Opinion on Right to buy

FTBAngst

Hi,
Not really an advice question, more a pondering.
I’ve always understood right to buy as a way for people and families to stay in the their homes with the security of having bought it, especially in a time when it was ‘normal‘ for most people to own their own home. I’m not sure that’s totally correct but that’s just always been my understanding of it. But now as House prices are higher than salaries/ affordability and people in their 20s-30s are unable to afford a property, the right to buy feels almost unfair. Is that an unjust opinion? How does it stack up against help to buy?

da_rule

Right to buy and help to buy cannot really be compared.

Right to buy is only available to secure tenants of Councils (and housing associations under the preserved right to buy). Whereas help to buy products are available to a lot of buyers.

Personally I think you are far more secure being a secure tenant than owning the property. If you own it and don’t pay the mortgage then the lender will take it off of you. If you own it and don’t insure it and it gets damaged then you have to pay to repair it or sell it cheaply. If it’s leasehold you’ll have to pay service charge, which given that a lot of Council stock is aging can be very expensive.

If you are a secure tenant and the house falls down the Council will rehouse you. If, as you get older, your needs change they will adapt the property or move you somewhere more suitable. They will take care of repairs. You will get new bathrooms and kitchens on a fairly regular basis. I can never fathom why someone would forfeit this by buying the property.

Obviously, in Scotland it has been scrapped altogether and the maximum discount has been drastically reduced in Wales and Northen Ireland as councils simply can’t replace the housing stock using the right to buy revenue which is creating problems.

FTBAngst

da_rule wrote: »

Personally I think you are far more secure being a secure tenant than owning the property. If you own it and don’t pay the mortgage then the lender will take it off of you. If you own it and don’t insure it and it gets damaged then you have to pay to repair it or sell it cheaply. If it’s leasehold you’ll have to pay service charge, which given that a lot of Council stock is aging can be very expensive.

If you are a secure tenant and the house falls down the Council will rehouse you. If, as you get older, your needs change they will adapt the property or move you somewhere more suitable. They will take care of repairs. You will get new bathrooms and kitchens on a fairly regular basis. I can never fathom why someone would forfeit this by buying the property.

Obviously, in Scotland it has been scrapped altogether and the maximum discount has been drastically reduced in Wales and Northen Ireland as councils simply can’t replace the housing stock using the right to buy revenue which is creating problems.

That’s a really interesting point. If it’s less advantageous to the tenant to buy and creating problems with the housing stock, why is it still in place in England?

I feel like Scotland really has a better control over their housing / property than England

Murphybear

da_rule wrote: »

Right to buy and help to buy cannot really be compared.

Right to buy is only available to secure tenants of Councils (and housing associations under the preserved right to buy). Whereas help to buy products are available to a lot of buyers.

Personally I think you are far more secure being a secure tenant than owning the property. If you own it and don’t pay the mortgage then the lender will take it off of you. If you own it and don’t insure it and it gets damaged then you have to pay to repair it or sell it cheaply. If it’s leasehold you’ll have to pay service charge, which given that a lot of Council stock is aging can be very expensive.

If you are a secure tenant and the house falls down the Council will rehouse you. If, as you get older, your needs change they will adapt the property or move you somewhere more suitable. They will take care of repairs. You will get new bathrooms and kitchens on a fairly regular basis. I can never fathom why someone would forfeit this by buying the property.

Obviously, in Scotland it has been scrapped altogether and the maximum discount has been drastically reduced in Wales and Northen Ireland as councils simply can’t replace the housing stock using the right to buy revenue which is creating problems.

We live in an over 60s development. We get a new kitchen/bathroom every 20 years. Is that fairly regular?

paddedjohn

Murphybear wrote: »

We live in an over 60s development. We get a new kitchen/bathroom every 20 years. Is that fairly regular?

I own my own home, my kitchen is about 20 years old and due for replacement but it's me who will have to foot the bill.

seven-day-weekend

Murphybear wrote: »

We live in an over 60s development. We get a new kitchen/bathroom every 20 years. Is that fairly regular?

How often do you think owner/occupiers have new kitchens and bathrooms?

seven-day-weekend

A secure Council tenancy is the most secure form of tenancy there is. Having said that, I cannot blame people for wanting to buy a much-loved home.

However, I don't agree with the discounts, think only older Council stock should be available for RTB, and the money should be used to build more housing.

I know very little about Help to Buy, so can't comment on that.

Davesnave

FTBAngst wrote: »

That’s a really interesting point. If it’s less advantageous to the tenant to buy and creating problems with the housing stock, why is it still in place in England?

That's a political question. The Tories introduced it, believing that home-owning people would tend to espouse Tory values, but when Labour were in power, they didn't remove it. Some might say that was because Tony & Co were just 'Tory-light.'


Anyway, you can see that it's properly a question for the 'Debate...' board. Just by saying this I'll probably have annoyed someone, ruining the peace and harmony that usually prevails here....

da_rule

Murphybear wrote: »

We live in an over 60s development. We get a new kitchen/bathroom every 20 years. Is that fairly regular?

It’s not bad considering you’re not paying for it. Most Councils will allow tenants to do their own replacements if they want to pay for it themselves (and why not, it is their home). This is still a better replacement rate than some private owners can afford. Also, if anything breaks and becomes unsafe/unusable it’ll be replaced.

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

A secure Council tenancy is the most secure form of tenancy there is. Having said that, I cannot blame people for wanting to buy a much-loved home.

However, I don't agree with the discounts, think only older Council stock should be available for RTB, and the money should be used to build more housing.

I know very little about Help to Buy, so can't comment on that.

New properties (whether newly built or newly purchased by the Council) are difficult to buy on right to buy due to the ‘cost floor’. This essentially means that the Council can reduce the discount (potentially to nil) if the cost of buying/building that property exceeded or was equal to the current market value. The Council can also deduct the costs of expensive building works to the discount.

Right to buy income can only be used to purchase or build new housing stock. However, when you are selling properties (after discount) for £20k, £30k etc you are limited to what you can buy/build, so one for one replacement is pretty hard.

Norman_Castle

da_rule wrote: »

Personally I think you are far more secure being a secure tenant than owning the property. If you own it and don’t pay the mortgage then the lender will take it off of you. If you own it and don’t insure it and it gets damaged then you have to pay to repair it or sell it cheaply. If it’s leasehold you’ll have to pay service charge, which given that a lot of Council stock is aging can be very expensive.

If you are a secure tenant and the house falls down the Council will rehouse you. If, as you get older, your needs change they will adapt the property or move you somewhere more suitable. They will take care of repairs. You will get new bathrooms and kitchens on a fairly regular basis. I can never fathom why someone would forfeit this by buying the property.

Renting can be considered dead money compared to buying. Mortgage payments are an investment which can be recovered but rent is spent money. Repairs are normally cheaper than rent when averaged over time. A secure tenancy and the possibility to move if needs change is good but there will be very limited choices of available properties compared to the open market.


Remaining as a social housing tenant is ideal for some but for others buying is better.

Norman_Castle

da_rule wrote: »

Right to buy income can only be used to purchase or build new housing stock. However, when you are selling properties (after discount) for £20k, £30k etc you are limited to what you can buy/build, so one for one replacement is pretty hard.

I believe a large proportion of income from sales is returned to central government reducing further the available funding for replacement properties.