2nd home somewhere on the South coast

northernsal

Well lets give NorthernSal what he/she really wants....

NorthernSal: In response to your OP to answer (and only answer) the question you posted....I recomend your parents purchase in Aldershot High Street. A lovely town in the South of England with a particuarly vibrant colourful ambience particuarly on a Friday and Saturday night.[/quote]

Ah bless you...is Aldershot High Street where you live????

Oh no... must remember you're a graduate with a 30k tax bill...that you felt the need to point out.....well gold medal for you:T

And also you need to re-read your post you DID direct venom at me.

you pretty much deserve the venom others are willing to throw at you on here.[/quote]

And yes..you've still got my sympathy I'm afraid....now would love to sit here and disagree all evening but feel this thread is getting rather childish....

Pez2

cheltenhamgirl wrote: »

A buy to let landlord who owns 80 properties is more detrimental to society than one person buying a second home if you're going to look at it like that. All I'm saying is that people don't have a 'right' to own their own house.

Has anyone said that it's their 'right'? All people want is a decent chance to own a home in the place where they have roots. We don't live in an ideal world and maybe most peple are going to have to accept that it's not going to possible for them in the current economic climate, but having the OP tell them that they're basically lazy, and should uproot themselves to another part of the country and work two jobs just because his/her parents want to spend the odd weekend on the south coast is rubbing salt into the wounds, don't you think?

IveSeenTheLight

oldMcDonald wrote: »

out.

I don't believe that (private rather than social) renting offers the same security that it once did, and this is why so many people are wanting to buy. Having spent many years myself renting privately, it was a nightmare. Several landlords tried to up the rent by a huge amount at the end of the rental period, one wasn't passing the money on to the mortgage company and they started to reposess whilst we were there, many feel that it is their property so they can let themselves in when ever they feel like it - regardless if they have notified you or even if you are there.....and as for getting the full 1 or 2 months deposit back.......

If you get one of the good, and sadly rare, landlords then renting can be a reasonable alternative to buying. Sadly, most of the landlords that I have had have not been good landlords.

You make some good points but hopefully with the new legislation coming in all the time (Registered Landlords, Tenancy Deposit Scheme etc) then this will tighten up the problems you had.

I am a landlord of two properties and always want to be good to my tenants in the hope that they are good tenants back to me.
It's worked so far

IveSeenTheLight

GavP wrote: »

Yep, that's right, sod everyone else!

With attitudes like this, it's no wonder this country's on the skids.

With attitudes like yours where will the country be in the future if they expect everything handed to them on a plate.

Yes its hard to get a property, yes its hard to get a mortgage, yes it costs a lot, but it can be done.

Speak to your parents or your grandparents and ask them about how life was and how they managed to get a mortgage. I bet it will be comparible with today.

The problem is that people expect everything. Many go out and get it done, many moan about how its not easy and do nothing

IveSeenTheLight

cheltenhamgirl wrote: »

OMG - I am getting very wound up. I'm a FTB and would desperately love to get on the ladder (although maybe i'll wait until the market's dropped, but hey, that's another thread;) ). HOWEVER, I am getting extrememly annoyed with all of these people who feel that they have a god given right to own a property. We don't! Rent somewhere. You do not have a RIGHT to own a house near where you live, and i'm not quite sure where you get that impression from. Just because our predecessors did, doesn't mean we can too.

Nobody has a god given right to buy a car - you either save up until you can afford one, you get hire purchase or lease one, or you use public transport. It's exactly the same with houses. And every other commodity.

People are perfectly entitled to spend their money on what they want if they've saved up - and yes - that may be to the detriment of you. However, if we're talking about people spending money to the detriment of others, maybe we should all stop and think about us buying cheap clothes, or tea-bags, or wood, meaning people are being displaced form their mud huts (which by the way they find perfectly adequate), or working their fingers to the bones for 8p a week. Is that not spending your money to the detriment of others?

:T :T :T :T :T :T :T :T :T

One of the best posts I've read on here. Well done

:T :T :T :T :T :T :T :T :T

ruggedtoast

The irony is that the more dessicated old codgers that pay a premium to move into these places the worse they become. Whole swathes of the South coast are becoming bizarre crosses between retirement villages and hoodie ridden sink estates. The more the retirees suck the life out of the area and price out working families the more asbo problems there are with remaining desperate teenagers who see no hope for their future.

It was exactly like this where I grew up around a bunch of intolerant fearful old curmudgeons who'd moved in from elsewhere,vetoed any new development in the town council, and spent the evenings locked away inside their properties because they were too afraid of bored teens prowling the streets after 5 to go out.

Frankly the miserable twilight world theyve created is about what they deserve.

Oh and by the way, not so long ago people were justifying slavery for no better reason other than that they had a right to spend their money. The ability to pay for something does not confer any moral right to do so. It is NOT up to the government to change things. Only gutless laggards making excuses for their own moral failings make this excuse. Governments are corrupt by default, its up to citizenry to lobby for change. If anyone thinks the current situation where housing basically deletes an entire generation is sustainable for a society with any chance of sustaining itself into the future, then they must be either blinded by their own greed or mentally incapable.

IveSeenTheLight

btloptingout wrote: »

The remainder of your post is utterly irrelevent as this is about a 2nd "holiday" property which will not be available for rent to a family.

If you read the thread the OP does mention it would be rented out and used as a holiday home.

What would be wrong with renting the place out and if there are any periods of lack of tenancy, jotting down the M6 for a break away?

IveSeenTheLight

btloptingout wrote: »

Someone will enjoy nothing more than purchasing your parents property off them in 5 years time for 30% less than they paid following the fallout of this credit crunch.

When they've lost 30% equity on both properties and have b*gger all left for retirement maybe they will thank you for forcefully standing up for their "rights" rather than providing an open-minded, objective and alternative view which would assist their decision making.

Good luck.....you need it.

What point is this post?
The OP stated they wanted to buy a place and retire to it in 15 years time?
Why would they buy now and sell in 5 years time?

It has absolutely no point whatsoever to the thread other than a poor attempt to try and justify your beliefs that they should not buy.

On a side note, EVEN if there is a house price reduction. Do you really believe they will have not recovered in 15 years time? If so take an historical look at other periods when house prices have "corrected"

SquatNow

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If you read the thread the OP does mention it would be rented out and used as a holiday home.

What would be wrong with renting the place out and if there are any periods of lack of tenancy, jotting down the M6 for a break away?

I'de just like to thank IveSeenTheLight for that. Not because it's practical, but because he/she has pointed out the total muppetry of the OP.

So what do his parents plan to do?

Live there in the summer and rent to some mysterious entity during the winter? Who wants to live on the south coast in the winter... it's a freeking holiday home.

or

Rent it out year round and order the tennant out for a week or 2 whenever they want to stay there.

or

Live there in the winter and rent it out in the summer.

or

Live in it some weeks and desperately hope to find someone to rent it in between.... except b&b will be cheaper!

Basically it's a lame !!! excuse to try to cover a complete lack of morals.

I agree with GavP: "just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean you should do it", although I think the words from the film are "they were too busy trying to work out if they COULD do something to ask themselves if they SHOULD"

IveSeenTheLight

Or how about rent it out to tenants and if they move on, pop down while it is re-advertised, spruce it up a bit and get it ready for the next tenants.

As they have cash they could have next to no mortgage so what if it was empty for a few months between tenants

Just make sure you dont get to know when it is empty so you can squat away in there.

P.S. no reply comments to my post # 72