Government should help those without bank of mum and dad

nearlyrich

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I couldn't afford to buy in a decent part of London over 30 years ago.

So unsure why it should be any different now.

I used to walk to work. But to buy my first property moved from the Reigate\Redhill area to Biggin Hill. Then commute back in.

Now everybody expects to be given something on a plate. Not make do and adjust to the available options.

I am in my 50s with almost 30 years of owning a house behind me I still can't afford to buy in London and I have a decent job and 100% equity in the house we live in. I had a Mum and Dad they didn't have a bank I occasionally borrowed a quid for a loaf and a pint of milk when the mortgage etc took all my cash in the early years of my mortgage. I am a Mum with 2 young adults one on the property ladder with a bit of temporary help and one working abroad so renting currently.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The aim would be to bring a level playing field to the housing market for FTBs.

If that is the aim, what would be the consequence to the market?

IveSeenTheLight

Seabee42 wrote: »

maybe we should restrict buy to let, mass immigration and also build more homes. All three have an impact.

There is a shortage of rental properties. BTL only partially filled a gap when the RTB scheme was utilised.

There is statistical proof that immigration benefits the UK.

The one factor you do have correct is the need to build more homes.

If only people would petition / canvass for this to be put in place it might resolve a lot of the debates in here.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

There is a shortage of rental properties. BTL only partially filled a gap when the RTB scheme was utilised.

There is statistical proof that immigration benefits the UK.

The one factor you do have correct is the need to build more homes.

If only people would petition / canvass for this to be put in place it might resolve a lot of the debates in here.

how did the RTB change the number of properties availbale: renter simply became owners : more owners less renter

the statistical 'proof' is fraudulent as it is based on a flawed 1930s invention (of GDP) that misses out lots of costs and makes actual costs in gdp.

danielhermann

Definitely not.Owning a house is not a prerogative. In a free economy, a person has to earn and spend according to his earnings. A person can very well rent a house till he can afford to buy one. All of us have gone through this stage. Only when he is financially independent and sound and has a ready stream of future cash flows should he think of buying a house.

Besides, assuming for a moment, this scheme is approved. How will the government keep track of when the house is actually sold to recover its dues? What if the people went bankrupt? What if on account of poor maintenance, the condition of the house deteroirates?

Seabee42

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

There is a shortage of rental properties. BTL only partially filled a gap when the RTB scheme was utilised.

There is statistical proof that immigration benefits the UK.

The one factor you do have correct is the need to build more homes.

If only people would petition / canvass for this to be put in place it might resolve a lot of the debates in here.

Actually there is no statistical proof that immigration benefits the UK. Who is the UK exactly?

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Plymouth is but one area of Devon. There are some seriously deprived areas in Plymouth too....most, incidentally, set for major improvements.

While what you say about the house prices is true, most will not want to buy there. A lot of those places go to investors whom then tap into the council for tenants.

There will be pockets of cheap houses up and down the country, at a guess, for the very same reasons as to why the pockets are cheap in Plymouth.

If you want to buy a house and you only have seventy grand at your disposal then, by definition, you'll be looking at the areas where other people don't want to live.

If the Government gave the poorest £50,000 towards a house then all that would happen is the lowest house price would rise from £70,000 to £120,000.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

If the Government gave the poorest £50,000 towards a house then all that would happen is the lowest house price would rise from £70,000 to £120,000.

Well, that's not quite all that would happen.

The other thing that would happen is more houses getting built and/or coming on the market, as the pool of proceedable buyers increases and rising prices trigger a supply response.

Whereas with restricted credit and fewer proceedable buyers house building falls to the lowest levels in 100 years and dramatically worsens the housing shortage.

As we've seen happen since 2007...

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well, that's not quite all that would happen.

The other thing that would happen is more houses getting built and/or coming on the market, as the pool of proceedable buyers increases and rising prices trigger a supply response.

Whereas with restricted credit and fewer proceedable buyers house building falls to the lowest levels in 100 years and dramatically worsens the housing shortage.

As we've seen happen since 2007...

Yes but everything I have ever seen tells me that these sorts of interventions into the market simply don't work.

Much better to make it easier to build houses. There are loads of unemployed builders, apparently, that would love to be out there building. More houses = lower prices (long term) + more employment. Every one's a winner.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well, that's not quite all that would happen.

The other thing that would happen is more houses getting built and/or coming on the market, as the pool of proceedable buyers increases and rising prices trigger a supply response.

Whereas with restricted credit and fewer proceedable buyers house building falls to the lowest levels in 100 years and dramatically worsens the housing shortage.

As we've seen happen since 2007...

I would say that currently there is no lack of mortgages to allow people to buy the available supply plus we have a 'optimistic' swell of opinion that house prices are rising further inflating demand.

I see no significant benefit to stimulate the mortgage supply until the supply side issues are resolved as it will primarily cause increase in price rather than increase in new building.