C4 Dispatches - The British Property Boom

Jason74

Cornucopia wrote: »

And am I part of this problem being a BTL-owner, but not a "boomer"?

In a word, yes.

Cornucopia

Explain it to me.

ukcarper

Who you consider that home ownership in the UK peaked at 69% in 2001, was 50% in the 70s, rising to 68% by the end of the 90s and was 64% in 2011. I'm not sure where the anti BTL people on here think people who want or have to rent are going to live without BTL, especially when you consider the number of people in social housing has reduced from 31% in 1981 to 18% in 2011.

danothy

ukcarper wrote: »

Who you consider that home ownership in the UK peaked at 69% in 2001, was 50% in the 70s, rising to 68% by the end of the 90s and was 64% in 2011. I'm not sure where the anti BTL people on here think people who want or have to rent are going to live without BTL, especially when you consider the number of people in social housing has reduced from 31% in 1981 to 18% in 2011.

I think the position might be that if BTL is taken out of the equation then owner occupation becomes implicitly more achievable. Whether or not this would be the case, I do not actually know.

jjlandlord

danothy wrote: »

I think the position might be that if BTL is taken out of the equation then owner occupation becomes implicitly more achievable.

But millions would suddenly find themselves living under bridges.

Pointing the finger at BTL is nonsensical.

danothy

jjlandlord wrote: »

But millions would suddenly find themselves living under bridges.

Pointing the finger at BTL is nonsensical.

Naturally, if a landlord suddenly finds that they are no longer permitted to own a rental property then they will have no choice but to sell it, presumably those currently living in them will be the buyers. At least this is how I understand the expectation to be.

fairy_lights

I was slightly puzzled by the woman who had to move to the other side of London and said it would be difficult to see her family so often now they were 12 miles away...does it take a particularly long time to travel 12 miles in London? I would have thought it would be fairly quick on the tube.
It just seemed odd to me as someone who lives in a rural area and is used to travelling miles to get to work, visit family etc. I'd imagine the public transport is a lot better in London than it is out in the sticks so I just can't get my head around moving a few miles being a big deal.

jjlandlord

danothy wrote: »

presumably those currently living in them will be the buyers.

The vast majority of tenants either can't buy or don't want to buy for the time being.

Of course, forcing BTL landlords to sell would crash the market and presumably allow people to buy at bargain price.
But that would be a good ol' spoliation of private property in my book.
I don't think that anyone is seriously considering joining the North Korean club...

As said: Nonsense.

ukcarper

danothy wrote: »

I think the position might be that if BTL is taken out of the equation then owner occupation becomes implicitly more achievable. Whether or not this would be the case, I do not actually know.

Prices might well drop a little but rents would rise as the supply shrinks but as homeownership has never been above 70% there has and probably will always been a large number of people who couldn't or didn't want to buy.

mayonnaise

jjlandlord wrote: »

I don't think that anyone is seriously considering joining the North Korean club...

Never underestimate the crashoholics. Many of them have openly stated on here they wish the UK economy wrecked in order for them to bag a cheap house.