Plans to free up 25 million unused bedrooms

Graham_Devon

Just noticed this comment, and I have to say, fair game.

Why should I move into a shoebox just because I've retired. I worked hard to buy my house and even if I genuinely believed there was a housing crisis this is our family home and will always remain so. None of our five children, [aged 22-37] have been able to afford to buy there own homes - they rent. If any of them lost their jobs tomorrow and fell on hard times they have a home to come to.

While realising the problem, realising that they could buy and their children are priced out....it's not anyones problem, it's someone elses. This comment, which I do completely get, is half the problem. No one is willing to budge on housing, no matter how well off they have been made from it, and no matter if it's their own kids that are suffering the consequences.

I'm in no way having a go at the poster of the comment, I understand perfectly why they are saying what they are. It just sums up every person, probably of his age, that I know, including my own parents, who think it's disgraceful me and my sister cannot get ahead like they could, but then they are first in the queue to the library to sign a petition to stop new builds. Why? Because mum and dad may like to convert their loft one day and these new houses would just about be seen from the loft window they don't yet have. But they will still say it's awful no homes are built. I just give up, I have to, to avoid arguments.

In the end, the petitions stopped those houses, and have stopped further housing since. They say they are for new housing, just not there, or anywhere around them, or anywhere which may increase road usage on any road they use, and certainly not anywhere they can see as it might impact on the value of their house. But they want us to be able to live locally. They just cannot seem to grasp the hypocrisy.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Just noticed this comment, and I have to say, fair game.

While realising the problem, realising that they could buy and their children are priced out....it's not anyones problem, it's someone elses. This comment, which I do completely get, is half the problem. No one is willing to budge on housing, no matter how well off they have been made from it, and no matter if it's their own kids that are suffering the consequences.

House prices are where they are for the number of factors that contribute to them.

There's no point in complaining about whether you can afford or not, you simply have to try and achieve as best you can.

Picking up on your bold bit, I wonder how many are turning to property investment not only as considering for a pension but also to protect options for their children in the future.

I have and I know of two others that have invested to protect the families future.

You may see this is selfish, but it's just nature.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You simply cannot get around the fact that the older people are, the more likely they are to have surfed the tide of a massive HPI boom, even over the last decade was enough to make some very well off if they played the game (even unknowingly) correct. The younger are simply left with the small pickings. Money does that.

The argument that subsidised tenants should downgrade is a valid one, IMO, it's just a very tough one to debate as whichever way you go, if you are on the side of freeing up accomodation, you are also on the side of "chucking out the elderly" so it's anone starter.

You can't do anything about owner occupiers though. If they want to start, start with second homes, instead of threatening it and doing nothing all the time. As for Grant Shapps, no point even listening to him, he'll just say whatever needs to be said for that particular media item. Doesn't matter if he said something completely different an hour ago. Just a puppet boy.

The other point about these houses, is because of the people that live in them, the schools have now shut down. the local ammeities shut down. The shops have gone due to lack of trade and so on. They are no good for families....not now they have been wiped out and all the ammenities have gone with them.

Surfed the HPI boom if we take your figures (Nationwide 5.2x) from another thread and house prices need to fall just over 20% to get to long term average. I sell my mouse for £300k and buy a 2-bed bungalow for £250k I get £50k, now if property was at long term average sell for £240k buy for £200k so I now have 40k so the boom has given me just over10k. That’s assuming I was lucky enough to buy when property was at long term average and not above as it was when I first bought.

SailorSam

There are some areas where there isn't a big problem with a shortage of housing so maybe before a plan like this was rolled out nationally we could pick areas where homes are at a premium and force pensioners out into bedsits there.
Now that the kids have all left home does the Queen really need all those empty rooms in Buck House, and couldn't her and Phillip make do with a caravan instead of one their other holiday palaces.

the_flying_pig

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Excellent post.

I highlighted one sentence which I thought was pertanent and shows an instance where generations of the past got on with things whilst there are instances today where people expect things to be within their affordability.

I just can't believe people don't realise how much better their life is in relation to previous generations or indeed poorer countries.

It makes me think that there are a section of society that is just plainly spoilt.

The last 30 years has been the anomoly from historical norm in which more people were able to become home owners and this has raised the expectation levels of some.

aside from your usual agenda pushing [slinging around conceivable half-baked economic, moral, ethical, financial, etc argument you can to somehow try & ‘defend’ high house prices] do you have any comments on “Plans to free up 25 million unused bedrooms”?

IveSeenTheLight

the_flying_pig wrote: »

aside from your usual agenda pushing [slinging around conceivable half-baked economic, moral, ethical, financial, etc argument you can to somehow try & ‘defend’ high house prices] do you have any comments on “Plans to free up 25 million unused bedrooms”?

got to run off and do something else for a bit, but I certainly don;t have any agenda.
I simply link and discuss facts and place my opinion on those facts.

Quickly, with regards to "freeing up 25 million unused bedrooms" it's hard to see that it would be achievable.

Let me go over the article in more detail later to see where they have identified these spare bedrooms and how they plan to free them up.

Certainly I don't envisage I would give up my spare rooms easily.

I would also wonder how the HMO legilation complies with the wish to free up spare rooms.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

crazyguy wrote: »

Solution,

Yes,excellent solution and I don't see why a perfectly healthy family of three kids and two parents should'nt manage in one of these if thats all they can afford.

Graham_Devon

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

Yes,excellent solution and I don't see why a perfectly healthy family of three kids and two parents should'nt manage in one of these if thats all they can afford.

You are joking, right?

Davesnave

There are some funny ideas about 'older people.' Don't folks realise that for a good proportion of 60-80 year olds, the idea of carpet slippers and a nice long rest from years of toil is risible?

I took on a larger property when I was 60, and I intend living here, or somewhere similar, until I'm at least 75 or 80, extending it too if I can. My purpose is simple; to keep my money in bricks & mortar for as long as it's sensible, not just because I trust them, but because it's more fun.

I can release capital by buying that uninspiring 2 bed bungalow and 0.1 acres any time, if needs be, but God-willing, not for a long time yet!

Going4TheDream

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You simply cannot get around the fact that the older people are, the more likely they are to have surfed the tide of a massive HPI boom, even over the last decade was enough to make some very well off if they played the game (even unknowingly) correct. The younger are simply left with the small pickings. Money does that.

In my street people have lived there for up to 50 years or longer. My partners gran has lived in hers for over 70 years and never moved. My folks bought their first house when I was small and would probably still be there had they not divorced 20 odd years later. My partners folks have lived in their since the 70's having only moved once prior, they moved from a town to a village to a house that cost no more than the one they sold.

The problem is there needs to be more low cost quality affordable housing of which there is a huge shortage. It is a supply and demand situation (amongst other things). When a commodity is scare and demand is high prices will rise. BTL landlords and higher deposits havent helped. Mortgages are scarcer and harder to come by and that is also an influencing factor.

None of the above 'played' the game but they have all seen a massive increase in the value of their properties, but they see them as 'homes' and not cash cows, and probably had very little influence over the value and they will never personally realise the wealth in the properties. It is a little unfair to blame all the older generation for all of the woes.