A question on succession…

Running_Horse

But the tenant saves money by dying sooner, and a better education increases income to choose better housing, and closes off the option of social housing.

Wee_Willy_Harris

NASA wrote: »

Isnt that because the landlord will be responsible for repairs whereas a homeowner has to do it themselves?

Even including the cost of repair maintanance on a typical property, the fact remains that, over the duration of a typical mortgage, the tenant will pay more. Of course, the tenant will see no increase in capitol value/equity either.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Running_Horse wrote: »

But the tenant saves money by dying sooner, and a better education increases income to choose better housing, and closes off the option of social housing.

Social housing isn't linked directly to income, to the option is never "closed off".

Wee_Willy_Harris

Running_Horse wrote: »

But the tenant saves money by dying sooner, and a better education increases income to choose better housing, and closes off the option of social housing.

A better education is no guarantee to higher earnings. Just ask all those graduates when they as "do you want fries with that?"

princeofpounds

Mortgage payments, over the length of the mortgage, will remain relatively stable. Rents, even those of social tenants, will rise throughout the entire duration of the tenancy, beyond even the 25 year length of a typical mortgage.

Sigh... Interest rates by definition must account for expected inflation, otherwise no-one would lend them out the money in the first place because it would be generating a negative real return for the bank.

Yes, over time the social renter will be paying more nominal amounts in rental payments, but nominal means nothing.

Wee_Willy_Harris

princeofpounds wrote: »

Sigh... Interest rates by definition must account for expected inflation, otherwise no-one would lend them out the money in the first place because it would be generating a negative real return for the bank.

Yes, over time the social renter will be paying more nominal amounts in rental payments, but nominal means nothing.

And, of course, the long term tenant continues to pay this ever increasing "nominal" sum long after the duration of a mortgage. I can assure you that, to the tenant at least, "nominal" doesn't mean "nothing". And for the housing provider, this "nominal" sum contributes towards their surplus (or profit).

Wee_Willy_Harris

I chose not to sigh, just yet.

FOURCANDLES_2

Running_Horse wrote: »

But the tenant saves money by dying sooner, and a better education increases income to choose better housing, and closes off the option of social housing.

Well as can be seen on other posts on here Housing associations are full of well paid individuals who are renting the houses in the nice little villages small towns and using the savings to build up an excellent deposit for a house in the uk or as me a home in france or living the good life ie plenty of cash in the bank and as one poster said 100k's worth of cars on the driveway . Makes you wonder who is the dim one ?.

ILW

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Well as can be seen on other posts on here Housing associations are full of well paid individuals who are renting the houses in the nice little villages small towns and using the savings to build up an excellent deposit for a house in the uk or as me a home in france or living the good life ie plenty of cash in the bank and as one poster said 100k's worth of cars on the driveway . Makes you wonder who is the dim one ?.

You must be WWHs hero.

Mum_of_3_3

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Well as we are all on about HA tenants who work hard and can afford to leave the HA house and buy or rent private and they are not in receipt of any benefits

Who is talking about this on this thread Fourcandles? Stop mixing the threads and take that bloomin' chip off of you shoulder.

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

All I can say if you want to earn more than 17k work harder

:eek::eek::eek: Who are you to say work harder? There are some jobs where the ceiling is roughly £17k. How can you make the assumption that OP isn't working his/her tail off for that £17k?

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

and a word off my acountant if you do not claim through the tax system what you are entitled to ctb then more fool you as you can bet your bottom dollar many are why do you think cameron has just stopped people on over 40k claiming ctb? because most were claiming it mug here comes to mind.

I suspect that the new government has stopped tax credits to those earning over £40k, because that's a high enough wage to start making your own way in the world

OP - I really wouldn't worry about what will happen to your children if both of you die, it probably won't happen. Anyway, if they are minors they will go to a relations to live and be cared for and if they are older than 18 they will probably be left home by then anyway!

Life's too short to worry about the "what ifs", just enjoy your family and be grateful that today you're all happy and healthy

M_o_3