Right To Buy from 2016!

Graham_Devon

pol-zeath wrote: »

We will be a nation of homeowners:)

[/B]

And our kids will be paying off the enormous debts the taxpayer took on to hand thousands of us homes at half price.

pol-zeath

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And our kids will be paying off the enormous debts the taxpayer took on to hand thousands of us homes at half price.

Which they may at a later date inherit

Butti

Just googled it and I can't find any info on this "deal"..[/QUOTE]


That's because it has been knocked up between the big HAs in London and the Government. It has to be worked up and then legally challenged by councils yet....and there will be legal challenges. In effect it is theft.

Butti

pol-zeath wrote: »

We will be a nation of homeowners:)

[/B]

Only if you can afford a mortgage on 80% of Open Market Value.

Butti

pol-zeath wrote: »

Which they may at a later date inherit

Or may be living in as part of the private rented sector when they are later sold off, as most of Thatcher ' s RTB houses were.

michaels

Does it cost the taxpayer if people are in ha properties? Do they charge market rents? If not who is paying for the rent subsidy? Won't that subsidy be saved if the property is sold in exactly the same way as we save on subsidised rents every time a council house is sold?

Pobby

RTB was morally wrong. Clearly, at that time under Thatcher, it was a massive subsidy, which would have been more palatable if the funds from this were allowed to be spent on more housing.

So who is going to benefit from this. as GD says, this is a tax payer hand out. Still many will be in the position of having to rent in the private sector which in my mind is not as strictly controlled as it should be.

Just more petrol onto the fire of HPI.

Generali

Pobby wrote: »

RTB was morally wrong. Clearly, at that time under Thatcher, it was a massive subsidy, which would have been more palatable if the funds from this were allowed to be spent on more housing.

So who is going to benefit from this. as GD says, this is a tax payer hand out. Still many will be in the position of having to rent in the private sector which in my mind is not as strictly controlled as it should be.

Just more petrol onto the fire of HPI.

All that happened though was that people moved from subsidised rent to subsidised mortgage. I have never understood why a particular group of people should be in a privileged position when it comes to renting.

Butti

pol-zeath wrote: »

I don't understand what the difference is with Council properies RTB why is it different to HA?
I am not complaining about others being subsidised by tax credits - only the one's that intentionally work less hours to maximise their entitlement.

Council houses were built with taxpayers money. They were a public asset with public debt attached too. Council's get a huge amount of their funding from Government so they can be forced to do things like sell their houses.

Housing Associations are private companies almost all charities. They own assets - houses. These are not public assets. Until the last budget they had a 10 year business plan with 1% above inflation rent increases. George Osborne had agreed this with them and they borrowed against their asset base and business plans so they could build more properties. They had good loans because there was certainty.

Now we are almost certainly moving into a period of less building and soon no grant. The current contribution of 25% grant will disappear. The plan is that this money will be 'taken' from sales of high value council housing and given to the housing associations. HAs funding costs will go up, their credit rating has already gone down, as a result they will build less.

They are selling out because at least this way they get to dictate some of the terms. It's looking great if you think 20% off a property is affordable.

Property experts have called the whole thing unworkable.

Butti

michaels wrote: »

Does it cost the taxpayer if people are in ha properties? Do they charge market rents? If not who is paying for the rent subsidy? Won't that subsidy be saved if the property is sold in exactly the same way as we save on subsidised rents every time a council house is sold?

The taxpayer subsidised the cost of building the asset and subsidises the rent through Housing Benefit if the tenant needs it. Sometimes they don't. Contrary to what the Daily Mail says, some aren't on benefits.

If you sell you have lost an asset you can borrow against.