£705,000 Shared ownership / affordable' home

brit1234

The £705,000 'affordable' home

Some housing associations are stretching the meaning of 'affordable home' to the limit



Probably the most expensive ever new-build by a housing association: Central Square in London EC1, where anyone buying a 25% share of the biggest flat will have to pay £2,322 a month for rent and mortgage. Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

In a busy road sandwiched between the office blocks of the City of London and the bijou streets of Islington lies what housing association One Housing Group calls a "calm home base where you can recharge the batteries". The association, which last year received a £20m government grant and says it is dedicated to "building affordable homes", :mad: has developed a block of 60 shared ownership apartments on the site. But if you are a hard-up house-hunter hoping to put your first foot on the property ladder, take a deep breath.

The biggest of the apartments, with a floor space less than the standard three-bed semi but without a garden, are on sale for between £695,000 and £705,000. It is, probably, the most expensive ever new-build offered by a housing association, yet it still meets the official criteria used to describe "affordable" – and qualify for taxpayer support.
Part-buyers of a 25% share in a flat will have to stump up £2,322 a month to cover the rent and mortgage. The housing association says buyers will need an income of £59,000 to qualify, but in reality even that income, nearly double the London average of £33,850, will leave them with little left over after paying the bills.

There are cheaper one-bed flats in the block – they start at £365,000 – but even these require the buyer to pay £1,209 a month for a 25% share.

Last week housing minister Grant Shapps traded blows with shadow minister Jack Dromey over the number of affordable homes being built in Britain. The Tories say they are up 25%, Labour says they are down. But however many are built, are they really "affordable"?

:eek:

One Housing Group assistant director Matthew Saye says: "Affordable means something that is above social rent but below market levels." That means that as house prices have escalated in the capital, so has the price of "affordable" homes.

rest of the story below
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jun/22/affordable-home

It really pees me off that developers are getting tax payers money to keep house prices in London extremely inflated. :mad:

moneyinmypocket

No 50% drops here than britty baby

CLAPTON

are these particular properties subsidised?

nollag2006

moneyinmypocket wrote: »

No 50% drops here than britty baby

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I bet it will be down 50% by Christmas though - mark my words!

:rotfl:

PasturesNew

Affordable means something that is above social rent but below market levels

And there's a major issue. Social rents are affordable... anything above them are unaffordable for most.

We need more social rents.... as they allow you enough left over after rent/basic utilities/beans on toast to be able to afford to get to work... something most private rents don't.

CKhalvashi

Unfortunately, for this part of London, this is cheap for the property in question.

I remember paying £192k in 2004 for a 3 bed terraced in Ealing. Same property is currently on the market at just shy of £550k :eek:

Yes, something needs to be done about it, but as long as someone is willing to pay the price, the prices will stay.

I'm happy to be out of London for good!

CK

nollag2006

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I remember paying £192k in 2004 for a 3 bed terraced in Ealing. Same property is currently on the market at just shy of £550k

Yup - I know my own first foray into the investment market (having been out for a few years) was in Ealing in Spring 2009. The prices there have really taken off since the crash ended in early 2009.

Bought a couple of BTLs then - both of them are up 15% or so, and the rents have increased by a bit more than that.

:beer:

brit1234

CLAPTON wrote: »

are these particular properties subsidised?

Apparently the rent side is. Shared ownership is just a way so people can justify they are doing something where in reality it is their way to keep the housing bubble going a little bit longer before it pops.

Mr._Pricklepants

CKhalvashi wrote: »

I remember paying £192k in 2004 for a 3 bed terraced in Ealing. Same property is currently on the market at just shy of £550k :eek:

That doesn't sound right.
According to the extremely reliable brit house price index, your 3 bed terrace is worth approx. 96K

PasturesNew

I need to buy a Transit van and learn how to pee in a bucket. It's cheaper.

CKhalvashi

Mr._Pricklepants wrote: »

That doesn't sound right.
According to the extremely reliable brit house price index, your 3 bed terrace is worth approx. 96K

Not for a large Victorian semi it's not.

This is 4 miles from Westminster we're talking.

I couldn't even get a 1 bed flat here for £96k, and I'm about an hour out of London!

CK