British culture of owning property??

IveSeenTheLight

PasturesNew wrote: »

Rents in most places in the UK are a huge proportion of your takehome pay, especially for the single. If we had affordable places to rent that we could stay in for life we'd be happier.

There's no sense of "home" as your dwelling is not in your control. And where you live impacts on whether you can get to work, how much that costs you to do and what services/amenities you have access to.

If you have a council house or you own your own home you can feel settled. Private rentals do not give this feeling of being settled, being able to stay in a community and be part of it and being secure.

Have there been a time in the UK (other than possibly after and due to hyper inflation) that the cost of a roof over your head wasn't a huge proportion of your take home pay?

Darth_Marty

Its a really good thread this and simply cant be answered easily. There are many factors involved an those do include the british attitude to property ownership, the typical british landlord mentality and of course the lack of legislation to protct both landlords and tenants.

I am a homeowner with no obvious risk of losing my home but even I sometimes envy my french friend who has a far cheaper monthly mortgage/rent and a better outlook on life because if she wants to move (she rents of course) then she simply does that. In the u.k there is a huge lifestyle that points to property owners being more succesful. Thats not the case really is it.

Personally I wont give up my 20 year mortgage for the freedom of renting but sometimes I do envy my european rental friends.

bob79

jenner wrote: »

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

Like old number 7, I'm also originally from the Netherlands. The interest that you pay on your mortgage there can be deducted from income tax. So if the gross interest rate is 6% and you pay 50% tax, then the net interest rate on your mortgage is 3%. So people in higher tax bands profit more.

Repayment mortgages are very out of fashion in the Netherlands. Endowment type mortgages are the thing: this maximizes the tax benefit. Many people MEWed (mortgage equity release) to buy cars, televisions whatever. Very attractive at typical 3% or lower net interest! The government a few years ago introduced rules to make this harder, since it was getting out of hand.

The tax revenue lost through this subsidizing of mortgages is apparently comparable to government spending on primary education: it's huge.

BTL is not subsidizes in this way (only owner occupied homes count for tax relief) and is only significant is specialist areas of the market: housing for students and foreign workers mainly.

The Netherlands has an enormous housing bubble, maybe even bigger than the UK. But they are still in denial.

Renting is subsidized through housing associations which charge below market rate (middle class people are also eligible for housing association houses) and there are extra rent subsidies for low income people. As old number 7 said there are huge waiting lists though. The 'undercutting' by housing associations means BTL is basically unviable other than in specialist markets where people can't afford to wait for a housing association house.

Due to the tax and regulation system it makes financial sense to buy if you have a high income and to rent if you have a low income. The turning point is relatively high though: probably at something like 30k gross a year.

Saver-Rob

I personally have always wanted to own my house. Renting isnt something that has ever been considered by me, and never would be unless my situation DRASTICALLY changed. I understand some people will never be in a position to buy but the thought of renting almost depresses me.

olly300

CLAPTON wrote: »

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

Just came back to this thread. My reply is to your individual points but if you need to explain it to you again I will below.

1. There is enough housing in the UK or England and Wales if you take the country/countries as a geographical whole.
2. The empty housing is not where most of the jobs so empty houses in Liverpool and Manchester are no use to people who work in London.
3. As most people want to live as close as possible to work or where they potentially have the most employment opportunities , properties in areas with most employment opportunties are the most expensive. (There are exceptions like areas with lots of second home owners in Devon.)
4. There are no or little restrictions for building on brown field sites but there is a limited number of them. There are lots of problems trying to get permission to build on a green field site so developers don't bother.
5. To make money developers build as many properties as physically possible on the brown field sites normally flats. These flats are in most cases are smaller than flats built in between 1930-1980 for example having combined kitchens and lounges, a second bedroom which can only fit in a single bed and one other piece of furniture.
6. Partly due to 5, people with children want to live in a house. However in European countries where apartments are bigger people have no problem bringing up their children in flats. (I have friends from European countries who when they first came here thought lots of our housing etc was very odd.)
7. Some people i.e. posties,road sweepers will never earn enough money on their own to pay for their own properties in most areas and for the up keep of those properties. However as we need people to do these jobs we need to provide affordable housing for them to rent long term.