75 Grand Discount....Right to buy is back...........

shortchanged_2

Sibley wrote: »

Wont make any difference to supply.

How do you figure that out?

If they sell a house via right to buy (already existing stock) and then build another house to replace it = net gain of property stock in the market.

To put it simply for you Sibley, they will basically be building more houses, funded by people who can't normally buy houses. That doesn't look like a price driver to me.

Running_Horse

The only thing worse than government trying to be a landlord, is government giving away public assets to a select few at a big discount.

shortchanged_2

Running_Horse wrote: »

The only thing worse than government trying to be a landlord, is government giving away public assets to a select few at a big discount.

I do agree that the discounts though are far too generous.

ILW

Within 5 years, most will have been sold to BTL investors, and instead of the state paying £300 quid in HB and getting it back in rent, they will be paying £1000 a month and getting none back. Seems a bit odd to me.

Jimmy_31

Sibley wrote: »

Ladies and gentleman. This is it. The end of any house price crash ideas.

Councils will give out the mortgages as well. Anyone will be able to get them. Read it and weep HPC gang. Grant Snapps has kicked you striaght in the goolies.


£75k discount if you buy your council house

Right to buy scheme returns

Right on time ... Housing Minister, Grant Shapps, pushing changes


Exclusive



COUNCIL tenants will be able to buy their homes and get up to £75,000 off the market price, ministers will reveal this week.




The current discount will be trebled across the UK and quadrupled in London. It means the price of homes will be slashed by as much as half after five years' tenancy.


Housing Minister Grant Shapps will announce the new deal as part of an effort to revive the Right To Buy scheme launched by Margaret Thatcher in the 80s.
Its aim is to reverse years of declining discounts under Labour. Mr Shapps will say: "Labour never really could stomach people aspiring to own their own homes and so they took delight in vindictively slashing the right to buy discounts until they were virtually meaningless."
Under the shake-up, tenants with five years residency will qualify for a 35 per cent discount. They get an extra one per cent for every added year — up to a maximum discount of £75,000. Those in flats will get 50 per cent off after five years, with two per cent added yearly.
There were fewer than 3,700 council house sales compared to a peak of 84,000 a decade ago.
Only 66 per cent of homes are now owned by those who live in them — compared to a peak of 71 per cent nine years ago.
The cash raised from sales will be spent building new council houses

The vast majority of council tenants i know have no intention of buying their council house.

Why buy when its free to live in and people like me come round and maintain it for them.

Why the fcuk would i want to buy a house that i already live in for free. Thats what most are saying around here.

Degenerate

shortchanged wrote: »

How do you figure that out?

If they sell a house via right to buy (already existing stock) and then build another house to replace it = net gain of property stock in the market.

1. The second part rarely happens.

2. The gain in private property stock is offset by the increase in owner-occupiers. Net difference to supply/demand in the private market = zero.

The chief factor driving UK housing costs up over the last couple of decades has been demand increasing at a pace that has persistently outstripped supply. Whether the new stock is built by the public or private sector, and RTB transfers of stock from public to private sector are largely irrelevant to this. We need to build more houses, and the public sector seems to find this just as difficult as the private, so nothing changes.

Because of (1), after decades of right to buy, the main effect seems to have been a large reduction in social housing stock. With the new proposals only calling for "affordable" (ie 80% market rent) housing to replace it, this looks to continue that trend.

shortchanged_2

Degenerate wrote: »

1. The second part rarely happens.

2. The gain in private property stock is offset by the increase in owner-occupiers. Net difference to supply/demand in the private market = zero.

The chief factor driving UK housing costs up over the last couple of decades has been demand increasing at a pace that has persistently outstripped supply. Whether the new stock is built by the public or private sector, and RTB transfers of stock from public to private sector are largely irrelevant to this. We need to build more houses, and the public sector seems to find this just as difficult as the private, so nothing changes.

Because of (1), after decades of right to buy, the main effect seems to have been a large reduction in social housing stock. With the new proposals only calling for "affordable" (ie 80% market rent) housing to replace it, this looks to continue that trend.

Maybe what your saying is correct. However that would mean that a government minister is lying (not for the first time of course) because I'm sure if right to buy is done properly i.e without too large a discount and houses are built to replace the ones that are sold then there is no real reason as to why it should it result in higher prices for the housing market.

So basically the main difference this time around would be if Shapps was truthful to his word and they do actually build the houses to replace the ones sold off so I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

shortchanged_2

ILW wrote: »

Within 5 years, most will have been sold to BTL investors, and instead of the state paying £300 quid in HB and getting it back in rent, they will be paying £1000 a month and getting none back. Seems a bit odd to me.

Well maybe they should be sold with strict conditions (covenant) that say for example these houses are not to be used for private rental for say at least 25 years.

Degenerate

shortchanged wrote: »

Maybe what your saying is correct. However that would mean that a government minister is lying (not for the first time of course) because I'm sure if right to buy is done properly i.e without too large a discount and houses are built to replace the ones that are sold then there is no real reason as to why it should it result in higher prices for the housing market.

To clarify, I didn't mean to suggest it will result in higher prices. My suggestion is that it is neutral, and therefore the prevailing dynamic of supply/demand will have it's way regardless.

So basically the main difference this time around would be if Shapps was truthful to his word and they do actually build the houses to replace the ones sold off so I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

Shapps may well intend to replace the stock, but for all their good intentions, successive Governments of varying flavours have failed to meet their own declared targets for new housing.

SingleSue

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

The vast majority of council tenants i know have no intention of buying their council house.

Why buy when its free to live in and people like me come round and maintain it for them.

Why the fcuk would i want to buy a house that i already live in for free. Thats what most are saying around here.

It is only 'free' for those who rely on benefits, for those working and living in social housing (of which there are a fair few), they still have to pay rent, so not free at all.

Don't think this applies to me anyway, I have a housing association house, don't think the council has any houses in this area at all, it was all sold to the HA years ago.