Sell up and stop complaining about going hungry and cold.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

Graham_Devon wrote: »

For info, there will be PLENTY of people struggling, but having loads of equity. Especially those towards the pensioner end.

I don't think you'll find too many people arguing against pensioners downsizing from a family home in order to reduce their outgoings and free up equity. It's an acceptable and widely used retirement strategy.

The debate is whether downsizing or STR is a valid approach for everyone and clearly, given the added expense of rent vs mortgage, it's not.

Graham_Devon

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

I don't think you'll find too many people arguing against pensioners downsizing from a family home in order to reduce their outgoings and free up equity. It's an acceptable and widely used retirement strategy.

The debate is whether downsizing or STR is a valid approach for everyone and clearly, given the added expense of rent vs mortgage, it's not.

Pop over to the interest only mortgage thread.

That argument is exactly what's happening. The argument is the banks should continue to let them live in the house, and pay rent, rather than the mortgagee having to either pay up, or sell.

homelessskilledworker

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Interesting reading the replies to this thread.

It seems that the main criticism of HSW suggestion is that rents are too high and the equity wont last long. But isnt that the point, those in rented are currently paying these too high rents. The help/assistance provided to poorer families should be equitable. If a renter was saving up for a deposit and they fall on hard times they would be expected to use the money they saved to tide them over, same the home owners. If they have equity then this should be also used to help them through the tough times. The equity or savings should be regarded in a similar way.

It comes back to the highly dysfunctional housing market we have in this country, whether buying or renting property values have got out of step with what the country as a whole can actually afford, and this cash drain is dragging us further into recession.

Rising house prices fuelled the boom, and sadly they are now very much at the heart of the recession. The trouble is now that if prices were to fall significantly we would have real problems with the banking sector, so prices cant move. People are stretched, and the recession will continue.

There is no quick way out of all this, just a long game while prices stay static in £ terms and gradually the value is eroded by inflation.

But we cant risk high inflation, so its going to be a long drawn out affair.

It is incredible how some people on this board will totally support the angel like BTL landlords who play a huge part in housing many of the UK population in affordable decent housing, who can then go on to post on the dirty scum renter who will never be able to attract women or be taken serioulsy by his neighbours/friends and work comrades to now state that renting is an expensive waste of money only to be used by the desperate.

The last statement I kind of go along with, renting does have it's place in the UK on a smaller scale, and whether people like it or not it is now an accepted form of housing. So just because some people have a current mortgage does not give them any special rights to own forever. If renting is ok for one person it is also ok for the other 65 million.

But BTL has got too big, it is a middleman that is just not needed or wanted and has caused prices to bubble. Sooner or later and when things get worse the politcians will one day have to give the voter what he wants, and that is the chance with hard work to own his own home.

But I tend to agree with those who are having a dig at me, renting is not very good in the UK, so why keep something we don't think is very good?

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Pop over to the interest only mortgage thread.

That argument is exactly what's happening. The argument is the banks should continue to let them live in the house, and pay rent, rather than the mortgagee having to either pay up, or sell.

Are the pensioners who are on IO able to afford the 'rent' and other outgoings or are they complaining about going hungry and cold?

Graham_Devon

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

Are the pensioners who are on IO able to afford the 'rent' and other outgoings or are they complaining about going hungry and cold?

Makes no difference whether they can't afford the house, or they can't afford food.

You stated something didn't happen. It does.

homelessskilledworker

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

I don't think you'll find too many people arguing against pensioners downsizing from a family home in order to reduce their outgoings and free up equity. It's an acceptable and widely used retirement strategy.

The debate is whether downsizing or STR is a valid approach for everyone and clearly, given the added expense of rent vs mortgage, it's not.

No!!:)

I will tell you what the thread is about seeing as though it is my thread, actually I will tell you what it is NOT about.

It is not about choices, it is not about someone making a lifestyle choice "Oh shall I move into rented or stay in my lovely owned home that is bigger".

It is about people who might well have £10,000's thousands in property equity but are cash poor and hungry and cold.
BTL and renting is now a lawfull and accepted form of housing in the UK, and it is as good a way of housing a present homeowner or ex homeowner as any.

If times are tough it is just another asset that can be cashed in, no differnet from the gold watch that goes into a pawn shop in bad times.

ukcarper

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

It is incredible how some people on this board will totally support the angel like BTL landlords who play a huge part in housing many of the UK population in affordable decent housing, who can then go on to post on the dirty scum renter who will never be able to attract women or be taken serioulsy by his neighbours/friends and work comrades to now state that renting is an expensive waste of money only to be used by the desperate.

The last statement I kind of go along with, renting does have it's place in the UK on a smaller scale, and whether people like it or not it is now an accepted form of housing. So just because some people have a current mortgage does not give them any special rights to own forever. If renting is ok for one person it is also ok for the other 65 million.

But BTL has got too big, it is a middleman that is just not needed or wanted and has caused prices to bubble. Sooner or later and when things get worse the politcians will one day have to give the voter what he wants, and that is the chance with hard work to own his own home.

But I tend to agree with those who are having a dig at me, renting is not very good in the UK, so why keep something we don't think is very good?

But who would fill the gap left by BTL I don’t see any other people willing to provide rental accommodation.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Makes no difference whether they can't afford the house, or they can't afford food.

You stated something didn't happen. It does.

How can you say it makes no difference if they can't afford food? This whole thread is about whether homeowners can afford food or other living expenses such as heating. The clue is in the title "Sell up and stop complaining about going hungry and cold".

I stated that I didn't think you'd find too many people who would have an issue with pensioners downsizing from a family home in order to reduce their outgoings and free up equity. You simply linked to an unconnected discussion and called it 'proof'. It's not, and just because you say it is, doesn't make it so.

homelessskilledworker

ukcarper wrote: »

But who would fill the gap left by BTL I don’t see any other people willing to provide rental accommodation.

Great question..

And my argument is that we do not need or want as much of it, at what percentage I have no idea. What I am certain of is that there are huge numbers who are living in rented who would prefer to own, but have no choice.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

It is about people who might well have £10,000's thousands in property equity but are cash poor and hungry and cold.

BTL and renting is now a lawfull and accepted form of housing in the UK, and it is as good a way of housing a present homeowner or ex homeowner as any.

If times are tough it is just another asset that can be cashed in, no differnet from the gold watch that goes into a pawn shop in bad times.

Fine, short-term a family will be better off after STRing, while they have released equity to subsidize their outgoings. What happens when that equity is spent and they are left in the situation where their outgoings are even higher now that they rent than they were when they owned?

The only answer that anyone has come back with is that they can go on housing benefits. Great, so now we all pay for their accomodation and they become a burden on the state. Is that what you are advocating?