| Excellent work by the government yesterday 16:58 - Jan 28 with 796 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
on the ground rent cap, plus stronger legal rights to dispute unreasonable service charges, easier “Right to Manage” and the eventual getting rid of leasehold altogether. Been the bane of our life that lot, so brilliant moves by Labour.
Funny how no-one mentioned it on here.
Plenty of good stuff is happening with this government as they try to fix years of neglect, but it doesn't seem to get reported so strongly. |  |
| |  |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:01 - Jan 28 with 766 views | artsbossbeard |
Currently awaiting the 1st Daily Mail article about a pensioner couple who's retirement funds have taken a massive shoeing as their 10x BTL hovels aren't now bringing in the monthly bucks they anticipated. |  |
| Please note: prior to hitting the post button, I've double checked for anything that could be construed as "Anti Semitic" and to the best of my knowledge it isn't. Anything deemed to be of a Xenophobic nature is therefore purely accidental or down to your own misconstruing. | | Poll: | Raining in IP8 - shall I get the washing in? |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:01 - Jan 28 with 764 views | Zx1988 |
A good announcement, and not a moment too soon.
I'm currently negotiating some lease extensions with pretty nasty ground rents attached, so it was quite enjoyable to be able to pen an email to the freeholder's valuer yesterday, suggesting that the premium will have to come down somewhat now that there is an expiry date on his client's pernicious income stream. |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:42 - Jan 28 with 651 views | DJR |
You're right about there being virtually no publicity about the good things Labour are doing.
As regards the abolition of leasehold, commonhold has been available as an option since an Act passed in 2002 but it appears there has been virtually no take up.
Whilst commonhold seem much better in principle, there will always be with flats the need to maintain the structure and common parts, and the corresponding need to collect from flat owners the cost of doing so. And I imagine in the case of larger blocks of flats, there will still be the need to employ managing agents.
I suppose the crucial thing is that the flat owners will own the freehold and will have control but I have searched in vain on the internet to find an example of a commonhold block of flats to see how it has worked in practice. [Post edited 28 Jan 17:45]
|  | | |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 with 598 views | MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:18 - Jan 28 with 531 views | BlueBadger |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
'The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords' isn't quite the swing and hit you think it is.
Get jobs, scroungers. |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:36 - Jan 28 with 471 views | Herbivore |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
How's your property portfolio doing mate? |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:43 - Jan 28 with 457 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
"A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels. "
The obvious answer is to build more council houses but they just don't make people richer (other than the builders), so that'll never happen. |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:44 - Jan 28 with 440 views | Clapham_Junction |
I fully support the abolition of private leasehold, but I think doing so for social housing flats would be highly problematic.
I worked for a borough where we had some blocks of flats where leaseholders were the majority due to RTB. If the government pushed through commonhold, council would lose control of these types of blocks. This would be particularly problematic on estates with multiple blocks. Leaseholders frequently attempted to block major or scheduled repair/replacement works - if they ended up controlling one block on an estate, that would likely create issues around consistency of maintenance and issues with whole-estate matters.
As well as abolishing right-to-buy, I would also like to see the government implement a 'right-to-buy-back' scheme where social housing providers have to be given the first opportunity to purchase any flats being sold where they are the leaseholder. A much quicker way of increasing the social housing stock, with the double benefit of reducing the bureaucracy of having leaseholders. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:02 - Jan 28 with 382 views | Blueschev |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
How does it diminish supply? What are these poor landlords going to do with their spare properties? |  | | |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:07 - Jan 28 with 368 views | Dubtractor |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:43 - Jan 28 by Ewan_Oozami |
"A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels. "
The obvious answer is to build more council houses but they just don't make people richer (other than the builders), so that'll never happen. |
Also, that suggestion is your standard pure capitalism 'let the market sort it out' theory, when there are so many examples of that not working. |  |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:07 - Jan 28 with 365 views | Herbivore |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 18:44 - Jan 28 by Clapham_Junction |
I fully support the abolition of private leasehold, but I think doing so for social housing flats would be highly problematic.
I worked for a borough where we had some blocks of flats where leaseholders were the majority due to RTB. If the government pushed through commonhold, council would lose control of these types of blocks. This would be particularly problematic on estates with multiple blocks. Leaseholders frequently attempted to block major or scheduled repair/replacement works - if they ended up controlling one block on an estate, that would likely create issues around consistency of maintenance and issues with whole-estate matters.
As well as abolishing right-to-buy, I would also like to see the government implement a 'right-to-buy-back' scheme where social housing providers have to be given the first opportunity to purchase any flats being sold where they are the leaseholder. A much quicker way of increasing the social housing stock, with the double benefit of reducing the bureaucracy of having leaseholders. |
It'd be good to see some investment from local councils and housing association in purchasing existing housing stock as well. I know they do this occasionally but there are people out there who want quick sales at times (selling due to probate, risk of repossession, quick sale of a rental place) where they could get good value. There's loads of cash homebuyers operating in that space and making a killing. There's even bargains to be had on the open market when it's slow. It'd be an investment worth making in the long run, insecure housing can cause all sorts of other costly issues. | |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:24 - Jan 28 with 342 views | BlueForYou |
This was supposed to happen during the previous government, but didn't. So, well done to Labour here. This needed to be done! |  | | |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:51 - Jan 28 with 288 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 19:07 - Jan 28 by Herbivore |
It'd be good to see some investment from local councils and housing association in purchasing existing housing stock as well. I know they do this occasionally but there are people out there who want quick sales at times (selling due to probate, risk of repossession, quick sale of a rental place) where they could get good value. There's loads of cash homebuyers operating in that space and making a killing. There's even bargains to be had on the open market when it's slow. It'd be an investment worth making in the long run, insecure housing can cause all sorts of other costly issues. |
I completely agree. Some kind of standing offer from councils to purchase your house if you get into financial distress and convert you into a council tenant would be a good policy IMO. | | | |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 21:37 - Jan 28 with 200 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
Who's landlord bashing? In fact who even mentioned landlords? | |
| |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 21:55 - Jan 28 with 159 views | WD19 |
Paul Lambert won a game once too. |  | | |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 21:57 - Jan 28 with 155 views | DJR |
| Excellent work by the government yesterday on 17:56 - Jan 28 by MedwayTractor |
The fundamental error in landlord bashing is that it discourages landlords. This means a diminishing supply of accommodation in the rental market. The law of supply and demand means, inevitably, that rents increase for the diminishing supply of accommodation.
Whilst, therefore, the last 100 years or so of successive governments keeping rents down for tenants sounds like good news for them, the long term result is that rents rise and there are fewer properties available. Is this really in the best interests of tenants? A more obvious answer to keeping rents down is to create a market which encourages more landlords, so that the law of supply and demand reduces rental levels.
What rent control policies have done is to create a rental market which has directly the opposite effect to the interests of tenants. This is without even addressing the questions of the mobility of the workforce, or the maintaining the housing stock in good repair. |
The OP isn't about the rental market. It's about long leases of flats. Not everyone is wealthy enough to buy a freehold property, at least as a first time buyer. [Post edited 28 Jan 21:59]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
