Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Mister E
05 Aug 16 12:54
Joined:
Date Joined: 20 Oct 07
| Topic/replies: 11,378 | Blogger: Mister E's blog
Rents sky high, prices sky high, ownership own.
Mrs Thatcher/Norman Tebbitt's dream of a property owning democracy has been shattered by the Blair/Cameron govts.

Many people working are on housing benefit, what happens when they retire?

£250k> for one room in London.
Shared ownerships a rip off, "Help to Buy" designed by somebody who assesses "affordable" housing at £400k.

Build more social housing, get to grips with population, give tenants long term security backed by rent control. Encourage people to move out of South east/London/ major cities. Public investment in transport.

It is all a retrograde step, but the selfish generation are leaving another tickng time bomb for the young.
Pause Switch to Standard View Housing Crisis
Show More
Loading...
Report CJ70 August 8, 2016 5:47 PM BST

Aug 8, 2016 -- 11:19AM, Dr Crippen wrote:


How does that work B-B.If you block someone do you know that they've posted something, but not what it is?If I did that.  I'd regularly issue a list of blocked people. So they'd know that their abuse wasn't hitting the target.


You see the name of the poster and then a message saying the contents of the post has been blocked.

Report Dr Crippen August 8, 2016 7:37 PM BST
Another one of tony's posts gone.

It was immediately before my post at 16:56, where I replied to him.
Report Dr Crippen August 8, 2016 7:49 PM BST
Hang on, all tony's stuff has gone.
Report stewarty b August 8, 2016 9:06 PM BST
Hanen't read all the thread but I know first time buyers are struggling. Which begs the question.... Where are the landlords getting the capital from to buy to let?
Report Whisperingdeath August 8, 2016 9:35 PM BST
it is a little complicated stew,

It is all about being in the right place at the right time. The last 23 odds years have been a good time to buy a house. Cheap interest rates, mortgage fraud, rising house prices, increasing money supply. All these combined to make houses and mortgages available to anyone.

Once you had a property it was relatively easy with rising property values to remortgage to release equity to but another for a small or no deposit and so on. Prices kept rising of course because demand increased.

We haven't really had a proper downturn or rise in interest rates in all that time. Many people are taking mortgages out now on discounted or fixed rates with a reversionary rate of between 3.5-5.5 above building society base rate not Bank base! This will end in tears at some point if the merry go round suffers a mechanical break down. Then many BTL Lanlords will be blaming the Government and demand tax payer hand outs.

It is a tough call to break the cycle and no one has the politcal resolve to do it.
Report Dr Crippen August 9, 2016 11:46 AM BST
Every market has to climb a wall of fear.

And it's the ones who go against the popular view who usually score in the business stakes.

For most of the early part of this century everyone was agreed that BTL was finished. Yet the smart money was buying again in late 2008 and few of the BTL brigade have regretted what they did.

Those pessimists 10 or 15 years ago were wrong. And they don't know what is around the corner now.

All I can say to people is that if they've got a notion, to just get on with it.

Because if you listen to the paper experts (who have never done anything but write about it) you'll never do anything.
Report Dr Crippen August 9, 2016 11:48 AM BST
And even if you come unstuck, you'll have learned plenty. Which will stand you in good stead for the next time you try.
Report unitedbiscuits August 9, 2016 11:56 AM BST
It's a very questionable activity. Can you look at yourself in a mirror after becoming a BTL-monger?
Report Whisperingdeath August 9, 2016 11:58 AM BST
Like I said Crippen

Luck!

Right place at the right time. It was a no brainer in the early 90's. The yield cruve was screamaing. Political instability throughout the World made London a safe haven not just financially. Remember you are only President for life!

I remember the last time property wents tits up. All these great businessmen who remortgage and gave it large were crying about how it was the Governments fault they had remortgaged and bought big cars and fancy holidays. It will end up that way again with new energy legislation, loss of mortgage interest relief, high interest rates when the bubble burst and a drive for social change starting with affordable housing.

The bottom line is when the tax payer stops funding the private landlords gravy tain it will hit the buffers and that will be good for society!
Report Dr Crippen August 9, 2016 12:07 PM BST
Can you look at yourself in a mirror after becoming a BTL-monger?

That's simply inverted snobbery.

Anybody would be proud of successfully running their own business.

And serving the community into the bargain if they were in BTL.
Report Dr Crippen August 9, 2016 12:08 PM BST
How many unfortunate people have you provided accommodation for this year UB?
Report stewarty b August 9, 2016 4:24 PM BST
I'm just a minnow in the property game having been persuaded to buy some endowment policies in the early eighties from a bloke I worked offshore with. Can't go into too much details but it was no problem getting 100% mortgages and little background checks were done.

I went in at the wrong time because the base rate was something like 8-9% until we came out of the ERM? Thankfully the rent paid the mortgages and I now have some sort of  'pension pot'.
Report unitedbiscuits August 9, 2016 7:06 PM BST
Anybody would be proud of successfully running their own business.

And serving the community into the bargain if they were in BTL.


Nobody equals Dr Crippen's trademark blend of mean-spiritedness, suspicion, naked greed and sanctimony.
Report InsiderTrader August 9, 2016 7:55 PM BST
Dr Crippen 09 Aug 16 12:08 Joined: 16 Apr 02 | Topic/replies: 25,339 | Blogger: Dr Crippen's blog
How many unfortunate people have you provided accommodation for this year UB?

...

Unless the BTLer has actually built a new property he/she is not providing new accommodation. Without the handouts given out to BTLers the last decade the properties they owned would still be lived in. They would still exist. It is just property would be cheaper.
Report Dr Crippen August 10, 2016 10:42 AM BST
Many BTL business people are property developers as well.
They take empty rundown properties, or empty business premises that no one wants, and turn them into habitable homes and flats.
Typically these are bought at auction. A lot of BTL developers buy at auctions.

Houses that would normally rot and turn into eyesores, are turned into dream homes for people who can't afford or don't want to buy their own.

A most satisfactory situation.

So why do socialist minded people always seek make matters worse, in situations where things are made better through the pursuit of profit?
Report Whisperingdeath August 10, 2016 10:47 AM BST
Pretty lame Crippen

All this QE is to keep asset prices up...why?

Let them fall. Typical these " Capitalists " need Government support and cry like babies when they don't get their tax payer subsidies.
Report Dr Crippen August 10, 2016 10:59 AM BST
Whispering,

If the object is to keep asset prices up. Why did the government impose extra stamp duty on homes being bought for letting?
Report Dr Crippen August 10, 2016 11:08 AM BST
need Government support and cry like babies when they don't get their tax payer subsidies.

What a giveaway.

And I haven't heard anybody crying, except the usual suspects who look on profit as a dirty word.
Report Whisperingdeath August 10, 2016 11:23 AM BST
Crippen,

You are not important in the scheme of things. Do you really think they give a rats fcek about you wanna be Capitalists? You are just hangers on, flag wavers, camp fodder for the people with real wealth. You are not part of the 1%, The people who you admire and aspire to so much would just wipe their arses with the likes of you
Report Dr Crippen August 10, 2016 12:10 PM BST
Whisper,
If they wipe their arses with the likes of me, they must you use you lot for fertiliser on the fields.

You have to make the best of what you've got.

Spending your life fuming over people who are doing better than you is not the way to do it.
Report jumper August 10, 2016 1:51 PM BST
What I've seen is when someone buys a BTL and see the one flat as their pension provider, their asset, something to pride themselves with - that type of person, and to be fair this is only a generalisation - well they are keen to see that asset being well maintained. They'll even drive past it at least once every week, or keep in regular touch with the estate agent.

There is another type of BTL landlord who sees this purely as a business. This type of person is only interested in a quicker return, and in their need to retain that return and accumulate funds, in a rising market, to fuel the purchase of their next property, and so on - then we see standards dropping, little interest in repairs, not particularly interested in who they let to, 5 singe blokes all paying ££s per week in a sort of makeshift bedsit arrangement being example.

On top of that, all my agent acquaintances tell me they have mostly stopped with the advent of the increase in SDLT and other hits Osborne implemented. That was done to bring back to some better sort of level playing field for first time owner occupiers. Brexit also beginning to bite with a stagnation appearing in the market. Banks still reticent to fund first time buyers though.

My own view - BTL landlords should not be taking the place of housing people who need to be housed on a permanent basis. Making hay out of others misfortune? No, that's not right in my book. I'd rather be investing any money I had in a real business.

More and more institutional investors, including large scale employers, also look like they are entering the market which could result in a more professional approach. Should raise standards one would hope.
Report Ski-Wiz August 10, 2016 5:41 PM BST
So many economic errors on here. Immigration is the prime cause of housing shortages. House builders can not magically build houses when 50,000 immigrants per month arrive in this country. It's not like baking 50,000 loaves of bread... house takes months to build.

BTL should be abolished except for niche markets.

Printing money out of thin air when someone take out a mortgage need to stop.

Housing benefits should be abolish and converted to mortgage assistance as welfare safely net.

100% home ownership is a must to avoid ever increasing costs of looking after pensioners. No housing benefits for pensioners would reduce the financial pressure on NHS, social care and state pension in the future.

Obsession with value of home need to stop. It's unhealthy and creates a distorted economy.

Dr Crippen • August 7, 2016 12:21 PM BST
The housing bubble has to be maintained.

That's the point.

A slump in house prices means a slump in house building, a slump in availability of mortgages. And consequently fewer houses in the long run.


Garbage. You are just looking after your own interest at the expense of everyone else. Pop the bubble and dissolve all housing bad debts and remove negative equity. Land prices will fall, so houses become cheaper to build. Profit per house will fall. Persimmon latest 2015 made £43,788 on average per house. This profit is over 20% and only feasible because of low interest, immigration, housing benefit and other subsidies. Why is the government pumping up the value of housebuilders companies at the expense of others. Let the free market dictate the profit, which would be vastly lower if the government bugger off.

Rents should be no more than 1 quarter of national average wages.

Don't use 'national average wages' as the average is meaningless and distorted. Take away the millionaires and the average would drop, so the average wage isn't a true picture of one's income. Rent will fall when the government stop housing benefit and ban landlords.

Key thing you missed is cheap credit.

If they can borrow at 3% the cost on borrowing 200,000 is 6k per year.
If they can borrow at 6% the cost on borrowing 200,000 is 12k per year.
If they can borrow at 12% the cost on borrowing 200,000 is 24k per year.


Cheap credit is a misnomer. Flawed reasoning. Lowering the interest doesn't decrease the cost of borrowing in the future. Only benefit the present borrowers at the expense of present savers. When money is created out of thin air with low interest, the property asset value balloons upwards creating a bubble. What one borrows depends on affordability according to the free market without subsidies.

If one can afford £500 per month for a mortgage with interest at 3.48 then the house/debt would be £100,000. With proper interest at say 5% and mortgage at 7%, limited by affordability of £500 per month, the house/debt would be £71,000. Nothing can be priced higher than what people can afford unless the product is a limited niche product, like buying an Aston Martin. As you can see at £500 per month you either borrow £100,000 at 3.48% or £71,000 at 7%. Lowering the interest rate since 2008 was stupid and now at .25%. All this does is push up the value of the present assets holders at the expense of the future buyers. The idea that interest rate going up will make borrowing more expensive is nonsense as the value of assets will fall, thus total borrow at 3.48% or 7% is the same.
Report Dr Crippen August 10, 2016 7:29 PM BST
Immigration is the prime cause of housing shortages. House builders can not magically build houses when 50,000 immigrants per month arrive in this country. It's not like baking 50,000 loaves of bread... house takes months to build.

You should have quit there while you were ahead ski-wiz.

I've never read such tripe.

Printing money out of thin air when someone take out a mortgage need to stop.

So that's an end to banking as we know it. Which is what the West has been built on.

Housing benefits should be abolish and converted to mortgage assistance as welfare safely net.

And that's an end to working in order to buy their own home, and would be an end to working full stop for people at the sharp end.
many would simply take out a mortgage and then go on the dole to let the state take the strain until the mortgage was paid.

The rest of your post is a bad.
Report Ski-Wiz August 11, 2016 5:03 PM BST
So that's an end to banking as we know it. Which is what the West has been built on.

Banking did well until money was created out of thin air. They made profit based on the difference after costs between lending rates and savers rates. It was a boring business, bland and stable. The present regime of money creation destroyed banks, needing bailouts... many times in the last 100 years - which almost ended banking as we know it - survived by government bailouts. You need to study the history of banking.

And that's an end to working in order to buy their own home, and would be an end to working full stop for people at the sharp end.
many would simply take out a mortgage and then go on the dole to let the state take the strain until the mortgage was paid.


Seriously, ever heard of regulations, qualifying period, limitations... done correctly it will reward the hard workers on low wages, but not the benefit breeders, landlords - who do little work and sit back watching the rent rolls in - stolen from others in taxes... you're a hypocrite.

The rest of your post is a bad.

It's excellent, true... but you don't like it as it doesn't suit your agenda. I'm sorry but the idea of stealing >£25bn per annum, and rising, and giving it to landlords is repulsive... the same as stealing and giving it to benefit breeders. Why should landlords have special privilege to get rich based on the hard work of the poor?
Report bongo August 11, 2016 9:12 PM BST
A lot of people displaying a wilful ignorance of how the world gets richer imv.
If person A is really good at doing up and managing houses and average at building a car, and person B is average at doing up houses and really good at building desirable cars, then person A should provide all the housing, and person B should provide all the autos.
It's called comparative advantage, and even applies if one person is better than another at both things - you should specialise in what you are comparatively best at.

But some people lose their minds when this principle is applied to residential property.
Report Ski-Wiz August 11, 2016 10:41 PM BST
Comparative advantage - do you even know what this is?
Person A gets subsidies and person B don't. Perhaps bongo thinks we should give £25bn a year to car manufacturers...
Report stewarty b August 11, 2016 11:17 PM BST
Does anyone know of a breakdowm of how property is 'split' percentage wise in the UK? ie. how many are buy to let, how many are private to live in and how many are council houses? I'm sure someone might hazard a guess but as buying your own council house isn't easy now can someone answer my question?
Report jumper August 12, 2016 11:49 AM BST
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/519475/Dwelling_Stock_Estimates_2015_England.pdf

First page gives the clear summary. Sorry, could not copy and paste.
Report bongo August 12, 2016 8:22 PM BST
Yes Ski-Wiz, I have a good idea what comparative advantage is, and you can't claim £25bn a year as a subsidy for private landlords, any more than you can claim the State paying the wages of doctors as a housing subsidy as they have housing costs too.
About 4-5/10ths of the Housing Benefit handouts is LHA to private landlords, and as we are going to organise society around letting the free market help the disadvantaged to some extent anyway, even in a neo-liberal utopia, then realistically you can only claim the difference between London LHAs and typical national LHAs as a subsidy to the bloated London market.

But subsidies aren't the point of comparative advantage theorising anyway. If you're good at providing housing at a price people are willing to pay, and at a profit to yourself that makes it worthwhile, then you should do it more. But the lefties get snarling mad about this and want punitive measures they wouldn't apply to other businesses. Totally inconsistent.
Report TheBaron August 13, 2016 1:30 PM BST
In my former life I used to sell various things to a lot of different types of business and I would notice the same traits within the owners of  certain types of business.  I have to say I found professional landlords a rather unappealing lot.  A lot of them seemed to lack the social skills that would be necessary to make a success of many other types of business and I was left with the feeling that being a landlord was probably one of the few options open to them.

This is just a generalisation but it seemed the longer they stayed in the letting business the more bitter they were and the more contempt they had for their tenants.
Report Mexico August 13, 2016 2:05 PM BST
Thank you Baron for one of the most vague job description.

You clearly believe this job was useful in your understanding of what type of person a "professional landlord" is. You have however shared f all with the forum.

In a former life? Is this 20 years about? 2 years ago?

Sell various "things"- FFS is this a real job or some made up antidote?

& you sold these "things" to different types of businesses.


Come on if you believe the knowledge you acquired "in a former life" is important then a few details would be useful.
Report Mister E August 13, 2016 5:03 PM BST
The position is deteriorating rapidly.
The Right to Buy that was popular a generation ago has left this generation short of stock. The promise to replace the stock one for one was just spin.

Plenty of workng people are reliant on Housing Benefit, in 25 30 years time when they retire on reduced state or private pension, they will be looking for more support. Less benefit would mean more pressure on poor paying companies, and on landlords who abuse the system
Report Mister E August 13, 2016 5:09 PM BST
I found professional landlords a rather unappealing lot.

A massive generalisation but surely no more  so unappealing than asset strippers, pension plunderers. tax dodgers,  , irresposible bankers, city spivs, and politicians etc.  who have been "honoured" for their services.

There are a few tenants who are a rather unappealing lot too.
Report Dr Crippen August 13, 2016 5:23 PM BST
The RICS's latest survey, (July 2016) reflects the lack of stock in the housing market, with surveyors reporting another fall in new instructions.

With surveyors increasingly reporting that 'supply is at or around record lows in most parts of the UK'
.

No wonder prises have been rising.
Report Mister E August 13, 2016 5:30 PM BST
Exactly Doc., but that is effect not cause. I am one of the lucky generation (obviously not like the young Westminster Duke).  £250K min. for  one room in a poor part of London is beyond the reach of most young people.
Report Dr Crippen August 13, 2016 5:40 PM BST
The answer should be to build more homes.

Yet they can't blast away with that, even if they did manage to speed up planning permission because that could saturate the market.

If that happened as I pointed out earlier in the thread. That would very likely cause the house building programme to stall.

We're in a very precarious position.
Report Dr Crippen August 13, 2016 5:48 PM BST
The answer to the housing crisis is to scrap right to buy and build some council houses.

That is politically impossible.

So we'll have to put up with what we've got.
Report Mexico August 13, 2016 6:48 PM BST
Dr, we could just try & be more efficient with the current stock of subsidised council housing.

We allow People to have spare bedrooms , yet they don't pay market rent. We allow medium/high earners to live in council housing.
We still have council houses in some of the most expensive locations on the planet.

Rather then asking for more taxpayers money we should make better use of the existing stock.
Report Dr Crippen August 13, 2016 8:03 PM BST
Yes Mexico there's always room for improvement.

I see a continuing bright future for BTL. Despite what the experts say.
If they were so clever they'd be doing it instead of writing about it.

And as far as the commies are concerned. If they kill BLT then they'll be saddled with the problem of housing the renters.
It's not going to happen is it? I predict more of the same.

Make hay while the sun shines.
Report unitedbiscuits August 13, 2016 9:34 PM BST
.  A lot of them seemed to lack the social skills that would be necessary to make a success of many other types of business and I was left with the feeling that being a landlord was probably one of the few options open to them.
C**k on, Baron. The default expectation of a BTL-monger is a spiritual/social-pygmy; mean-spirited and unfitted to compete on a level playing field.
Report InsiderTrader August 14, 2016 7:46 AM BST
Dr Crippen 13 Aug 16 17:23 Joined: 16 Apr 02 | Topic/replies: 25,374 | Blogger: Dr Crippen's blog
The RICS's latest survey, (July 2016) reflects the lack of stock in the housing market, with surveyors reporting another fall in new instructions.

With surveyors increasingly reporting that 'supply is at or around record lows in most parts of the UK'.

No wonder prises have been rising.


...............

This is supply of houses for sale! Not the quantity housing stock in the country. From the report:

'Lack of stock in the housing market continues to cause ripples, with new instructions falling again in the month of July.  33% more respondents to the survey have seen a fall in new instructions and supply is at or around record lows in most parts of the UK.  In line with the dip in demand and the worsening supply position, sales declined sharply. Across the UK, 34% more respondents reported a fall in transactions, with the monthly pace of decline in both July and June at the fastest since 2008.
This reflects a continuation of a trend that started back in April following the implementation of the tax surcharge on investment purchases. Anecdotal reports provided by contributors to the survey suggest both the tax change and the ongoing fall-out from the EU referendum are contributing to the current mood in the market. However, looking into the comments left by members suggests conditions vary markedly between agents. A large portion of respondents note, after an initial wobble, activity has returned to normal, while others feel Brexit has only had a very modest or negligible impact.'

Basically BTL are not selling they are hoarding properties. Why wouldnt they when they have to pay CGT when they sell and now have even lower interest rates and QE proping them up? Although we could do with more houses being built the main problem is the transfer of council properties the BTL sector over the last 15 years.

This transfer has been caused by low returns on savings, very low interest rates  and housing benefit subsidy encouraging this. The properties that were purchased as right to buy and now in the hands of BTLers are still there. They are just only available at high cost to the government/the workers.
Report Burton-Brewers August 14, 2016 10:53 AM BST
C**k on, Baron. The default expectation of a BTL-monger is a spiritual/social-pygmy; mean-spirited and unfitted to compete on a level playing field.

wow smell the hatred/envy
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 11:10 AM BST
Just for unitedbiscuits

The Fox and the Grapes

One hot summer's day a Fox was strolling through an orchard
till he came to a bunch of Grapes just ripening on a vine which
had been trained over a lofty branch. 

"Just the thing to quench my thirst," quoth he. 

Drawing back a few paces, he took a run and
a jump, and just missed the bunch. 
Turning round again with a One, Two, Three, he jumped up, but with no greater success. 

Again and again he tried after the tempting morsel, but at last had to
give it up, and walked away with his nose in the air, saying: "They're
probably sour anyway."

It is easy to despise what you cannot have.
Report unitedbiscuits August 14, 2016 12:53 PM BST
Not being ungenerous, Dr Crippen, but you're not really an enviable figure.
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 2:03 PM BST
Again UB's sheer envy of what he can never be, shines out like a beacon.
Report mobo August 14, 2016 2:15 PM BST
one thing for certain is it has nothing to do with islam
and even more certain is it has nothing to do with immigration.
4 million foreigners living here and over another million illegals puts no pressure on housing whatsover
around west london 60,000 of them are living in garages and sheds(official council figures)- don't need houses for them

so if we build - say - a couple of million garages in peoples gardens we will have everyone housed
SORTED!!!
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 2:33 PM BST
Take away the growth in the population and there would have been plenty of houses to go round.

The house prices wouldn't have gone up so much, and certainly not the rents.

Council houses would have been much easier to get as well.

Don't you just love immigration?
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 2:34 PM BST
They'll blame anything but the growth in the numbers of the people competing for housing.
Report unitedbiscuits August 14, 2016 4:01 PM BST
As several of us have pointed out, there's little point in building a million new dwellings in the current market, as most will fall into the hands of people who already own homes. Of course, the same is true of the dissolution of the Housing Associations. Anyone would think the tories wanted a two-tier country, from the cradle to the gallows, as they used to say.
Report unitedbiscuits August 14, 2016 5:01 PM BST
A "raft" of reformatory measures have been proposed on this thread. In summary.

1) Raise interest rates. Desirable but not doable currently, as there is a Brexit induced recession coming down the track.

2)Reform HB. This is a must. At present there is a disconnect in the market. Landlords, as ever, want as much as they can get, LHA tenants don't care what they're charged. Other benefits are not siloed like this: there is no tobacco or food allowance, it is for the recipient to budget. LHA claimants must be empowered to cut themselves a good deal.

3) Start a national housebuilding programme. No. Almost all the new builds would end up in the hands of people who already own several properties.

4) Encourage people to move out of London. No. People need to realise that command economys are inefficient; far better for people to gravitate to where they can be useful than to force the BBC to Salford or other terrible cultural cruelties.

5) Make landlords, rather than tenants, liable for Council Tax. A no-brainer:- most Council Tax supports the infastructure that protects the value of a property. Double Council Tax on an empty property and double it again if the property has been vacant a six-month, and on. The Bishops Avenue is owned by people who have never slept there, who could have bought a 100 square mile estate on the Russian border with Ukraine for less than the value of their house there. Just as it takes a whole summer to create the environment for a butterfly, so it takes the whole infastructure of NW3 and further, to create the environment for the owners of the houses on that avenue. Let them stay, but let them pay.

6) Stop BTL mortgage tax-relief now. It is deemed an unfair advantage, yet will only start to be tapered down next year. It is the unspeakable congress of a teat with a leech. End it now.

7) Tax rent at source, like other unearned income. Sounds radical but why? The landlord no more "earns" his income than the investor does his share dividend. Let the initial 5k stay free of tax, to encourage the "spare room" market, and accrue the money thereeafter.

8) End the BTL shell-company status. Where anyone with 15 or more properties can register as a company and avoid paying any tax at all, by following a programme of expansion. A shark eating its tail, perpetuating the housing misery that this country suffers but others do not.

This thread deals only with practical redress. The moral badness of a system where the life chances of the coming generation are predicated on whether their parents are landlords or renters, I'm happy to discuss also.
Report Ski-Wiz August 14, 2016 6:09 PM BST
1) Raise interest rates. Desirable but not doable currently, as there is a Brexit induced recession coming down the track.

Ho Ho. Interest rate at its proper level prevent recession by preventing a cracked up boom.
Report unitedbiscuits August 14, 2016 6:22 PM BST
Negligible interest rates and a weak pound cost everyone, Ski Wiz, but a few of the other listed measures will very easily correct the housing bubble.
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 7:27 PM BST
Same old tripe from UB.

A man whose unworkable ideas are driven by pure envy.
Report Dr Crippen August 14, 2016 7:33 PM BST
Make landlords, rather than tenants, liable for Council Tax.

That sounds like a nice little earner for landlords.

The landlord charges the tenants full whack for the council tax.

Then puts the tax up against expenses and get at least 20% knocked off. Or considerably more if he's a top rate tax payer.Laugh
Report Ski-Wiz August 14, 2016 11:07 PM BST

Aug 14, 2016 -- 12:22PM, unitedbiscuits wrote:


Negligible interest rates and a weak pound cost everyone, Ski Wiz, but a few of the other listed measures will very easily correct the housing bubble.


Look at the history of the pound valuations... use to be much higher and we are still here, abliet a dodgy economy. Not the end of the world.

Report unitedbiscuits August 15, 2016 11:12 AM BST
Landlords are taking full advantage of mortgage tax-relief at the moment, but many established BTL-mongers could just as easily buy your house with a carrier bag of cash. Any interest rate rise will likely just strengthen their hand against owner-occupiers.
Report stewarty b August 15, 2016 8:36 PM BST
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/519475/Dwelling_Stock_Estimates_2015_England.pdf


Thanks for that link jumper. Although it only relates to England.


For what it's worth this goverment should build at least 2,000,000 new council houses in the next five years to help with the shortage.

I don't know how feasible that might be but there is plenty room for them. The population continues to grow and this would also boost

the economy given how many jobs it would create. (imho)
Report dukeofpuke August 15, 2016 11:40 PM BST
there are over a million unoccupied dwellings in london
Report Mister E August 16, 2016 1:19 PM BST
Yes, Duke of Puke.
Houses bought off plan and never lived in remains a ridiculous result oF govts@ policy.

Flogging off MoD land, and Hospital land cheap to corporates  doesn't create "affordable" housing either.

Houses built on the hospital land near me ranges from £500k> to £1 million.
Report Mister E August 16, 2016 1:25 PM BST
Help to buy in London.
Catford £462,000 to £530,000.

Dont think we are helping the right people there, just stoking price inflation, and subsidising people who are already comfortably off, and the builders.
Report Ski-Wiz August 16, 2016 4:17 PM BST
Build more council/social housing then what? Sell at cost to the poor with mortgage assistance? Landlords buying up newly built houses?

Not one person here is thinking of the long-term impact and answer this question.

Where is the money coming from to pay housing benefits for pensioners in the future?
Report lfc1971 August 16, 2016 4:29 PM BST
bring in a one child per family policy, problem solved.
Report lfc1971 August 16, 2016 4:31 PM BST
the strange thing is why is everyone so poor? it makes you wonder whatour ancesters did with their money and property.
where did it all go?
Report unitedbiscuits August 16, 2016 4:47 PM BST
lfc1971 - Housing is the chief reason for the inexorable decline of the UK for the last seventy years. Ever since the war, this country has rewarded those on the housing ladder above innovation and production. Now it hardly matters if a child is bright, sociable, public-spirited, well-intentioned, hard-working, resourceful or a mean-spirited dolt: its life chances depend on whether its parents are landlords or renters.
Report Mexico August 16, 2016 6:38 PM BST
Until we manage the existing stock of social housing better we should not waste any taxpayers money building more.

Those living in subsidised social housing should not have spare rooms - pay market rates if you want a spare bedroom. We should not house people at taxpayers expense in some of the most expensive areas on the planet. Those earning a decent salary should pay market rent rather than getting the taxpayer to subsidise their housing.

Plenty of spare rooms/more rent which could be used for those who need housing.
Report unitedbiscuits August 16, 2016 8:22 PM BST
Mexico makes a valid point, his first. Unfortunately, he goes off the rails after that, pursuing an envy driven agenda. But it is said that, with infinite patience, a monkey at a typewriter could pound out the Complete Works Of Shakespeare.
Report Ski-Wiz August 16, 2016 8:37 PM BST

Aug 16, 2016 -- 10:31AM, lfc1971 wrote:


the strange thing is why is everyone so poor? it makes you wonder whatour ancesters did with their money and property.where did it all go?


100% property ownership no matter what standard it was, existed for everyone who built their own shelter... until someone decided to grab all the land and register it into the hands of the few.

Report unitedbiscuits August 16, 2016 9:22 PM BST
You are so right, Ski Wiz - providing shelter for your family is a basic human instinct and easily attained with a modicum of collaboration: capitalism drives a schism between aspiration and attainment. Enclosure Acts, driven by Conservatives stole land from people. And the Tory Party hasn't really changed - when they're talking about "one nation Conservatism," - that's when they're trying hardest to filch more rights from the people. We won't be around to see it but, in the near future, capitalists will cost green energy to the point where "customers" have to pay for breathing in. Then charged again for breathing out.
Report lfc1971 August 16, 2016 11:53 PM BST
i do not agree with using spare bedrooms in peoples houses. it is as easy and affordable to build a 3 bedroom house as a two.

no British house should have anything less than 3 bedrooms, British people are different from those of other countries and are not like house pets but an englishmans home is his castle.
Report lfc1971 August 16, 2016 11:56 PM BST
if a British home, no matter how humble, does not have a spare room then we have too many people in Britain.
it is impossible to live in a house without a spare room if you are English.
Report dukeofpuke August 17, 2016 1:05 AM BST
put a log cabin in your garden or a caravan on your drive or dig down make a cellar ot go up make a loft room

ffs wake up
Report dukeofpuke August 17, 2016 1:10 AM BST
have massive trailer parks for migrant workers paid for by the farms that employ them you can dismantle them later

if that means costs go up for food so be it

the cost of the food that is picked via labour costs is well low as the govt are subsidising them

the wealthy farmers supermarkets are getting the profits the taxpayer is getting the bill
Report stewarty b August 17, 2016 6:57 AM BST
But it is said that, with infinite patience, a monkey at a typewriter could pound out the Complete Works Of Shakespeare. Laugh
Report Dr Crippen August 17, 2016 11:15 AM BST
Socialism and immigration, a combination guaranteed to undermine any stable society.

Turn the clock back to before 1997.
There was no housing problem them.
No problems with couples getting on to the housing ladder.
Far fewer people renting and the BTL craze had hardly started.

Yet people voted willingly for everything we're seeing now. While others saw it coming.

It's a bit rich now for the people who buggered everything up, to start telling us how to put it all right.
Report Ski-Wiz August 17, 2016 11:50 AM BST
Far fewer people renting and the BTL craze had hardly started.

That was because G U Brown abolished tax relief on pension dividends. This alone made BTL a better investment for pension and only benefited the few at the expense of the majority. Nice to see socialism helping the rich... as usual.
Report bongo August 17, 2016 4:20 PM BST
The DWP Stat-Explore people have published some numbers today:


At May 2016:


    The total number of people claiming Housing Benefit was 4.68 million.
    3.42 million Housing Benefit claimants were aged under 65, representing almost three quarters of all Housing Benefit claimants.
    69 per cent of Housing Benefit claimants were tenants of Social Rented Sector landlords.
    Just over six out of ten Housing Benefit claimants were in receipt of a Passported Benefit.
    The overall average Housing Benefit award was £96.03 per week.
    3.67 million Housing Benefit claimants were single, with 65 per cent of these being female. Of the 1.71 million claimants with at least one child dependent, 1.15 million of these were single.
    87 per cent of the 1.47 million Private Sector tenant Housing Benefit recipients were receiving the Local Housing Allowance.
Report Dr Crippen August 18, 2016 9:43 AM BST
^What are passported benefits?

Passported benefits are benefits or schemes which some groups of people are entitled to because of their entitlement to certain other benefits or tax credits. Benefits and tax credits which can passport you to other benefits or schemes include:
• Income Support
• Jobseekers Allowance (income-based)
• Employment and Support Allowance (income-related)
• Pension Credit (guarantee credit)
• Child Tax Credit
Report Ski-Wiz August 18, 2016 9:11 PM BST
The total number of people claiming Housing Benefit was 4.68 million. 3.42 million Housing Benefit claimants were aged under 65,

So 1.26 million pensioners on housing benefit already... That could treble in 20 years...
Report Whisperingdeath August 18, 2016 9:40 PM BST
stewarty b
17 Aug 16 06:57

But it is said that, with infinite patience, a monkey at a typewriter could pound out the Complete Works Of Shakespeare. Laugh


Are you an advocate of the infinite monkey theorem?
Report dukeofpuke August 19, 2016 3:05 AM BST
the theory is an infinite amount of monkeys not the one as thats impossible

for instance lets say an infinite amount of monkeys with an infinite amount of typewriters failed by one letter one of them typed a instead of e

would you class that as a failure

obviously you would need an infinite amount of adjucators

an infinite amount of time

an infinite amount of life time

an infinite of planet earths

an infinite amount matter energy etc
Report Whisperingdeath August 19, 2016 12:22 PM BST
Exactly your Grace and that is why I shall stick to drinking the wine called Infinite Monkey Theorem.
Report Whisperingdeath August 20, 2016 2:50 PM BST
I wonder how many homes could be built for £9 Billion and how many jobs created and how many people taken off benefits?

Seems we have a solution to the housing crisis!
Report Mexico August 20, 2016 3:03 PM BST
Whispering- if you don't know how many "homes" £9bn will build & you don't know how many jobs will be created & you don't know how many people will be taken off benefits then you have clearly NOT found a solution to "the housing crisis"

How can you work out a cost benefit analysis if you only know the cost & not the benefit?


We could start using the current stock of social housing more efficiently before squandering more taxpayers money on housing low skilled part time workers in some of the most expensive areas on the planet.
Report Whisperingdeath August 20, 2016 6:59 PM BST
erm you can build well in excess of 100,000 homes a year with that money or are you suggesting we squander more Tax Payers money bailing out wealthy Banksters like we have already?

Yes existing housing stock should be better used. I am just saying tax payer money should not be used to subsidise business's that pay low wages and private landlords.
Report Mexico August 20, 2016 10:50 PM BST
Easy to cut down on the amount of money the taxpayers fork out to house the scroungers.

Stop paying housing benefit to any property in the most expensive areas on the planet . Limit scroungers benefit to maximum 3 bed house. Only pay full housing benefit for 18 months. Make better use of existing social housing stock.
Report Mister E August 21, 2016 2:32 PM BST
Mex,
I would phase it out gradually. Direct use of taxpayers money to interfere with the Free Market. If it wasn't for Housing Benefit landlord could not charge exorbitant rents.

Over half the claimants are WORKING; wages not high enough? rents too high? or a bit of both?

Either way the taxpayer,s money is subsidising the system for the benefit of the better off.
Report Ski-Wiz August 21, 2016 4:25 PM BST

Aug 21, 2016 -- 8:32AM, Mister E wrote:


Mex, I would phase it out gradually. Direct use of taxpayers money to interfere with the Free Market. If it wasn't for Housing Benefit landlord could not charge exorbitant rents.Over half the claimants are WORKING; wages not high enough? rents too high? or a bit of both?Either way the taxpayer,s money is subsidising the system for the benefit of the better off.


Yes. A young low paid worker would normally stay at home with their parents and save money. The welfare state, tax credit, housing benefit caused young people to leave home earlier than they would have done and subsidies by others. Take these supports away and many problems will be solved by making the youngsters take more responsibility of themselves and build a career.

Report Whisperingdeath August 21, 2016 5:20 PM BST
There is a clear need for houses ( at least doon Sooth !). There are people claiming umnemployment benefit or whatever it is called. Put them to work!

Anybody on benefit should be directed to a building site if they want money!

The people who should be sorting out benefits are The Labour Party but they seem to be the Non Labour Party now! Who are Group 4S? How much Tax Payer money do they recieve from the Government. Labour are a disgrace. They are so many things they can do but they have only succeeded in helping Privatise the NHS, supplying Employers with Victorian Workhouse ethics a large lowly paid work force and then subsidze further these employers but giving their workers Tax Credits like BHS workers got £400 Million in Tax Credits under Phillip Green. It is a disgrace and we allow it to happen!
Report Dr Crippen August 21, 2016 5:50 PM BST
If people want to deny the unemployed and poor a place to live by withdrawing LHA, then why stop there?

Why not go the whole hog and deny them access to the NHS as well. That would save the taxpayer countless billions and allow the NHS to provide a first class service at no extra cost.

Or would simply throwing people out onto the streets be enough?

Be careful what you wish for, you might fall upon hard times yourselves one day.
Report Mister E August 21, 2016 7:33 PM BST
If Ashley, Green, and the zero hours poor payers aren't paying their workers enough to find somewhere to live; why should the taxpayer make up the difference? The majority on Housing Benefit are working, they aren't the scroungers in this.
Report Whisperingdeath August 21, 2016 9:21 PM BST
Thats right Mister E!

But too many are now abusing the system. The girl gets the housing benefit and income support and the fella stays gratis. This is quite common.

There is also a relationship where emploers know the score and can keep wages and hours down as they are in it together to get Government subsidy.

Income support is th not the answer to low wages!

Paying tax payer money to people to provide a roof over their heads teaches them the futility of hard work in this country! The rich and the game players combine to screw the hard working!
Report Dr Crippen August 22, 2016 10:18 AM BST
Everybody seems to know what is wrong, but no one seems to know how to turn the clock back.

We set out to create a low wage economy, where many would be denied the chance to buy their own home.
It was quite clear where we were going.
Where the state would look after those who chose not to work.

Immigration to bring down wages.
Tax credits to subsidise those low wages.
Generous benefits and somewhere to live rent free for those who chose not to work if they had kids. Because most of them would be no better off if they did work.
 
That is what we voted for and that is what we've got.
The socialists created it and the capitalists endorsed it.

We can't change it now.
Report Ski-Wiz August 22, 2016 12:38 PM BST
It's not about turning the clock back....

For me it is two main things.

1. Free market to sort the wheat from the chaff by abolishing housing subsidies.
2. Long-term finance.
Report Whisperingdeath August 22, 2016 2:05 PM BST
There is no way we should not seek to change this system. It will lead to our destruction. Society does not benefit from having haves and have nots and depriving pople of the chance to compete fairly. Look at Brasil and America and their underclass. I for one am not going to accept that for the UK.
Report Mister E August 22, 2016 2:39 PM BST
We cant turn clock back agreed. And most of us want to ensure that disabled etc. are cared for by rest of us.

But subsidising the wages of care Workers, tax dodgers workers to sustain high rents with taxpayers money is wrong.

For a start

Limit immigration we have had  Blairs open door and cameron's empty pledges, the numbers are rising

Replenish the sold off Social Housing stock
Fix a livng wage and ENFORCE it

Gimmicks like First Time buyer ISAs etc., are a total waste.
Report 1st time poster August 22, 2016 4:18 PM BST
you can add to all the above,there,ll be 1000,s upon 1000,s of these houses,homes which the average person would consider totaly inhabitable
Report Dr Crippen August 26, 2016 10:42 AM BST
Fix a livng wage and ENFORCE it

That's a bit optimistic if not highly unlikely.

The plan was to turn the UK into an expanding yet low wage economy and keep the lid on wages.

Now the plan has worked they're not going to scrap it.
Report Mister E August 27, 2016 4:03 PM BST
It has to be tried doc;
the alternative is to sit back and let the PAYE taxpayers subsidise the gap between employers poor wages, and landlords high rents.
Report Dr Crippen August 27, 2016 7:14 PM BST
The government sees it another way Mister E.
Let private landlords look after the renters, and take some off the strain off the councils.
Because the high rents and house prices aren't nationwide.

They also get plenty back in income tax from the private landlords.
It must be economical to do it this way or housing associations would price the private landlords out of the market.
As it is in many instances the housing associations charge the same as the going rate for private rentals.

Yet we don't hear much bellyaching about taxpayers subsidising publicly funded housing associations with their highly paid staff and pensions adding to government debt.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0afa1cf6-7f27-11e5-98fb-5a6d4728f74e.html?siteedit...
Report stewarty b August 28, 2016 11:48 AM BST
Anybody on benefit should be directed to a building site if they want money!


That's if they could find a building site..
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com