What will the new government mean for tenants?

pyueck

Jowo wrote: »

What will the new government mean for tenants? asks the OP. The short response is 'nothing'. It's not doing anything for landlords, either.

Housing, like immigration, was simply another area which is virtually absent from any of the policies of the major parties.

I can recollect few discussions on it by the politicians and I can recall little in the way of changes to legislation in this whole area, save for perhaps the potential scrapping of HIPs.

There's a demographic timebomb in terms of supply and demand but you wouldn't know there is a housing and homelessness crisis in this country from the recent election.

You may well be right. I have read the full statement from the Con/Lib alliance. Outlawing fingeringprinting of school children is in (thank goodness for this, it has really kept me awake at night) a plan to deal with the lack of affordable homes unfortunately doesn't make it.

pyueck

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Hmmmmmmm.....

You argue the lack of affordable accommodation....

"a generation of tenants with overpriced accomodation that does not provide adequate living space,"

Then propose a cost increase....

"I would like the independant dispute resolution avaliable to tenants (not just for deposits) to be free and funded by the industry, much like the FOS is for banking."

As for your final point, regarding greenfield sites. If you seriously think that the land used will make any difference to the profit motive of developers, then you are very much mistaken.

Labour may well get only 1/10 from you. I won't tell you what my marks were for your proposals. I'm just glad your not in a position to realise these plans.

The current problem of a lack of affordable housing has nothing to do with too high a cost base for dealing with disputes, and everything to do with a complete lack of land to build on. Greenbelt land can of course be built on without yet more flats on it. The government can decide the mix of properties that should be built on the land and the developers will only be given permission to build in accordance.

Wee_Willy_Harris

pyueck wrote: »

The current problem of a lack of affordable housing has nothing to do with too high a cost base for dealing with disputes, and everything to do with a complete lack of land to build on. Greenbelt land can of course be built on without yet more flats on it. The government can decide the mix of properties that should be built on the land and the developers will only be given permission to build in accordance.

Which is the case already. You might recognise the phrase "planning permission"?

pyueck

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Which is the case already. You might recognise the phrase "planning permission"?

In the south east almost no planning permission in granted on greenfield sites, and is only granted on brownfield sites. Hence towns with huge fields next to it and people living on top of each other in overcrowded accomodation.

jonewer

pyueck wrote: »

In the south east almost no planning permission in granted on greenfield sites, and is only granted on brownfield sites. Hence towns with huge fields next to it and people living on top of each other in overcrowded accomodation.

Bloody green fields. No use to anyone.

clutton_2

i see OP has utterly ignored my suggestions

the Guardian today published an article claiming to have found 500,000 yes half a million empty homes in E&W at present....

this would solve a huge amount of problems in the housing market if local authorities used their empty homes powers.....

jonewer

clutton wrote: »

i see OP has utterly ignored my suggestions

the Guardian today published an article claiming to have found 500,000 yes half a million empty homes in E&W at present....

this would solve a huge amount of problems in the housing market if local authorities used their empty homes powers.....

Theres around 800,000 to 1,000,000 empty homes in the UK.

Simple solution - any property thats empty for more than 3 months pays quadruple the top rate of council tax.

The problem of a million empty homes will solve itself shortly thereafter.

But second homes are also a problem. Whole areas of the country turn into ghost towns when the schools are in while the locals cant afford a home.

Simple solution - all second homes pay quadruple the top rate of council tax and all second homes pay 50% CGT.

Problem solved.

pyueck

clutton wrote: »

i see OP has utterly ignored my suggestions

the Guardian today published an article claiming to have found 500,000 yes half a million empty homes in E&W at present....

this would solve a huge amount of problems in the housing market if local authorities used their empty homes powers.....

Sorry clutton, completely agree, empty properties should be used if at all possible. In practice there though may be good reasons why a property is empty. For instance my sick 95 year old grandma is currently living with me, and probably will for about six months, while she recovers from an operation. Should her home be 'redistributed?'

N79

pyueck wrote: »

Sorry clutton, completely agree, empty properties should be used if at all possible. In practice there though may be good reasons why a property is empty. For instance my sick 95 year old grandma is currently living with me, and probably will for about six months, while she recovers from an operation. Should her home be 'redistributed?'

Its a difficult question isn't it? The last government talked about forceably using unoccupied housing for a little while but then did nothing precisely because this is an impossible question to answer.

clutton_2

i think every community has its share of boarded-up abandoned property, and i'm sure that these properties could be compulsoriliy purchased and refurbished.... i think i heard a R4 prog on a scheme in Manchester where a large housing association took over a whole street of properties in Salford (?) which were about to be demolished and they refurbed them into decent homes for much less than building new...

Of courses some houses are empty for good reasons... void periods inbetween tenants for example; folks temporarily in care/hospital/overseas contracts of employment/in prison etc etc

but i dont think local authorities have made this a priority....