Further pressure for rental regulation...this time, from RICS

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

One of the major problems is that new builds are burdened by extra taxes ( the sort that tuggedtoast doubtless approves of) which make newbuilds expensive compared to the existing stock

I am not experiencing that.
I'm able to build a property 1.5x the square footage of similar properties for the same price.

Not proposing this is simlar throughout the country, but certainly I'm seeing (and it has been the same in the past) that you get more for your money building.

The issue has always been access to land to do so.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

New-Builds have received some negative press over the quality of the new-builds, however.....

I am in the process of finalising a self build property and am finding the new regulation to be positive improvements on the previous regulations.

Build quality (i.e. craftmanship) and regulation are entirely different matters.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I am not experiencing that.
I'm able to build a property 1.5x the square footage of similar properties for the same price.

Not proposing this is simlar throughout the country, but certainly I'm seeing (and it has been the same in the past) that you get more for your money building.

The issue has always been access to land to do so.

please explain
you are saying that a new build in your area will be 50% bigger than other local older property for the same price?

where is that then ? postcode would be good.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Build quality (i.e. craftmanship) and regulation are entirely different matters.

I understand that, but we are seeing regulation tighten, potentially forcing better craftsmanship.

As an example, there is now a requirement to improve the property efficiency, one of which is an air tightness test

Essentially the requirement is to pressurise the property and ensure it loses less than 10 cubic feet of air at 50 Pascals (IIRC).
A recent Grand designs home focussed on this and managed to achieve 1.06 cubic feet loss.
Without any change to their craftsmanship, they achieved 2.04 and 3.something from their first two properties tested after the regulation came in.

Not sure if it's just Scotland, but there are also SAP requirements which means that if the property has a certain carbon footprint, it must have a certain measure of green measures (solar panels, heat pumps, wood burning stoves etc) to reduce the carbon footprint.

makeyourdaddyproud

How long can it go on ignored? As stated before, the more people that turn to renting, the more pressure there will be to properly regulate the whole sector.

And for how much longer is there to be endless beauracracy on any market that can allow rental businesses to foster and grow out of early teething problems without endless regulation? I have always been an advocate of a degree of lassez faire markets such as lettings, which is enjoying a boom, so that someone somewhere can build a business without jobsworth government beauracrats sniffing their every move.

People like the OP will just regulate, regulate and regulate, leading to an endless tirade of form filling, membership conforming and restrictive practice that will simply make letting a property much harder.

I'm thinking of starting a lettings agency because of the lack of regulation: they generate money and fast growth for their owners.

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

please explain
you are saying that a new build in your area will be 50% bigger than other local older property for the same price?

where is that then ? postcode would be good.

It will.
I must confess, I have had to move slightly further away (7 miles)to secure the land (available land does not come along very easily).
They are however in process of building a dual carriageway to link the area

That said, here is a property near where I am building
http://www-k.aspc.co.uk/cgi-bin/public/LiveProperty/301313?ID=FAPOJEJL#picture

When you look at the Home report Single Survey, it identifies the property as being 143 square meters

The property I am going to build is a modified Ronaldsay 239.2 square meters. The modification includes pulling the stairs forward increasing the landing size and what was the bathroom sizethe
http://www.caledonia-homes.co.uk/plan%20and%20detail/ronaldsay.htm

Kit price £59,583.00, all in build price (includes warrants, planning, architects) just under £200k (includes provisions for kitchens / bathrooms / ensuites etc).

I've also managed to secure land at a very reasonable price £100k (£40k less than the site next door), is at the top of a hill overlooking the hillside on two sides.

With landscaping / flooring costs, I'm estimating my socts to be circa £325k and have added £10k for further contingency.

As you can see, 100 square meters more than a similar property price.
My builder also reckons onced completed and valued, it's likely to be worth £100k more because of the extra space, but we'll wait till I get it valued.

Assume that is enough detail.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It will.
I must confess, I have had to move slightly further away (7 miles)to secure the land (available land does not come along very easily).
They are however in process of building a dual carriageway to link the area

That said, here is a property near where I am building
http://www-k.aspc.co.uk/cgi-bin/public/LiveProperty/301313?ID=FAPOJEJL#picture

When you look at the Home report Single Survey, it identifies the property as being 143 square meters

The property I am going to build is a modified Ronaldsay 239.2 square meters. The modification includes pulling the stairs forward increasing the landing size and what was the bathroom sizethe
http://www.caledonia-homes.co.uk/plan%20and%20detail/ronaldsay.htm

Kit price £59,583.00, all in build price (includes warrants, planning, architects) just under £200k (includes provisions for kitchens / bathrooms / ensuites etc).

I've also managed to secure land at a very reasonable price £100k (£40k less than the site next door), is at the top of a hill overlooking the hillside on two sides.

With landscaping / flooring costs, I'm estimating my socts to be circa £325k and have added £10k for further contingency.

As you can see, 100 square meters more than a similar property price.
My builder also reckons onced completed and valued, it's likely to be worth £100k more because of the extra space, but we'll wait till I get it valued.

Assume that is enough detail.

maybe I misunderstand

are you taliking about new build in general or self build?

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

maybe I misunderstand

are you taliking about new build in general or self build?

I am contracting a builder to build a home for me.
It is a new-build property that needs to conform to the regulations and planning restrictions currently in place.

I did say

Originally Posted by IveSeenTheLight
I am not experiencing that.
I'm able to build a property 1.5x the square footage of similar properties for the same price.

It is a new build property that is less expensive than existing stock

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I am contracting a builder to build a home for me.
It is a new-build property that needs to conform to the regulations and planning restrictions currently in place.

I did say
[/I]
It is a new build property that is less expensive than existing stock

I'm not how sure this relates to England;
in scotland are you charged infrastructure levies and 'affordable housing' levy?

Callie22

Road_Hog wrote: »

Yes, several groups that want to cut a cut of the market, will apply political pressure. They will get their regs and their profit from it.

Two things will happen, landlords will pass on the cost to the tenant.

Accidental/small landlords will withdraw from the market. They are the easy going ones, that allow smokers and pets.

You will be left with the professional landlords that don't allow anything, are up to date with all the regs and make sure they have rent reviews every 6 months.

Enjoy.

The absolute worst LLs I've ever rented from have been accidental ones. They don't want to rent their houses out so resent a tenant's presence from day one. They umm and ahh about putting the house on the market so every meeting is peppered with vague threats of eviction because they 'might want to sell soon'. They won't let tenants do anything to the property because they 'might want to sell soon'. They won't maintain the property because they 'might want to sell soon' ...