Record numbers of young forced to live at home

greggymagic

Blacklight wrote: »

You have the choice to change your income. Alan Sugar didn't choose to stay at home and whine about having no money.

Possibly the worst argument I've ever read on this site.

borkid

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As soon as my children are earning, they will be charged rent to live at home.
This will probably be about 25% of their income.
We'll also be insisting that they put away 25% into saving.

This will be to help them to understand the cost of payments and incentivise them to move into their own accommodation (why stay at home when they can buy / rent / share themselves.

The thing they will not know until the time comes, is when they do buy, they will get that "home rent" back to put towards their mortgage.

This may mean that they stay at home for a few more years, but it will also ensure that they are better prepared for when they move out.

We said similar to my son when he was about to finish uni (2012). Going rate for his 2 rooms plus rota for all household chores ( we had the awful feeling he was getting too comfortable!). A couple of weeks later he had found a job and a place to live in London. When he was 23 he bought a flat in London, worked long hours to pay for it etc.

If he had stayed at home and paid rent we would have saved it for when he wanted a deposit for a house/ flat.

IveSeenTheLight

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Wouldn't you preferred that they saved 50%, then were able to get on the property ladder quicker; probably saving tens of thousands of pounds?

There is a fine line as to when it would be beneficial.
They will have a fund that I could release to them at 16 to buy their own place, but that doesn't mean they would be at a sufficient maturity level to do so.

A lot may depend if and where they go to university, as I would probably want to invest there to save on the rent

We also have BTL's at the moment which will hedge against over inflation to the point they cannot afford.

It's only a plan at the moment and they are only about to turn 5 and 3, so a long way off, where the situation may change.

I think the crux of it is that I want them to feel that they have self control to be able to afford the payments when compared to the rent they will be paying but also still able to save at the same time.

FR_262

The article consists of statistics and no real evidence of the causes behind the statistics is shown in the article.

The ONS '....suggests the trend of living at home might....'

Karen Gask says '........I think....'

"It's hard for young people to get on the housing ladder."
No it isn't. It's hard for some young people to get on the housing ladder.

Miss Gask says '..................choosing.....' Many young people have always 'chosen' to stay with family instead. Many have chosen not to.

The article hasn't identified any definite reasons for young people staying at home longer.

Perhaps parents are emotionally blackmailing their children into staying? Perhaps we've raised a generation of children who love their parents so much they 'choose' to stay with their family.

I'm not saying they are, of course, just that the article give statistics without backing up the reasons behind the statistics.

Prothet_of_Doom

If you Look on spareroom.co.uk, you will find that a double room with ensuite and access to the kitchen, with all bills and wifi, in someone's house or flat is not beyond the financial limits of a 20 year old earning NMW. And that includes London.

It may mean they have to share with a nutter landlord, it may mean they can't afford the luxuries they have become used to, but they can afford to leave home if they wanted.

JencParker

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As soon as my children are earning, they will be charged rent to live at home.
This will probably be about 25% of their income.
We'll also be insisting that they put away 25% into saving.

This will be to help them to understand the cost of payments and incentivise them to move into their own accommodation (why stay at home when they can buy / rent / share themselves.

The thing they will not know until the time comes, is when they do buy, they will get that "home rent" back to put towards their mortgage.

This may mean that they stay at home for a few more years, but it will also ensure that they are better prepared for when they move out.

Well I hope things have improved when your children are earning because I can assure you that 50% of a typical graduate salary is not enough to cover the cost of shared living in the capital! My (graduate) children both lived at home and paid a realistic contribution as well as their share of chores. They also saved a substantial amount of their salary. I did not have to insist on it as I had raised them properly to be aware of their finances, which, they had already managed for the 3/4 years they were at university!

Still does not make it possible for many to afford to live independently in London

PS - why are you waiting until they are earning to teach them the value of money and saving?

FR_262

Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »

If you Look on spareroom.co.uk, you will find that a double room with ensuite and access to the kitchen, with all bills and wifi, in someone's house or flat is not beyond the financial limits of a 20 year old earning NMW. And that includes London.

It may mean they have to share with a nutter landlord, it may mean they can't afford the luxuries they have become used to, but they can afford to leave home if they wanted.

That 'nutter landlord' is the parent whose child has left home to live with another 'nutter landlord'.

I know, let's all swap children when they reach 18!

Not being sarky there, just taking an idea to an extreme.

I'm a landlord and have a house of multiple occupancy (HMO) in which there is one young man who has made his room his home.

My rooms BTW start at £63 inc bills, broadband and cleaning. So young people can afford to move out if they want to. Got to have a job though, but hat's always been the case.

Thrugelmir

Record numbers of young forced to live at home

Perhaps they have less of an obsession with property ownership than their parents. Considering they are likely to be working until their 70. No need to rush to get on the ladder.

Nikkster

Woo hoo! I'm still young :j :beer:

kabayiri

People adapt to changing social conditions. I fail to see why this is always a bad thing. Lots of countries aspire to having a mobile and flexible workforce.

I wonder if we might see more housing built to accommodate multiple living groups? We should relax planning controls to allow more expansion into lofts or bigger extensions.