Energy Price Guarantee No Longer 2 years just 6 months at current level

Mstty

Whilst I agree this has strayed from the original title the good thing here is that the people are interacting are actively thinking about what increased energy costs mean for them in 6 months time.

I do know friends and family that can only just cope with the current levels of energy prices with their current income and expenditure. With inflation and increases in interest rates they have little choice but to look at their biggest asset as a way out. They have little to no rainy day fund.

So it really all is related and as others have said a very emotive subject.

We have moved on average every 3-4 years, (adding value above market rises with cost effective changes) so we are less emotive about the house we are in and always looking for the next project and step up. Don't get me wrong we had to step down a far way only 3 years ago to build ourselves up again due to a bad business investment so we don't see houses the same way as everyone else. They are a tertiary pension pot to us.

BooJewels

Indeed @lisyloo - my long term plans didn't involve my husband dying at 62 - our future would have been pretty decent if it had gone according to plan - but you just cannot foresee all potential scenarios when you first start thinking of the long term - which most people do too late already.  Luckily we had made enough sensible decisions early on that have proved critical for where I find myself now.

EssexHebridean

Mstty said:

<snip>
2) Not glib and not fortunate per se infact for our very first house at that time we had 5 different jobs between us. No University degrees just starting at the bottom and working up and moving on and working up and moving on. In fact still now we run two separate side (very small sidelines) with our jobs as we are not done yet. Hard work very hard work but I don't take offence someone calling it glib, lucky or fortunate if that is how it comes across.
<snip> 

This is something I have to be mindful of when referring to being mortgage free on here - we ARE fortunate to be in the position we are, but we also had to work extremely hard and go without a fair amount for a few years to make it happen so soon. Having made those sacrifices though has now paid off to leave us in a position where yes, we are fortunate - and particularly at this point in time - to not have that monthly financial commitment.  The fact that someone has worked hard for a position of financial privilege doesn't stop it being privilege - and "financial privilege" doesn't always simply refer to Little Lord Wilberforce in his stately home who has inherited everything from Mama & Papa and never worked a day in his life!  

We deliberately decided to buy at a level where IF interest rates sky rocketed, we could still afford to meet payments. Having seen my parents come dangerously close to losing our home in the 1980's at the 15%+ point, I was petrified of ever risking being in that position myself. The home we are in as a result is by no means big, but it's "big enough" for the two of us, and so although we have from time to time mused on the idea of moving, we've not felt the need to (apart from when the upstairs neighbours flood us yet AGAIN!). Someone else will choose to "move up the ladder" - whether because they need to (increasing family size, relocation to an area where less money = more home) or simply because they want to (Want a garden, parking space, garage, no upstairs neighbours to flood them...) The upside of this is simplicity, reduction in stress (apart from the flooding) and saving on moving costs - the downside however is that realistically we'll never be in the position of having a half-million pound plus asset! 

Have to agree with Brewerdave about the off-topic aspect of this thread now - although I do think it's been a worthwhile discussion that just hopefully might have opened a few peoples eyes to problems they had no idea were out there potentially lurking in their future! 

Returning to the OP then - with all the changes at Westminster, presumably we have to wait for a few weeks now to find out if in fact this scheme WILL be ending in April or whether that could change again, and hopefully also if it IS still to end, what assistance might be available to those who will then be struggling more than they are even now. 

deano2099

BooJewels said:

Mstty said:

It is the nature of forums for someone to take extreme offence to anything said.

I too am an advocate of downsizing when the time is right or when financial hardship takes hold. It is one of the most sensible decisions to make when all you money is tied up in an asset as an example we could sell up quickly for £600k downsize to a bungalow with solar/battery just up the road brand new £350k ASHP designed and EPC B. Even with all fees and getting someone to move everything for us that means pocketing over £200k.

Not offence, in this case but amusement really.  It's very easy to make glib comments about potential downsizing when you're sitting pretty in a £600k+ house with all that equity under your belt.  It's slightly different when your house is worth £120k and there aren't any bungalows under £350k in the area and the only level living is a top floor apartment the size of a postage stamp at £140k. 

Bearing in mind that the conversation originally started from the suggestion that old people living in drafty old multiple bedroom family homes should downsize to free up the larger home for families and reduce their own energy and associated costs.  Some of us suggested that it really wasn't that straightforward for everyone - albeit it might well be for others.  I say that as someone living in what was a family home, after child is now a homeowner of his own and my husband died.  It's something I have considered, but it's neither fiscally or emotionally sensible.  But neither is my hand out asking for help, I can pay my own bills.

No-one is suggesting people move out of a £120K two-bed house. The suggestions for downsizing came about because:
a) people living along or as a pair in larger houses were struggling to pay the bills and wanted "support" and
b) a suggestion that those people should be moving to smaller homes to free up larger homes for families.

I agree with the first, and not the second. If you're in a £120K house then obviously downsizing isn't going to help. If you're in such a house and can't pay the bills because of the energy crisis then I have a huge empathy for that and think that that is where the government support should be targeted. These people should not end up cold or without power. But if you're living alone in a 4/5-bed house, and you can't afford to heat all that space... yes, you should downsize. You don't need the state help. I'm not saying you *have* to move. If you can afford it then continue to enjoy it. If you can't but your kids will help you out then that's fine too. But if you can't afford the bills you're living beyond your means and may have to move. That's the cold reality. 

mmmmikey

ariarnia said:

OH also keeps pointing out they have to have an election the latest jan 2024 so there might not be any support from april - oct but then they might bung another general 400 at everyone for next winter right before they start campaigning. or the other lot might promise the world to get in depending on how they think of there chances. 

Yes indeed. All we actually know at the moment is that as things stand the EPG in it's current form is going to end in April. We really don't know what will replace it. If you can afford it, it's prudent to budget on the basis of a pessimistic forecast, but I suspect there are all kinds of reasons, both political and economic, why something fairly widespread but targeted to avoid heating swimming pools will take it's place. Quite apart from the political reasons you outline, in my view there's a lot to be said for a simple flat payment scheme that runs over the coldest months. And given that was what Rishi decided on last time, may well be what he does again. But in truth I've found that my crystal ball doesn't work very well looking that far into the future

deano2099

EssexHebridean said:

You've made the points I would have done - thank you. I'm out now - the sheer lack of empathy from some posters on this thread is breathtaking. I can only assume that they are fortunate enough to not yet be at the age themselves where they have elderly family members with health issues and diminishing mobility - as you clearly know it certainly opens your eyes to the problems elderly people face (not least that they are so clearly considered as second class citizens without any right to consideration by some in society!) once you are in a position where you have to deal with those problems on behalf of people you love dearly. I would wish them luck when they DO reach that point, but unless outlooks change considerably I suspect it is their nearest and dearest that need the luck! 

It's not a lack of empathy at all. I have empathy for people in difficult positions, where I suspect we differ is I have no more empathy for a older person facing these challenges than I do for anyone else facing these challenges. It sucks when your standard of living drops, it sucks when you can't afford to actually enjoy life. It sucks to be living somewhere you don't like. It sucks if you're 70 and it sucks if you're 27 in a house share, or 23 and a single mum of two in a tiny flat. 
Here's the thing: I'm not treating the elderly like second-class citizens. I'm treating them the exact same as everyone else. I'm positioning their needs as no more or less valid than the needs of someone in their 20s. The sort of advice me and others are giving is the exact same advice that someone in their 20s or 30s would be given when posting on here and no-one would bat an eyelid.
This is hard for some to handle as they've lived for so long in an environment where the elderly were given a special status. That is being eroded across society now, I think in part because we're now in a generation where nearly all the elderly *didn't* fight in the war.
The reality is lots of people are going to have to make hard choices and sacrifices over the coming years. "The elderly" don't get a free pass out of that just by virtue of age. Unfortunately they're in the same sinking boat as the rest of us.

ariarnia

deano2099 said:

BooJewels said:

Mstty said:

It is the nature of forums for someone to take extreme offence to anything said.

I too am an advocate of downsizing when the time is right or when financial hardship takes hold. It is one of the most sensible decisions to make when all you money is tied up in an asset as an example we could sell up quickly for £600k downsize to a bungalow with solar/battery just up the road brand new £350k ASHP designed and EPC B. Even with all fees and getting someone to move everything for us that means pocketing over £200k.

Not offence, in this case but amusement really.  It's very easy to make glib comments about potential downsizing when you're sitting pretty in a £600k+ house with all that equity under your belt.  It's slightly different when your house is worth £120k and there aren't any bungalows under £350k in the area and the only level living is a top floor apartment the size of a postage stamp at £140k. 

Bearing in mind that the conversation originally started from the suggestion that old people living in drafty old multiple bedroom family homes should downsize to free up the larger home for families and reduce their own energy and associated costs.  Some of us suggested that it really wasn't that straightforward for everyone - albeit it might well be for others.  I say that as someone living in what was a family home, after child is now a homeowner of his own and my husband died.  It's something I have considered, but it's neither fiscally or emotionally sensible.  But neither is my hand out asking for help, I can pay my own bills.

No-one is suggesting people move out of a £120K two-bed house. The suggestions for downsizing came about because:
a) people living along or as a pair in larger houses were struggling to pay the bills and wanted "support" and
b) a suggestion that those people should be moving to smaller homes to free up larger homes for families.

I agree with the first, and not the second. If you're in a £120K house then obviously downsizing isn't going to help. If you're in such a house and can't pay the bills because of the energy crisis then I have a huge empathy for that and think that that is where the government support should be targeted. These people should not end up cold or without power. But if you're living alone in a 4/5-bed house, and you can't afford to heat all that space... yes, you should downsize. You don't need the state help. I'm not saying you *have* to move. If you can afford it then continue to enjoy it. If you can't but your kids will help you out then that's fine too. But if you can't afford the bills you're living beyond your means and may have to move. That's the cold reality. 

that's the problem you seem to be missing.

when you are in a larger house (in the mil's case a three bed semi) worth around £130-160k and you can't afford to downsize to a more 'affordable' and efficient smaller house because of the local market conditions and limitations like accessibility. not every larger house is worth half a million pounds and its the more run down houses that will be the most expensive to heat (because insulation and home improvements are expensive and grant eligibility is often based on claiming some form of benifits). 

if you have a large house that needs a lot of work and is inefficient to heat then its very possible all you will be able to afford is a small house or flat that needs a lot of work and is ineffeicnt to heat and you still wont have the money to have the work done to it. AND you have the extra cost of moving and if moving away from the area paying for help that your family currently provides. 

ariarnia

wittynamegoeshere said:

ariarnia said:

wittynamegoeshere said:

I can't possibly know what that solution is for some random other person, but if it was me in that position then I'd be taking ownership of the problem and solving it.

and again you suggest that people who are pointing out your magic solution of selling a house to cut down on heating bills wont work for every situation are somehow not taking ownership of the problem or trying to solve it... and you wonder why people are objecting to your post. 

your solution is fine (for those it works for). your patronising and judgemental posts are the problem 

And your constructive solution is...?

(Other than me shutting up and everyone just complaining about how terrible everything is)

going back to what i said however many 10s of pages ago. make suggestions that you think will help BUT believe someone if they say a specific suggestion wont work for them and then put some actual effort into thinking about other options. not pushing the same thing again and again disagreeing with the person about if its a solution in there situation. and (i can't believe i have to type this) but if someone goes to the effort of explaining at length why somethng wont work then dont insult them by suggesting they just need to put some effort into it and stop being so defeatist. you know. trying to actually help. not criticise or patronise. 

there is no one solution for everyone. and theres a lot more than one option of moving home that might help. for the mil we paying for her to have a new gas boiler and radiators fitted (she currently only has gas to cook) but theres no plumber available until next year so in the mean time we are diy-ing where we can replacing her curtains with heavier ones filling gaps and having her spend more time at our house (where she can also spend time with her grandchildren) all things that work for our situation but we would never expect to work for others without first ASKING about there situation 

mmmmikey

There comes a point in any debate where the best thing to do is walk away from it

ariarnia

mmmmikey said:

There comes a point in any debate where the best thing to do is walk away from it

your right. one for the ignore list or my doctor will be complaining about my blood pressure next visit i think