Right To Buy Discount By Husband

lighting_up_the_chalice

sandsni wrote: »

If the regulations allowed people to benefit from more than one discount then why would there be a question about it on the form? It would be irrelevant.

If that's your argument then, if the form was filed in correctly, there would be no issue. However, if the form was filled in incorrectly, it would be fraud.

The regulations remain the same.

mountainofdebt

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

And, given the opportunity, wouldn't you?

You'd be stupid not to!

And this is why,until they stop the rtb there is no point in building any more council houses.

lighting_up_the_chalice

mountainofdebt wrote: »

And this is why,until they stop the rtb there is no point in building any more council houses.

We have a housing shortage. Any house-building programme should be encouraged, whatever the ultimate outcome. If you cannot understand that, then you cannot understand the current housing crisis.

mountainofdebt

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

We have a housing shortage. Any house-building programme should be encouraged, whatever the ultimate outcome. If you cannot understand that, then you cannot understand the current housing crisis.

I understand it perfectly.

By not doing something to the RTB scheme but building more public sector houses, all the council is doing is subsidising a property purchase - and the arguments for building ever more houses would just continue.

And whilst we're at it, perhaps the btl market should be looked at as well.

lighting_up_the_chalice

mountainofdebt wrote: »

I understand it perfectly.

By not doing something to the RTB scheme but building more public sector houses, all the council is doing is subsidising a property purchase - and the arguments for building ever more houses would just continue.

And whilst we're at it, perhaps the btl market should be looked at as well.

If we build more houses, we address the crisis... regardless of tenure. New build SH units are almost always let without RTB/RTA.

gunner786

sandsni wrote: »

I don't think anyone is suggesting someone shouldn't take advantage of the RTB discount IF THEY ARE ENTITLED TO IT. But if someone has already used the discount to buy a house they lived in at the time then do they have the right to use a tax-payer-funded discount to buy a second house? There's another thread running ATM where the RTB buyer wants to use the RTB property as a let and buy another house. I thought the whole idea of RTB was to allow people who couldn't afford to buy on the open market to own their own home, not to set up a letting business.


Presumably the OPs OH willingly chose to be a part of the RTB on his parents' house. If he simply stumped up the cash to allow his parents to buy a house for their old age then fair enough, but if he used his name and entitlement to apply for the discount then why should he be entitled to a second discount?

stumped up cash for parents not for himself. he wasnt a tenant he was just on the moetgage papers

rpc

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

The POLICY may be wrong... and I won't argue with that... But taking advantage of it isn't, surely.

Just like all those large companies arrange their accounting to take advantage of perfectly legal mechanisms to vastly reduce the amount of tax to pay. After all, if it is allowed then you must be daft not to do it.

Nobody here has a problem with that either, do they!

Yorkie1

gunner786 wrote: »

stumped up cash for parents not for himself. he wasnt a tenant he was just on the moetgage papers

By being on the mortgage, he is party to the purchase and thus the discount.

But, at the end of the day, the only people who can answer this are the new lenders. The full facts must be disclosed and then the lender can make up its mind.