Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
State to buy troubled householders property, a solution??

Neillgb
Posts: 574 Forumite
Not sure if this has been raised elsewhere but thought it reasonable to chuck this hot potato back into the fire in the current climate.
Speculation on other threads is that the government are considering some sort of assistance for troubled householders. Therefore why not just purchase the property and place it in state ownwership, giving the tenants an Assured Tenancy?
This would keep a roof over peoples heads and, assuming prices recover, not cost the taxpayer anything in the medium/long term.
Simplistic post, fraught with difficulites I know, but any thoughts?
Speculation on other threads is that the government are considering some sort of assistance for troubled householders. Therefore why not just purchase the property and place it in state ownwership, giving the tenants an Assured Tenancy?
This would keep a roof over peoples heads and, assuming prices recover, not cost the taxpayer anything in the medium/long term.
Simplistic post, fraught with difficulites I know, but any thoughts?
0
Comments
-
Not sure if this has been raised elsewhere but thought it reasonable to chuck this hot potato back into the fire in the current climate.
Speculation on other threads is that the government are considering some sort of assistance for troubled householders. Therefore why not just purchase the property and place it in state ownwership, giving the tenants an Assured Tenancy?
This would keep a roof over peoples heads and, assuming prices recover, not cost the taxpayer anything in the medium/long term.
Simplistic post, fraught with difficulites I know, but any thoughts?"Do not regret growing older, it's a privilege denied to many"0 -
What is the mega inflated bubble value of UK residential property worth again?
£4 trillion pounds odd or something like that isn't it?
Yeah.. good idea. The Government and tax payers will just buy houses from massively over indebted mortgage owners at near top whack prices. All those £280,000 slave box apartments in my City should be snapped up first, with the proceeds going to owner or back to bank for the mortgage repayment.
It's a capitalist country - a market. Not a nationalise the property market after 10 years of HPI, including 4 years of extreme super-charged HPI thrown in, putting us on the top of the biggest house price crash this country has ever known.0 -
If the owners can't service their debts, GET EM OUT !!!
That is a market. It's clear in the papers you sign for mortgage...
YOUR HOME MAY BE REPOSSESSED IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP REPAYMENTS ON YOUR MORTGAGE.
If people thought they were clever chaining themselves to a mortgage of x8 their earnings, or self-cert lied, or now have like £250,000 (A QUARTER MILLION FGS) mortgage and dodgy job outlook, or have equity released and enjoyed holidays and new cars - then get em out if they can't pay.
There is an entire generation closed out from the market that has been waiting to get on at levels which are affordable. They've been denied the opportunity due to the madness of previous generations and the slowing trickle of FTB sheeple pushing themselves to extremes to buy.0 -
The problem with social housing, that probably caused it to be sold off, was it was aging. It costs more to maintain an older property.
One of the things that the council could do with maintaining property was be assured it was all in the same area, of the same type and contained the same fittings. They could therefore know their stock and keep spares of things.
This would not be the case with random purchases made all over the place, of all types, with unknown fittings/fitments and electrical/plumbing routes.
It would be prohibitively expensive to maintain these houses and the supporting infrastructure to manage the stock would escalate out of control.
If a council were to consider buying property to manage (and they aren't interested in this as a lot already handed them over to HAs) the properties would need to all be in the same block/estate and they'd also need the detailed building/building plans to even start to get a grip on how things were coupled together.
I've not read any of these stories. But I suspect any rescue package would be severely limited to tiny groups of people that fit very tight criteria, as is the case in the US.
Never trust a headline.0 -
Sorry to harp on about it but the housing market is just one of many markets.From time to time markets get ``bubbly`` and then there is a correction. In some markets there is regulation and rightly so. I am sure that if the government had chosen, the housing market could have been much more sustainable.G. Mc Broon has enjoyed massive tax revenues from hpi. It`s no good him and the rest of Nu Tory,ooops sorry, Nu Labour banging on about helping out borrowers who can`t keep up the repayments. There is no real way they can afford to do this.0
-
There would be an uproar. While there are people with houses struggling, there are MORE people WITHOUT houses who have always struggled, and either couldn't or didn't pay silly prices in the scramble to the top, the scramble to own a better house than anybody else they knew.
Some of it was driven by desperation. Some by greed. A lot was driven by the ability to lie and cheat to speculate.
No Govt should, or is in a position to, settle the gambling debts of people who thought they were about to make a lot of free and easy money.
A house is a home.
IMHO houses should stay about the same price over the years, so people have a chance of getting one, keeping it and moving into a larger one if they can.
Here's my tip for houses in the future: buy small. Running costs are the crippler, not the buying cost. I've known quite a few single people now who could buy a house - but then couldn't afford to keep running it with the increasing bills. Look at how food/fuel is increasing now. Buy small, cheap to run. Buy what you need, not the house you think is bigger/better than some smug git at work ... because that's what's helped get things where we are now.0 -
If the owners can't service their debts, GET EM OUT !!!
That is a market. It's clear in the papers you sign for mortgage...
YOUR HOME MAY BE REPOSSESSED IF YOU DO NOT KEEP UP REPAYMENTS ON YOUR MORTGAGE.
If people thought they were clever chaining themselves to a mortgage of x8 their earnings, or self-cert lied, or now have like £250,000 (A QUARTER MILLION FGS) mortgage and dodgy job outlook, or have equity released and enjoyed holidays and new cars - then get em out if they can't pay.
There is an entire generation closed out from the market that has been waiting to get on at levels which are affordable. They've been denied the opportunity due to the madness of previous generations and the slowing trickle of FTB sheeple pushing themselves to extremes to buy.
Problem might be that Brown might find a way to KEEP EM IN! at the taxpayers expense!!
Yes people will abuse the system, but anything that Brown does will be abused. At least in state ownwership the poor old taxpayer will have some bricks and mortar. Would be quite fun to see some of the 'middle classes' in social housing too:rotfl: .0 -
Where would all this vast amount of money come from? oO0
-
Where would all this vast amount of money come from? oO
Seriously though there would have to be very strict criteria and perhaps a cap to funding. Also don't forget the rental income from the properties, not a lot i know but something. Perhaps enough to cover maintenance/admin etc.
From the potential new tenants point of view the rental would presumeably be less than their mortgage payments which would enable them to address the problem of the other unsecured debts they have run up.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 348.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.3K Spending & Discounts
- 240.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 617K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 175.6K Life & Family
- 253.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards