and on what terms, but the owner-occupier knows the answer to that question.