Right to buy to be extended

Graham_Devon

Cameron will announce tommorow that right to buy will be extended if the tories come to power in May.

Under the new policy, around 800,000 people in housing associations will be offered the full discount, up to £72,000 in England and up to £102,000 in London.

The extension to Right to Buy will be funded by forcing councils to sell their most valuable properties when they become empty.

So a bit of a double whammy really.... the sell off of council properties to fund the the sell off of housing association property.

The majority (according to the news) of those in the housing industry have warned against this "controversial policy"

Housing associations have also labelled the policy as unworkable.

However, the cabinet are apparently "very excited" to follow Thatchers flagship policy and believe it will bring optimism to the tory campaign.

Apparently the old policy, when they ramped up RTB and pledged 1 house will be built for every house sold has actually only provided £27,000 to councils per house sold.

My thoughts? The tories have lost the plot.

CLAPTON

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Cameron will announce tommorow that right to buy will be extended if the tories come to power in May.

Under the new policy, around 800,000 people in housing associations will be offered the full discount, up to £72,000 in England and up to £102,000 in London.

The extension to Right to Buy will be funded by forcing councils to sell their most valuable properties when they become empty.

So a bit of a double whammy really.... the sell off of council properties to fund the the sell off of housing association property.

The majority (according to the news) of those in the housing industry have warned against this "controversial policy"

Housing associations have also labelled the policy as unworkable.

However, the cabinet are apparently "very excited" to follow Thatchers flagship policy and believe it will bring optimism to the tory campaign.

Apparently the old policy, when they ramped up RTB and pledged 1 house will be built for every house sold has actually on provided £27,000 to councils per house sold.

My thoughts? The tories have lost the plot.

The supply of properties is unchanged ; only the ownership changes

however, I see no good reason for a massive subsidy to be given to people who are already heavily subsidised.

padington

I quite like the honesty of the Tories, they're basically promising to rob the poor on benefits that can't afford to buy a house and share the new income with everyone else that can, especially if they earn enough to commute or were lucky enough to enjoy cheap state subsidised rent for many years whilst hoarding a fat load of cash or have divorced parents that own a million pound pad each.

It's bold that's for sure.

ukcarper

If what Graham posted is right what an idea remove 2 houses from the affordable sector sell one probably to a BTL landlord then pay LHA to his tennant at a much higher rate than housing benefit.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

If what Graham posted is right what an idea remove 2 houses from the affordable sector sell one probably to a BTL landlord then pay LHA to his tennant at a much higher rate than housing benefit.

It's right.

This policy is on the front page of many papers tommorow.

And as for the council house sell off, it's in the fourth paragraph here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3037686/A-new-right-buy-revolution-35-years-Maggie-s-visionary-policy-Cameron-pledges-property-dream-reality-1-3million-families.html

The subsidy will be funded by forcing councils to sell off their most expensive properties when they become vacant.

BBC news appear to be ripping it apart right now.

stator

Damn. When I read the thread title I thought they might have picked up on my idea to extend Right to Buy into the private sector, where it might actually do some good.

fordcapri2000

Well you can count on present day Tories to stick to their strengths..

BRIBERY

vivatifosi

As I said on the who will win thread, it's mad.

CLAPTON is right, the supply is unchanged. So why take a scarce resource out of housing association hands?

We've recently been in the position of handing back a council house due to the death of a close family member. We know from talking to the council that they could fill it more than 100x over, so why change supply going forward? Why pay more to private landlords to house the same families?

Also, how do they force the housing association to sell? What if someone had gifted their house to an association to benefit future tenants in perpetuity, could that actually be sold against the donor's wishes?

It just doesn't make sense at this point in time.

cepheus

why take a scarce resource out of housing association hands?

simply because the Tories will compromise the housing sector and wider economy to suit their own political and private interests. this is another reason why they must be removed from power.

according to the tax expert Richard Murphy: ‏

Cameron's Right to Buy offer is a potential £100 billion tax giveaway. How does that make sense?

Tory plan to GIVE AWAY council houses dismissed as 'bonkers' by housing experts

Waiting lists for social housing have grown thanks to a failure by successive governments to build enough council houses to replace those sold off under Right to Buy.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-plan-give-away-council-5150760#ICID=sharebar_twitter

CLAPTON

vivatifosi wrote: »

As I said on the who will win thread, it's mad.

CLAPTON is right, the supply is unchanged. So why take a scarce resource out of housing association hands?

We've recently been in the position of handing back a council house due to the death of a close family member. We know from talking to the council that they could fill it more than 100x over, so why change supply going forward? Why pay more to private landlords to house the same families?

Also, how do they force the housing association to sell? What if someone had gifted their house to an association to benefit future tenants in perpetuity, could that actually be sold against the donor's wishes?

It just doesn't make sense at this point in time.

well lets try it out

go out into the street and ask people :

'would you like a heavily subsidised house for the rest of your life : it comes maintenance free and is a quality home with adequate number of rooms for your needs'?

Obviously there will be a huge waiting list for the property.
The fact the council /HA can fill the property many times over just shows it is massively under priced.

The whole system of social housing is corrupt and corrupts the people that live there.

We have a shortage of homes for all the people ; the solution is to build more and not to reserve some for a undeserving class.

wotsthat

May as well just transfer the tenancies straight to a BTL landlord - seems rather inefficient requiring a property to first have to be transferred to a poor person who has to sell it to realise the cash to spend on shiny things.