Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Gers
    • By Gers 18th May 19, 9:32 AM
    • 7,304Posts
    • 49,741Thanks
    Gers
    Right to Buy flat warning
    • #1
    • 18th May 19, 9:32 AM
    Right to Buy flat warning 18th May 19 at 9:32 AM
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/may/18/a-terrible-shock-council-flat-owner-bill-tustin-estate

    So often there are members who ask about buying a flat from their local council with a view to 'securing their future'.

    This article shows the other side.
Page 1
    • csgohan4
    • By csgohan4 18th May 19, 9:40 AM
    • 5,901 Posts
    • 3,867 Thanks
    csgohan4
    • #2
    • 18th May 19, 9:40 AM
    • #2
    • 18th May 19, 9:40 AM
    not surprised and in some ways people don't see the cons and only the £££ to make off tax payers.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they come on here about being mis sold on this
    "It is prudent when shopping for something important, not to limit yourself to Pound land/Estate Agents"
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 18th May 19, 9:42 AM
    • 22,344 Posts
    • 21,140 Thanks
    AdrianC
    • #3
    • 18th May 19, 9:42 AM
    • #3
    • 18th May 19, 9:42 AM
    "Onuoha bought his flat on the Tustin estate in Peckham in 2004 using right to buy. Back then, the flat was valued at £93,000 – it’s worth about £250,000 now. In 2010, he moved out of the property and started letting it out, as it was not big enough for his growing family."

    "For those leaseholders who live in their property, the council has offered to buy their home for 40% of its market value and offer them a secure tenancy.
    ...
    Southwark is also offering to buy back properties of both residents and landlords at full market value."


    So whatever happens, nobody's going to have to move home*. He gets to crystallise his £157,000/15yr capital growth. If he wasn't letting it, he'd have the opportunity to become a secure council tenant again, with a small capital growth on top of getting the original purchase price back.

    Ohnoes. How terrible for all concerned.

    Edit:
    * - except his private-sector tenants, obvs...
    Last edited by AdrianC; Yesterday at 10:22 AM.
    • diggingdude
    • By diggingdude 18th May 19, 10:20 AM
    • 771 Posts
    • 994 Thanks
    diggingdude
    • #4
    • 18th May 19, 10:20 AM
    • #4
    • 18th May 19, 10:20 AM
    The thing that disgusts me most is the renting of right to buy properties
    House owner as of 27.3.2019
    Free Tumble drier fund £44 (March) £88.04 (April)
    • Lioness Twinkletoes
    • By Lioness Twinkletoes 18th May 19, 11:01 AM
    • 1,491 Posts
    • 5,314 Thanks
    Lioness Twinkletoes
    • #5
    • 18th May 19, 11:01 AM
    • #5
    • 18th May 19, 11:01 AM
    Yeah, this is a non-story. It's a no brainer that such extensive works are going to cos a small fortune. Freeholders have a responsibility to maintain their blocks. Leaseholders, when they sign the lease, are agreeing to pay a share. Sadly a lot of leaseholders don't read the lease - all they see are £££££.

    I have no sympathy for this man. He;ll make a killing if he sells it back - at full market value. It's a joke that the Council sold it for a pittance and will buy back at full market value. One wonders then, if they put it back into housing stock....can the next tenant also buy it for a (slightly larger but still heavily discounted) price?
    Last edited by Lioness Twinkletoes; Yesterday at 11:04 AM.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 18th May 19, 1:48 PM
    • 22,344 Posts
    • 21,140 Thanks
    AdrianC
    • #6
    • 18th May 19, 1:48 PM
    • #6
    • 18th May 19, 1:48 PM
    The thing that disgusts me most is the renting of right to buy properties
    Originally posted by diggingdude
    225 flats in the estate. 22 privately-owned. So only 10%.

    20 of 22 privately-owned flats let. 2 of privately owned flats owned for <5yrs.
    Reckon there might be a correlation there?
    • SnooksNJ
    • By SnooksNJ 18th May 19, 4:44 PM
    • 747 Posts
    • 1,293 Thanks
    SnooksNJ
    • #7
    • 18th May 19, 4:44 PM
    • #7
    • 18th May 19, 4:44 PM
    "Onuoha bought his flat on the Tustin estate in Peckham in 2004 using right to buy. Back then, the flat was valued at £93,000 – it’s worth about £250,000 now. In 2010, he moved out of the property and started letting it out, as it was not big enough for his growing family."

    "For those leaseholders who live in their property, the council has offered to buy their home for 40% of its market value and offer them a secure tenancy.
    ...
    Southwark is also offering to buy back properties of both residents and landlords at full market value."


    So whatever happens, nobody's going to have to move home*. He gets to crystallise his £157,000/15yr capital growth. If he wasn't letting it, he'd have the opportunity to become a secure council tenant again, with a small capital growth on top of getting the original purchase price back.

    Ohnoes. How terrible for all concerned.

    Edit:
    * - except his private-sector tenants, obvs...
    Originally posted by AdrianC
    It was appraised at £93K so could that be before the discount?
    • Marvel1
    • By Marvel1 18th May 19, 6:02 PM
    • 4,148 Posts
    • 4,606 Thanks
    Marvel1
    • #8
    • 18th May 19, 6:02 PM
    • #8
    • 18th May 19, 6:02 PM
    Onuoha bought his flat on the Tustin estate in Peckham in 2004 using right to buy. Back then, the flat was valued at £93,000 – it’s worth about £250,000 now. In 2010, he moved out of the property and started letting it out, as it was not big enough for his growing family.
    How convenient after the 5 years, no sympathy from me. I find it hilarious.
    • markin
    • By markin 18th May 19, 7:06 PM
    • 271 Posts
    • 301 Thanks
    markin
    • #9
    • 18th May 19, 7:06 PM
    • #9
    • 18th May 19, 7:06 PM
    "and says it saved up work to do in one package to take advantage of economies of scale"


    So surly he only owes a share only from when he bought it, with future costs of major repairs put aside from the day it was built, and even then he may have been paying monthly or yearly maintenance that they have been 'saving up'?

    Well that's how it should be anyway, You can bet the cost per flat is overly inflated.


    30k per flat would be 6,750,000 over 225 flats.
    Last edited by markin; Yesterday at 7:10 PM.
    • Norman Castle
    • By Norman Castle 18th May 19, 7:09 PM
    • 8,110 Posts
    • 6,928 Thanks
    Norman Castle
    How convenient after the 5 years, no sympathy from me. I find it hilarious.
    Originally posted by Marvel1
    As hilarious as the councils housing department having to fund the remaining 90% of the £27m.
    Don't harass a hippie. You'll get bad karma.

    Never trust a newbie with a rtb tale.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 19th May 19, 7:22 AM
    • 22,344 Posts
    • 21,140 Thanks
    AdrianC
    It was appraised at £93K so could that be before the discount?
    Originally posted by SnooksNJ
    Good point.
    • AnotherJoe
    • By AnotherJoe 19th May 19, 7:58 AM
    • 14,189 Posts
    • 16,873 Thanks
    AnotherJoe
    The thing that disgusts me most is the renting of right to buy properties
    Originally posted by diggingdude
    Add on top of that disgust that the council will buy it back ! So council tenants are paying for that !
    Please dont criticise my spelling. It's excellent. Its my typing that's bad.
    • Lioness Twinkletoes
    • By Lioness Twinkletoes 19th May 19, 10:01 AM
    • 1,491 Posts
    • 5,314 Thanks
    Lioness Twinkletoes
    30k per flat would be 6,750,000 over 225 flats.
    Originally posted by markin
    It is likely that leaseholders apportionment will be calculate via Rateable Value and not 'per flat' although this does depend on what is stated in the lease

    "Rateable value – This apportionment method uses the now defunct local authority rates system that was once used to calculate what is now termed ‘Council Tax’. It involves charging the leaseholder by comparing the ‘rateable value’ of an individual dwelling with the combined rateable value of all the individual dwellings within the building. For example, if the rateable value of all the flats in a building comes to 5,000, then somebody with a flat which has a rateable value of 250 should pay 5% of the total costs for the building"
    • Norman Castle
    • By Norman Castle 19th May 19, 11:49 AM
    • 8,110 Posts
    • 6,928 Thanks
    Norman Castle
    Add on top of that disgust that the council will buy it back ! So council tenants are paying for that !
    Originally posted by AnotherJoe
    Council tenants won't be paying extra for either the work or buying back neighbouring properties. The costs will be covered by rental income and funded from the housing revenue account.
    Don't harass a hippie. You'll get bad karma.

    Never trust a newbie with a rtb tale.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,831Posts Today

6,571Users online

Martin's Twitter