| Latest rental madness. 18:44 - May 15 with 1531 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/15/rent-outside-london-passes-1000-fo
"The average new monthly rent outside London has passed £1,000 for the first time, figures show, with tenants in Great Britain now typically paying 25% more than they were at the start of the Covid pandemic.
The estate agent Hamptons, which issued the data, warned that the rate of rent rises was “unlikely to slow considerably due to the number of landlords looking to pass on their rising costs” and this may force some tenants to downsize or relocate to a cheaper area."
Surely something is going to snap but will it be a reset in the property madness or people having enough? I just can't see how this can carry on. |  |
| |  |
| Latest rental madness. on 18:58 - May 15 with 1446 views | clive_baker |
Almost like it benefits the mega wealthy with copious rentals properties and zero debt to their name isn’t it. |  |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 18:59 - May 15 with 1445 views | DanTheMan |
The housing price bubble will burst at some point. Or at least I keep hoping.
We don't build houses because of NIMBYs, which worsens everything. I think we will need central planning to override councils otherwise nothing will ever get built.
Meanwhile, home ownership and wealth are massively concentrated in the over 50s.
From The Times
The amount of mortgage-free equity held by the over-65s has doubled in the past decade, rising by £1.11 trillion to reach £2.183 trillion. In addition, landlords in this age bracket own £405 billion in mortgage-free rental properties, leaving over-65s with a total of £2.588 trillion tied up in bricks and mortar.
Just behind them are owner- occupiers aged 50 to 64, who hold £1.53 trillion in housing wealth, along with £679 billion tied up in rental properties, a total of £2.213 trillion. Putting the two age groups together, over-50s in the UK hold 78 per cent of the country’s entire privately held housing equity, according to Savills.
The under-35s own £306 billion of property outright to occupy or let, equivalent to 5 per cent of housing wealth. The remainder of the country’s wealth (£1.058 trillion) is owned by the 35-to-49 age group.
We spend more and more money on social care to pay for an aging population whilst decreasing the spend on the young, and crucially education.
Nobody wants to do anything about it because it's going to upset those who lose out.
I don't have much faith any political party has the balls to sort it out. |  |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:05 - May 15 with 1421 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Latest rental madness. on 18:58 - May 15 by clive_baker |
Almost like it benefits the mega wealthy with copious rentals properties and zero debt to their name isn’t it. |
Although I imagine that a few debt laden speculative types are in the rental game too and passing on higher mortgage cost. I think they will eventually run out of people that can afford to pay it gor them. Sociopaths the lot of them imho.
Edit....and if not worse are the landlords that own properties outright who are just charging more because the market says they can.
It's almost like there is no such thing as society. [Post edited 15 May 2023 19:08]
| |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:12 - May 15 with 1398 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Latest rental madness. on 18:59 - May 15 by DanTheMan |
The housing price bubble will burst at some point. Or at least I keep hoping.
We don't build houses because of NIMBYs, which worsens everything. I think we will need central planning to override councils otherwise nothing will ever get built.
Meanwhile, home ownership and wealth are massively concentrated in the over 50s.
From The Times
The amount of mortgage-free equity held by the over-65s has doubled in the past decade, rising by £1.11 trillion to reach £2.183 trillion. In addition, landlords in this age bracket own £405 billion in mortgage-free rental properties, leaving over-65s with a total of £2.588 trillion tied up in bricks and mortar.
Just behind them are owner- occupiers aged 50 to 64, who hold £1.53 trillion in housing wealth, along with £679 billion tied up in rental properties, a total of £2.213 trillion. Putting the two age groups together, over-50s in the UK hold 78 per cent of the country’s entire privately held housing equity, according to Savills.
The under-35s own £306 billion of property outright to occupy or let, equivalent to 5 per cent of housing wealth. The remainder of the country’s wealth (£1.058 trillion) is owned by the 35-to-49 age group.
We spend more and more money on social care to pay for an aging population whilst decreasing the spend on the young, and crucially education.
Nobody wants to do anything about it because it's going to upset those who lose out.
I don't have much faith any political party has the balls to sort it out. |
Is it NIMBYs though or that land bankers drip the land onto the market for use?
Interesting data from the Times there on debt free equity....tax them til their pips squeak. | |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:55 - May 15 with 1324 views | DanTheMan |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:12 - May 15 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Is it NIMBYs though or that land bankers drip the land onto the market for use?
Interesting data from the Times there on debt free equity....tax them til their pips squeak. |
That I couldn't tell you, but I do know it's mainly Conservative run councils that block developments. We've already seen they've dropped the mandatory targets for house building because it upset a few MPs and their base.
So NIMBYism there, but I reckon they also don't want to admit they don't want houses built as then the value of their own houses will go down.
This might make it somewhat easier for Labour to build lots of houses as these people are never likely to vote for them anyway. [Post edited 15 May 2023 19:59]
| |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 20:17 - May 15 with 1283 views | giant_stow |
| Latest rental madness. on 18:59 - May 15 by DanTheMan |
The housing price bubble will burst at some point. Or at least I keep hoping.
We don't build houses because of NIMBYs, which worsens everything. I think we will need central planning to override councils otherwise nothing will ever get built.
Meanwhile, home ownership and wealth are massively concentrated in the over 50s.
From The Times
The amount of mortgage-free equity held by the over-65s has doubled in the past decade, rising by £1.11 trillion to reach £2.183 trillion. In addition, landlords in this age bracket own £405 billion in mortgage-free rental properties, leaving over-65s with a total of £2.588 trillion tied up in bricks and mortar.
Just behind them are owner- occupiers aged 50 to 64, who hold £1.53 trillion in housing wealth, along with £679 billion tied up in rental properties, a total of £2.213 trillion. Putting the two age groups together, over-50s in the UK hold 78 per cent of the country’s entire privately held housing equity, according to Savills.
The under-35s own £306 billion of property outright to occupy or let, equivalent to 5 per cent of housing wealth. The remainder of the country’s wealth (£1.058 trillion) is owned by the 35-to-49 age group.
We spend more and more money on social care to pay for an aging population whilst decreasing the spend on the young, and crucially education.
Nobody wants to do anything about it because it's going to upset those who lose out.
I don't have much faith any political party has the balls to sort it out. |
Absolutely bang on. Younger people are getting an incredibly raw deal, not just on housing but, everything else too (pensions, education, social spending etc...) |  |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 20:50 - May 15 with 1220 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:55 - May 15 by DanTheMan |
That I couldn't tell you, but I do know it's mainly Conservative run councils that block developments. We've already seen they've dropped the mandatory targets for house building because it upset a few MPs and their base.
So NIMBYism there, but I reckon they also don't want to admit they don't want houses built as then the value of their own houses will go down.
This might make it somewhat easier for Labour to build lots of houses as these people are never likely to vote for them anyway. [Post edited 15 May 2023 19:59]
|
I think the NIMBY comment is somewhat harsh. As a (young) homeowner I don’t oppose house building because of property value - I’m in it for the long term. It’s the fact that councils of all colour continue to allow building en masse on our greenbelt, they don’t force the builders to provide new schools, roads, parks or Doctors (where it’s already impossible to get an appointment)
If councils tackled these problems then far fewer people would object. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Latest rental madness. on 21:01 - May 15 with 1187 views | HARRY10 |
| Latest rental madness. on 19:55 - May 15 by DanTheMan |
That I couldn't tell you, but I do know it's mainly Conservative run councils that block developments. We've already seen they've dropped the mandatory targets for house building because it upset a few MPs and their base.
So NIMBYism there, but I reckon they also don't want to admit they don't want houses built as then the value of their own houses will go down.
This might make it somewhat easier for Labour to build lots of houses as these people are never likely to vote for them anyway. [Post edited 15 May 2023 19:59]
|
Your second paragraph hits the nail on the head. So many are now stuck in what is basically a Ponzi scheme that no politician will attempt to deal with it because of the repucussions.
It throws up all sorts of anomalies. Housing Benefot is being bled dry by greedy landlordss who know benefit will pay up irrespective of the shoddy state of the slum. Money that could and should be used to built decent housing.
This dire shortage of housing is othe movement of labour, leading to staff shortages across the country. Perhaps it won't lead to a housing crash, but it will lead to an ever decreasing economy.
And the counter that lower growth we have clueless idiots like Braverman and Truss bleating about growth when it is the wery policies they support and have done previouslythat are the cause of that problem.
While these problems are obvious and confront so many people, especially tge young, we have a bunch of shytehawks trying to lay the blame on those who are a victim of their policies.
We cannot rid ourselves of these cnts soon enough, and that also goes for the apologists on here who bleat out in the defence of such nonsense. | | | |
| Latest rental madness. on 21:31 - May 15 with 1157 views | DanTheMan |
| Latest rental madness. on 20:50 - May 15 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I think the NIMBY comment is somewhat harsh. As a (young) homeowner I don’t oppose house building because of property value - I’m in it for the long term. It’s the fact that councils of all colour continue to allow building en masse on our greenbelt, they don’t force the builders to provide new schools, roads, parks or Doctors (where it’s already impossible to get an appointment)
If councils tackled these problems then far fewer people would object. |
I am also a young homeowner but the issue is it's very easy to turn around and say "it shouldn't go here because of X".
And then everyone does it and nothing gets built, or at least nowhere near enough gets built.
I do agree though that we just tend to build these big suburb estates with nothing in them. The houses are all detached or semis with little to nothing in the way of medium or high density housing, no amenities and rubbish transport links.
In my mind, we need to have some level of centralised planning for building houses otherwise we'll just not build enough.
Just briefly as well, it is mainly Conservative run councils / constituencies, at least according to the Telegraph.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/news/why-a-tory-government-can-never-fix-th [Post edited 15 May 2023 21:32]
| |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:04 - May 15 with 1123 views | tractordownsouth |
It'll carry on so long as selfish NIMBYs think that preserving the nice view from their multi million pound houses is more important than younger people having homes to live in. |  |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:09 - May 15 with 1111 views | tractordownsouth |
| Latest rental madness. on 20:50 - May 15 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I think the NIMBY comment is somewhat harsh. As a (young) homeowner I don’t oppose house building because of property value - I’m in it for the long term. It’s the fact that councils of all colour continue to allow building en masse on our greenbelt, they don’t force the builders to provide new schools, roads, parks or Doctors (where it’s already impossible to get an appointment)
If councils tackled these problems then far fewer people would object. |
I agree that new infrastructure needs to be built alongside new homes but the solution to that is to campaign for the new infrastructure not block the new homes. | |
| |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:19 - May 15 with 1096 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:09 - May 15 by tractordownsouth |
I agree that new infrastructure needs to be built alongside new homes but the solution to that is to campaign for the new infrastructure not block the new homes. |
Isn’t that what we pay the council for - they have planning teams, shouldn’t be on residents to demand new facilities. Pretty p1ss poor to be honest.
If the councils did it from the off people wouldn’t object, and those who did would have little ground to do so.
As an aside there are towns all over the county with empty commercial properties where the high street has been decimated. Surely converting some of these to residential use is better than constantly building over the green belt. | | | |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:19 - May 15 with 1095 views | HARRY10 |
| Latest rental madness. on 21:31 - May 15 by DanTheMan |
I am also a young homeowner but the issue is it's very easy to turn around and say "it shouldn't go here because of X".
And then everyone does it and nothing gets built, or at least nowhere near enough gets built.
I do agree though that we just tend to build these big suburb estates with nothing in them. The houses are all detached or semis with little to nothing in the way of medium or high density housing, no amenities and rubbish transport links.
In my mind, we need to have some level of centralised planning for building houses otherwise we'll just not build enough.
Just briefly as well, it is mainly Conservative run councils / constituencies, at least according to the Telegraph.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/news/why-a-tory-government-can-never-fix-th [Post edited 15 May 2023 21:32]
|
"T was informed by some thicko that it was wrong that new houses would be built on brown field sites" - whereas his wasn't I suppose
Another cretin told me that Britain was full up, so much so that arrivals to Gatwick often cause folk to tumble into the sea.
Around 8% of housing is second/holiday homes. But you cannot replace them as that would 'destroy the natural beauty'. I wonder if we would allow hospital beds to lie empty as they were holiday beds, used occasionally by people who might need a hospital. Crazy, then have a system where it is forbidden to provide replacement beds.
However this is situation is because so many accept it. In fact support it as they did with Brexit = something so stupid it is hard to imagine anyone would be fooled by it.
That is what is happening now. Government paying out billions to house folk in slum housing when that money should be used to built better housing, and owned by the rest of us, not some parasitical landlord/pimp. | | | |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:32 - May 15 with 1076 views | tractordownsouth |
| Latest rental madness. on 22:19 - May 15 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Isn’t that what we pay the council for - they have planning teams, shouldn’t be on residents to demand new facilities. Pretty p1ss poor to be honest.
If the councils did it from the off people wouldn’t object, and those who did would have little ground to do so.
As an aside there are towns all over the county with empty commercial properties where the high street has been decimated. Surely converting some of these to residential use is better than constantly building over the green belt. |
There are plenty who would still object due to their house values dropping. With regards to the last paragraph, converting empty shops is fine as is using homes which are currently not occupied but we have one of the worst lowest vacancy rates in Europe so it's only a small part of the problem.
Greenbelt building should be a last resort when brownfield options are exhausted but we're getting to that stage now because our shortage is at crisis levels. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
