A change in the way people own property?

chucknorris

GreatApe wrote: »

But the data shows that only about 25% of private renters rent for 10 or more years.

That means 96% of people buy their own home or get given a social house. Only 4% of the public rent long term.

That 4% is an irrelevant minority. And even in that 4% some want to rent long term like a friend of mine that rents a 1 bedroom flat in zone 1 for the weekdays but owns a family home in the Midlands

You and your crash cheerleader friends don't understand this simple fact. You think 20% rent and that's a massive 5.5 million households. But the vast major of those renters are temporary renters who move on to ownership or social

When I first arrived in London, I wanted to buy a house, but I didn't know anything about London, it would have been stupid to rush in and buy in one of the many areas that I knew nothing about. so I rented for 6 months (as an aside I was ripped off, and swore that I would never stoop so low myself when I eventually bought my investment properties, which was always the plan).

Additionally, we plan to spend our winters in Southern Spain and/or the Algarve. But not only do we not know the regions yet (see above re London) also the long term winter rentals are very good value. Although I am continually pulled towards buying, as it means we would get exactly what we want (rarely achievable when you want to rent with a dog).

badmemory

I think some boomer's children are in for a serious disappointment. It has often been those boomer's parents (started work during or immediately post war) who actually handed down the inheritances. We boomers unless seriously well off have been dealing with extremely low interest rates, accompanied by crashing annuity rates from their pension savings. When our depleted savings have then financed a care home for just a couple of years, hopefully they will have enough left to pay for the funeral.

lisyloo

Inheritance is certainly not a racing certainty for normal people (I’m not talking about the rich).
We are in the situation at the moment where MILs care is free as FIL is living in the family home, but if he needs care (looking likely) then they will both become private payers at £825 per week each (that’s a bristol price not London price). Deducting their pension income that would be £70k per year, so won’t take many years for any inheritance to reduce substantially.

No one can plan on this 30 years ahead.

I am not complaining at all as I think their home should be used to pay for care, my point is that for normal people with an average home, there are no guarantees on an individual basis.

BIL was hoping for an inheritance and was quite dissapointed when his mother went into a home. Not a good place to be when you don’t wish the best for your parents.

I have always felt that these inheritances would come later in life so it’s nice to see that confirmed. Many of us hope to be retired with mortgages paid off by 61.

GreatApe

lisyloo wrote: »

Inheritance is certainly not a racing certainty for normal people (I’m not talking about the rich).
We are in the situation at the moment where MILs care is free as FIL is living in the family home, but if he needs care (looking likely) then they will both become private payers at £825 per week each (that’s a bristol price not London price). Deducting their pension income that would be £70k per year, so won’t take many years for any inheritance to reduce substantially.

No one can plan on this 30 years ahead.

I am not complaining at all as I think their home should be used to pay for care, my point is that for normal people with an average home, there are no guarantees on an individual basis.

BIL was hoping for an inheritance and was quite dissapointed when his mother went into a home. Not a good place to be when you don’t wish the best for your parents.

What you describe is a minority case.
The majority do leave something significant and kids have 2 sets of parents/parent-inlaws and also four sets of grand parents

lisyloo

So are you saying you think individuals should base their personal financial planning on that?

Whatever the averages say it’s a huge risk for an individual to base their lifetime financial planning on isn’t it? (I’m excluding the rich).

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

What you describe is a minority case.
The majority do leave something significant and kids have 2 sets of parents/parent-inlaws and also four sets of grand parents

Out of this significant wealth, how much of it is primary residence property and how much of the significant wealth is gifted vs. inherited?

I suspect by far most of the wealth is in primary residence and private pensions (> 80%) and that most of the wealth is inherited and not gifted (>90%). But i am just guessing.

Whilst this wealth would be useful for someone in their 60s (when they expect to receive it), i am not sure how someone who is 30 with parents who are still alive and healthy can say they are lucky to have wealthy parents when by far most of the parents wealth wont be seen and able to be used till their parents die.

lisyloo

GreatApe wrote: »

What you describe is a minority case.
The majority do leave something significant and kids have 2 sets of parents/parent-inlaws and also four sets of grand parents

What do you call significant?
Average home price is £224 (land registry Oct 2017)
So £94k when divided by 2.4.
Are we talking about the same thing?

economic

lisyloo wrote: »

So are you saying you think individuals should base their personal financial planning on that?

Whatever the averages say it’s a huge risk for an individual to base their lifetime financial planning on isn’t it? (I’m excluding the rich).

I don't think GreatApe is saying that. What i think he is saying is that despite the media and politicians going on about the wealth divide across generations, it is actually the younger generations who will be looking to inherit vasts sum of money from their parents. So if we tax the older generation massively for their wealth, we are only hurting the vast majority of younger generation as they will stand to inherit less.

economic

lisyloo wrote: »

What do you call significant?
Average home price is £224 (land registry Oct 2017)
So £94k when divided by 2.4.
Are we talking about the same thing?

Wealth is not just homes.

It is:
- pensions
- cash
- stocks
- jewellery
- businesses
- bitcoin
- xmas jumpers

worried_jim

I’ll have paid my mortgage off in ten years at 53. My parents will be well into their 80’s so in “that” window and at 55 I’ll have access to 35 years pension savings so I’ll go from being a bill paying wage slave to potentially having a whole new life in front of me with lots of cash. I’m not planning anything (except the colour of my Porsche) but am aware that a lot will change almost overnight.