House price crash?

HugoSP

IMO the answer to 2nd home owners is to give them tax breaks for increased occupancy all the year round, and penalise them for lack of occupancy.

Think about it. There are a number of holiday cottages in my village. I spersonally don't subscribe to holiday letting as a means of generating income. One such cottage is next door to a house we own.

It is usually vacant during the winter months but teaming with activity during the summer. Last year was an exception. Due to the floods a friend of ours had to find emergency accomodation. We know the people that own the house and put her in touch with someone who had their phone number.

Result. This holiday cottage was let throughout the winter and the occupant continued to contribute to the local economy.

Yes, as a LL and property investor I am advocating use of the tax system, not to penalise holiday home owners but to engourge them with the stick and carrot to make sure their property is occupied at least 80% of the year.

I get asked on a semi regular basis if I have property available for a ffew weeks or a couple of months to tide people over. Unfortunately for those asking I have long term tenants in all our properties but those holiday cottages/homes could be put to very good use, generating income for the owners and helping the community at the same time.

lestamunda

mystic_trev wrote: »

I do wish people wouldn't use those as they're ASKING prices. I could ask twice as much as my homes worth, but would I get it? We know Property prices are still continuing to rise, but lookk at Halifax, Nationwide or Land registry prices.

But surely if the asking prices are unreasonable, then they would be going down as none would sell?

Yes some (and maybe all!?) houses are being sold at a discount to asking price, but if this discount was mega high, then surely asking prices would decrease in line with expectations?

At the end of the day, there will always be a for/against argument for all comments, if we truely knew what was going to happen, these chat forums would not exist!

Guy_Montag

SnowDog & Hugo, one suggestion I have is that planning permission must be obtained for a residential property to be turned into a holiday home either for private use or for let

SnowDog, we do not have a free market in roperty, if we did we wouldn't have the problem of young people in rural areas being priced out. They'd simply be able to buy a small parcel of agricultural land & build a home on it. So given that we do not have anything resembling a free market I have no qualms about restricting it further.

horace_2

Guy_Montag suggests that there is not a free market in housing because young people in rural areas are priced out which is somewhat extraordinary thinking IMO.

I would like to purchase a Bentley motor car but, sadly ,I cannot but that doesn`t mean the motor car market isn`t free, it simply means that I have insufficient disposable cash to make a purchase.
Similarly those `priced out` of the housing market should not bleet, they should simply set their sights lower.

Life is a !!!!! but that is the way free markets work.

As an aside, it appears our bespoke P.M. is to make an announcement this coming thursday concerning his resignation. It is also the same day that the BOE announce their decision on interest rates. Could Tony`s choice of this day be a way to `bury bad news`?
Thank goodness I rent and am not encumbered by a mortgage.

horace

tomstickland

horace wrote: »

Guy_Montag suggests that there is not a free market in housing because young people in rural areas are priced out which is somewhat extraordinary thinking IMO.

I would like to purchase a Bentley motor car but, sadly ,I cannot but that doesn`t mean the motor car market isn`t free, it simply means that I have insufficient disposable cash to make purchase.
Similarly those `priced out` of the housing market should not bleet, they should simply set their sights lower.

How much lower should they set their sights? Cardboard boxes are quite cheap.

horace_2

How much lower should they set their sights? Cardboard boxes are quite cheap.

What is wrong with renting accomodation? Or is that rocket science?



h

Woby_Tide

horace wrote: »

What is wrong with renting accomodation? Or is that rocket science?



h

but historically people never rented, everyone has always owned property, everyone know the property market hasn't changed in centuries, thats why it's so easy to predict....


erm I'll just get my coat

stashmycash

Mr_helpful wrote: »

Perhaps you should move to North Korea. next you will be saying we cant have 2 cars or even 2 kids.

Not at all. Only that I think people who can afford more than one house should pay more.

CFC

stashmycash wrote: »

Not at all. Only that I think people who can afford more than one house should pay more.

I'd like to do away with public spending schools and social workers, or reduce my tax as a childfree and put up taxes for those with kids to cover the cost and not disadvantage those of us with no or one child. I think that those who can afford more than one child should pay more.

Bet you're not quite so keen on that one are you....?

defender_of_the_weak

Where did the idea that people have always owned property come from. Up untl the sixties the majority of the population rented, often in very poor conditions with slum landlords. The centre of cities up and down the country have been transformed by property ownership.

As for the original question regarding a crash, there has only really been the one crash in the last 20 years and the economies of the time were a million miles away from the current circumstances. A correction maybe, but if people regard property as a home first then in time the correction will reverse and property will rise again. There is a very simple equation, we don't have enough houses and when supply does not meet demand the price will be inflated