British culture of owning property??

PasturesNew

jenner wrote: »

but isnt that the same with social housing here? im not sure, so correct me if im wrong, but if your council or social housing flat needs decorating or a new kitchen or something, dont you have to get it yourself?

You decorate it yourself and if you WANT a newer kitchen you can put one in, but if you're happy to have a new kitchen only when it's upgrade time (say, 20 years) then the council will do it. If it NEEDS fixing (you didn't wreck it), then they'll fix it. 20 years in the same kitchen's fine, it's only recently that people have started popping in new ones as often as they change their underwear. It never used to happen.

olly300

CLAPTON wrote: »

the basic problem in the UK is the shortgage of houses in relation to the population.

There is no shortage of housing - it's just that the housing is not where the majority of jobs are which is why public organisations like the BBC need to be and are being forced to move out of the South East.

CLAPTON wrote: »

and we have so many restrictions on building more houses.
henced house price inflation

There seem to be few restrictions about building on brown field sites which include gardens.

The problem is that lots of what is being built like small badly designed city centre apartments or houses on very small plots, is not what people wish to live in for the long term particularly if they intend to have/bring up children.

There is nothing wrong with bringing children up in flats/apartments but unfortunately UK developers just try and shove as many into a block as possible and then make the block as high as possible. UK developers seem to forget the basic like the reason why kitchens are separate from living rooms.

CLAPTON wrote: »

so its completely rational to buy a house as soon as possible.

It becomes rational once you start to have children or need to care for someone. Other than that as an adult with no responsibility for other people there are advantages to renting particularly in a culture where there are no jobs for life. For example renters spend less time commuting then home owners.

CLAPTON wrote: »

if I were buying to day there is absolutely no way i could afford to buy my house... true of loads of people.

so renting is seen as only a short term expedient and so commercial landlords aren't in general interested

Unfortunately for lots of people they have no choice due to low wages and high house prices but to rent.

Plus there has been and always be a section of the population who can't afford to buy due to the jobs they do. Lots of them are vital for the communities they serve as a whole. The real shame is that instead of providing good quality social housing for rent only the government seems hell-bent on part-rent part- buy schemes.

puddy

olly, that is so true about developers and buildings. i sometimes wonder what on earth is going through their minds when they are planning a property. i have been looking at properties for about 18 months now (i put mine on the market to see this summer) and in that time, ive seen some right humdingers. before the official crash, the prices for these refurbed conversion flats were far more than i could afford, and yet the 2 beds that i was finding on rightmove, all had a second bedroom that was about 5 or 6' wide, im not joking, plus kitchen/lounges, which i hate, yet it was described as luxury this, luxury that, i thought, if only you had designed that as a one bed and taken slightly less money for it,you would have sold it by now. they're mad
i also spotted one where it was a 3 bed converstion flat, with 2 of the bedrooms with ensuites (small bedrooms) and no 'family bathroom'. so basically if you want to use the toilet, you go into someones bedroom. why put an ensuite in everywhere, i cant understand it

CLAPTON

olly300 wrote: »

There is no shortage of housing - it's just that the housing is not where the majority of jobs are which is why public organisations like the BBC need to be and are being forced to move out of the South East.


There seem to be few restrictions about building on brown field sites which include gardens.

The problem is that lots of what is being built like small badly designed city centre apartments or houses on very small plots, is not what people wish to live in for the long term particularly if they intend to have/bring up children.

There is nothing wrong with bringing children up in flats/apartments but unfortunately UK developers just try and shove as many into a block as possible and then make the block as high as possible. UK developers seem to forget the basic like the reason why kitchens are separate from living rooms.


It becomes rational once you start to have children or need to care for someone. Other than that as an adult with no responsibility for other people there are advantages to renting particularly in a culture where there are no jobs for life. For example renters spend less time commuting then home owners.



Unfortunately for lots of people they have no choice due to low wages and high house prices but to rent.

Plus there has been and always be a section of the population who can't afford to buy due to the jobs they do. Lots of them are vital for the communities they serve as a whole. The real shame is that instead of providing good quality social housing for rent only the government seems hell-bent on part-rent part- buy schemes.

I can't really understand what you are saying

you seem to be saying that there a lots of houses available
and building more is no problem
and that kids can be brought in flats no problem

and also houses are expensive (why if there are loads available

and people with kids want houses not flats
and that poor people can't afford houses (.. even if we have too many)


seems a bit muddled and makes no sense to me

CLAPTON

jenner wrote: »

olly, that is so true about developers and buildings. i sometimes wonder what on earth is going through their minds when they are planning a property. i have been looking at properties for about 18 months now (i put mine on the market to see this summer) and in that time, ive seen some right humdingers. before the official crash, the prices for these refurbed conversion flats were far more than i could afford, and yet the 2 beds that i was finding on rightmove, all had a second bedroom that was about 5 or 6' wide, im not joking, plus kitchen/lounges, which i hate, yet it was described as luxury this, luxury that, i thought, if only you had designed that as a one bed and taken slightly less money for it,you would have sold it by now. they're mad
i also spotted one where it was a 3 bed converstion flat, with 2 of the bedrooms with ensuites (small bedrooms) and no 'family bathroom'. so basically if you want to use the toilet, you go into someones bedroom. why put an ensuite in everywhere, i cant understand it

unless you take a special interest and have specific knowledge, then you will not necesarially know that the governement sets specific targets for 'affordaable housing'.
So all new developments have to meet government targets for affordable housing.
so deleveloper build 'nice' stufff for making a profit and future slums (called affordable housing) to meet government targets.

which is why manchester, birmingham, leeds etc now have a surplus of very small flats that no-one wants at almost any price.

Old_No.7

(Editing note: sorry, took so long typing this, that the discussion seems to have taken a different direction! Will leave this here for interested parties anyway)

Hello, interesting discussion: I often wonder how come the English system is so different from the Dutch one (I'm from the Netherlands, but have lived here for 10 years now).

So I thought I'd give you some more information on my country's system:

In the Netherlands, there's is hardly any private landlords, as far as I know: most of the properties are owned by housing associations. They are responsible for the upkeep of the houses: we've always lives in rental places, and whenever the toilet was blocked or whatever, the HA's team would come out and fix it immediately. You can't tell the difference between a rented house and a owner-occupied house in the Netherlands: in fact, as a kid, I thought that we were richer than friends' parents as their houses (owned) were much smaller than our rented place! )

If you get into trouble financially, you get housing subsidy (bit like housing benefit here, but without the stigma attached).

You can do to the house whatever you like, as long as it's in a rentable state when you leave (a simple inspection at start and end of tenancy, no big reports needed): my parents built an extension onto theirs about 30 years ago. The maintenance for this is their responsibility, but they could have opted to have the responsibility moved to the HA (that would have put up their rent a little bit though).

So in general there's no need to own your own place there. Having said that, my generation seems to want to own anyway, and while hardly any aunts/uncles owned a place, almost all my cousins own their house. But you don't buy until you can afford it comfortably. In general the houses in the NL are very well maintained: my family is always surprised at how badly some of the English houses look on the outside. (I think the council might have more power to intervene there, but not sure about that: could just be a national characteristic?). Also, the Dutch don't seem to feel that they need to leave a property for the next generation: I get the impression that is a factor here in England.

Having lived here for 10 years though, I've definitely been bitten by the ownership bug myself, and feel that rent is an intermediate option here: you can't be certain you can stay anywhere long, and letting contracts that won't even let you put up some posters using blutack are just insane! Talk about over-regulation, and you can't blame the government for that one. )

(apologies for long post: feel I haven't even started yet, but will leave it at this)

puddy

CLAPTON wrote: »

unless you take a special interest and have specific knowledge, then you will not necesarially know that the governement sets specific targets for 'affordaable housing'.
So all new developments have to meet government targets for affordable housing.
so deleveloper build 'nice' stufff for making a profit and future slums (called affordable housing) to meet government targets.

which is why manchester, birmingham, leeds etc now have a surplus of very small flats that no-one wants at almost any price.

i dont honestly know if these developers are really big boys like that, they seem to be people who have bought a couple of victorian houses and converted them into flats, like you or i might do, not big companies, although they might be just as bad.

puddy

old number 7,,, what is the tax and regulation system like in the netherlands compared to here?

Old_No.7

Hi Jenner, sorry, bit late in replying to your message, been preoccupied with a new baby!

Not sure what to say about the tax system in the Netherlands: I never owned a property there, but everyone I know keeps their mortgage as large as possible to get more tax refunded (bit like on BTLs here). Not many people own property to let out, so I don't know anyone there I could ask. People are v surprised to hear that I rent out a flat here, as they would never really consider it as a way of making money. But there is property owned by private people there, so someone is making money out of it! ;o)

Advice on websites I've checked is to not pay off your mortgage early as you lose out too much. This is probably to do with the state wanting to motivate people to own a house; renting is so easy once you have a house, that people need to be pushed a bit to consider buying. Although my generation seems to be more focussed on buying, so that might change. (I know they have talked in parlement about abolishing the tax refund, but no parties dares to do it).

Tenants have very strong rights (even squatters build up rights almost instantly), so you're in a strong position if you like the house you're in, whether this is a housing association house, or a privately owned one: it's not easy to get you out. There are no short-term contracts as far as I know: as a tenant you just have to give 1 months notice (don't think the landlord can get rid of tenants that easily though). There is a market for private rentals though, especially in the big cities, where students etc rent from private landlords.

The problem in the Netherlands is that there are waiting lists for everything. Once you're in the system you're fine, as you can swap to a different property that would better fit your needs, but you have to wait for YEARS to get into your first property. So people get onto the Housing Register as soon as they can, years before they really want or need to move out from home. As far as I know it's the same all over the country. That's why people sometimes end up in privately rented for a few years, until they finally get offered a housng association house.

Hope that answers your questions? Happy to fill you in more, but you might have to wait another 2 months for an answer, haha!

IveSeenTheLight

jenner wrote: »

I often read on here (and see on telly and in papers) that one of the 'problems' in this country with regard to house prices is that we're all obsessed about owning property and that other european countries dont have this 'problem' because they are happier to rent and have different rental legislation which is more favourable to the tenant, hence more tenants.

however, what confuses me (without going into the argument of should we shouldnt we rent) is that, surely in order for there to be tenants aplenty in france, spain or italy SOMEONE has to be the owner of those properties in order to be the landlord?
therefore, there are just as many owners per property, its not like NO ONE owns those properties, they just choose to let them out rather than live in them themselves.
it also stands to reason that the owners, therefore, must be buy to letters, which are criticised a lot on here, and own multiple properties.

for what its worth, im not a landlord and i dont rent because i choose not to, im lucky in that way that i have the choice, but im always struck by what seems to be such an onslaught of criticism for the desire to own the home you live in, rather than rent the home you live in. the comparison with europe is always made, that there isnt such a strong desire, but its spoken of in terms of 'few people' owning homes, without the acknowledgement that of course people own homes, they just rent them out rather than live in them themselves

if that make sense....

Very sensible post.
I believe the answer lies in the culture you talk aboutin your post.
The renters want to buy but believe they have been priced out by BTLers