How there haven't been more riots yet I don't know

Windofchange

The corruption and greed continues at pace in London.

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/every-flat-in-a-new-south-london-development-has-been-sold-to-foreign-investors

Cornucopia

Where is the corruption there?

Also, I know the area very well, and I can tell you that that article is hysterical and factually incorrect in places.

PasturesNew

Cornucopia wrote: »

.... I can tell you ....

But then you didn't.

Gambler101

Can prospective rioters try living in various countries around the globe, and then on their return they might see just how good we have it here even if your "poor"

Cornucopia

PasturesNew wrote: »

But then you didn't.

I told him that the article was hysterical and inaccurate in parts, I just didn't say why.

Windofchange

So please do enlighten us

Cornucopia

Windofchange wrote: »

So please do enlighten us

The Heygate is just the latest area of Inner London to encounter gentrification. In its case, this has come through the demolition of poorly designed, poorly maintained social housing blocks and the re-use of the land for new build projects.

What was there before had a reduced market value as a consequence of what it was and where it was (in pre-gentrification Elephant & Castle).

Their use of emotive language does not help. Landlords at that development are no more "creaming off" rent than any other landlords anywhere else.

The bottom line is that the prices reflect the desirability of the new properties in their new environment. The price is determined by the excess of demand over supply, and there are only really two solutions - allow the market to ration by price, or artificially hold the prices down and ration the properties in some other way.

Windofchange

Cornucopia wrote: »

The Heygate is just the latest area of Inner London to encounter gentrification. In its case, this has come through the demolition of poorly designed, poorly maintained social housing blocks and the re-use of the land for new build projects.

What was there before had a reduced market value as a consequence of what it was and where it was (in pre-gentrification Elephant & Castle).

Their use of emotive language does not help. Landlords at that development are no more "creaming off" rent than any other landlords anywhere else.

The bottom line is that the prices reflect the desirability of the new properties in their new environment. The price is determined by the excess of demand over supply, and there are only really two solutions - allow the market to ration by price, or artificially hold the prices down and ration the properties in some other way.

Ok buddy, so you reckon 80k for a one bed flat in Zone 1 / 2 is fair value? You reckon that guy got a good price? Imagine you're that bloke. You get 80k, the cheapest flat goes for 550k. Come on. You've presented nothing but blah blah blah market value. What if someone came along tomorrow and took your home for a quarter of it's value and said tough !!!!?

economic

just another silly post by BagofWind without ALL the facts.

how much did the owners buy it for in the first place? did they pay market value at their time of purchase or was it heavily discounted?

lisyloo

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok buddy, so you reckon 80k for a one bed flat in Zone 1 / 2 is fair value? You reckon that guy got a good price? Imagine you're that bloke. You get 80k, the cheapest flat goes for 550k. Come on. You've presented nothing but blah blah blah market value. What if someone came along tomorrow and took your home for a quarter of it's value and said tough !!!!?

Theres quite a bit of difference between a run down badly designed flat in a social tenant block and a newly designed, brand new luxury flat in a prestigious area.

Cornucopia

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok buddy, so you reckon 80k for a one bed flat in Zone 1 / 2 is fair value? You reckon that guy got a good price? Imagine you're that bloke. You get 80k, the cheapest flat goes for 550k. Come on. You've presented nothing but blah blah blah market value. What if someone came along tomorrow and took your home for a quarter of it's value and said tough !!!!?

I don't recall saying it was fair. In fact, I presented the alternative which would be to charge less for the new flats and to ration them in some other way. Indeed, some of the local schemes have done exactly that, with requirements for buyers to have "links" with the local area, such as working there.

The bottom line is that £550k for Elephant & Castle is way over the top. At the time of the redevelopment, £250K would have been more realistic (for a good flat on the open market, not a run down flat on the Heygate Estate). Should people in this situation be given a "leg up" to a market price for their next property at public expense? I don't know that answer to that question, but I do know that it is intrinsically a moral rather than economic one.

Councils such as Southwark find themselves in a difficult situation - especially where they are both the Lessor/Landlord of the Estate Flats and the Planning Authority. If there isn't already a protection there against conflict of interest, then there should be. I'm not convinced that there are any easy answers, though.