I disagree, as you may have guessed. The value of my house very much is relevant to my life should I ever, you know, want to get a loan or borrow against the equity from it.
And, yes, I would still have somewhere to live if I sold it, thanks anyway.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Housing in the UK
- Thread starter telstarbox
- Start date
- Status
I disagree, as you may have guessed. The value of my house very much is relevant to my life should I ever, you know, want to get a loan or borrow against the equity from it.
And, yes, I would still have somewhere to live if I sold it, thanks anyway.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I'm not sure that buy-to-let is that bad.
They provide housing and the kind of properties that BTLers buy tend to be more suited to people who are at the time of their lives that they want to rent.
BTL doesn't work well with family homes generally.
The problem is a supply problem, supply of houses. Also rates are too low.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well it's great for you that you own more than one house or whatever it is.
Most people don't and don't want to.
Neither do they want to borrow against equity, the idea for most people is to borrow the cost (or most of it) of the house and pay it back over 25 years, so that by the end of the term they are no longer paying interest and are living 'rent-free', so-to-speak.
People don't want to pay off most of their debt and then increase it. It all has to paid off at some point.
A home is a place to live in, not an investment, in most cases.
They provide housing and the kind of properties that BTLers buy tend to be more suited to people who are at the time of their lives that they want to rent.
BTL doesn't work well with family homes generally.
The problem is a supply problem, supply of houses. Also rates are too low.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well it's great for you that you own more than one house or whatever it is.
Most people don't and don't want to.
Neither do they want to borrow against equity, the idea for most people is to borrow the cost (or most of it) of the house and pay it back over 25 years, so that by the end of the term they are no longer paying interest and are living 'rent-free', so-to-speak.
People don't want to pay off most of their debt and then increase it. It all has to paid off at some point.
A home is a place to live in, not an investment, in most cases.
Drsatan
Established Member
The problem with buy to let, to a certain extent, is that buy to let landlords reduce the number of houses available to purchase for first time buyers. I'd certainly support restrictions on buy to let, such as prohibiting buy to let mortgages for houses under three years old, and possibly banning the issuing of buy to let mortgages in areas of very high demand.
Otherwise, I get the impression that there will be a mass extinction event of buy to let landlords who go bankrupt through not being able to repay their mortgages.
So you have spoken to most people then and know what they want when they purchase a house and not one of them wants the price to rise at all then?
If thats the case then they may aswell rent.
Johnuk123
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,800
You keep using generalisations that have no basis in reality.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,611
Which is great for you.
But most people are not in that situation.
For the vast majority of homeowners, if they sold up, they would not have anywhere to live.
They would either have to crash at friends places, rent or buy a new place. And the point that I think was trying to be made is that for most people, buying a new house costs more than what they would get from selling their current one (of course there are exceptions, if you are downsizing or have been lucky enough to own a house in an area of the country where prices are a lot higher than the rest of the country and are going to be moving to a cheaper area).
Last edited:
I'm not sure, even if it is a generalisation, it is too far from the truth. Whenever I have bought houses, the living aspects came first, and the possible increase in value came way down the priorities, if I considered it at all.
In fact, I think that the idea of your home as an "investment", which only really came to be pushed in the 80s or after, is a large cause of today's trouble. People's expectations are that the price of their house will rise substantially, so they are willing to borrow ridiculously compared with their salary (particularly as rates are ridiculously low). So a) more money is available, so prices rise to ridiculous amounts and b) the Bank of England is hamstrung, because it cannot raise rates (if it wanted) because of the difficulties caused to those who over-borrowed (though this aspect is inevitable, and cannot be put off much longer). We need to wean ourselves off cheap credit, in housing as in everything else, as it distorts all aspects of purchasing. A return to the idea that your home is simply somewhere to live, and you go for what you can realistically afford (and not demand the state provides affordable housing - another impossible myth) would be a good start.
What?
Most people do NOT have multiple homes. If they sold their home they would have nowhere to live.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,611
My naive view is that rented accommodation in countries where renting is more popular is probably of a better standard than many of the places available in this country. Of course I have no way of proving that, or knowing if it is indeed the case. Just a guess.
One question I do have, is for those who prefer to rent, what happens in old age where you no longer have your pay packet to pay your rent with? Obviously you have your pension and any savings, but surely renting would mean quite a significant expenditure that otherwise would not be there if you owned your home (as you would hopefully have paid off your mortgage by the time you retire). Or are people just better at managing the finances and saving (and so the money that would have been used to buy a house is just saved and used to pay rent in old age).
Is there also better security for tenants, the landlord can't take posession at the end of the term without reason? I'm not sure how long the lease would usually be for over there.
Last edited:
But most if not all people do not just sell their home for no reason without somewhere else to go on to. They either downsize or get somewhere bigger so its a really daft thing to say.
And yes, you do generalise. You keep claiming things about most people yet you have no idea about most people therefore you are generalising.
Unfortunately in areas of London and Kent I know well, buy to let landlords have moved into residential areas / family homes in a big way, and the results are not good.
It leads to a very transient population with the typical short tenancies in the UK - people therefore have little attachment and community cohesion declines. People care less about the homes and they are not well kept. Many are actually disgracefully kept by the landlords - broken front and back fences, paving, painted surfaces peeling badly etc. Many tenants also seem not to care and allow the condition of gardens to deteriorate massively, and leave rubbish outside their houses. Many areas now look awful. I thought I may have had rose tinted glasses on when visiting thinking the past was better, but I recently dug out some old pics (1990s and before) and areas were vastly better, both public spaces and housing.
Last edited:
Try living in Hatfield. Where I am it's not too bad, but some areas are horrid - thanks to a combination of rogue landlords and students that care very little about their surroundings.
I shouldn't need to add that not all students are bad, but - boy - can you spot the bad ones.. and don't need to venture very far to do so.
Since we got the new recycling rules (with three bins) the amount of rubbish dumped or put out incorrectly has grown massively in these areas. The general waste bin is the smallest, but the students only really use this - and then the excess bags are dumped by the roadside, which aren't collected. Eventually rats/foxes/birds get at them and, only after a while, does the council have to reluctantly come and clean up.
It's quite amazing to see how some people (and it isn't just students renting obviously) care so little for the environment where they live - even if only for a year or two. And no doubt when they move away later, they'll tell everyone how awful it was where they lived...
I shouldn't need to add that not all students are bad, but - boy - can you spot the bad ones.. and don't need to venture very far to do so.
Since we got the new recycling rules (with three bins) the amount of rubbish dumped or put out incorrectly has grown massively in these areas. The general waste bin is the smallest, but the students only really use this - and then the excess bags are dumped by the roadside, which aren't collected. Eventually rats/foxes/birds get at them and, only after a while, does the council have to reluctantly come and clean up.
It's quite amazing to see how some people (and it isn't just students renting obviously) care so little for the environment where they live - even if only for a year or two. And no doubt when they move away later, they'll tell everyone how awful it was where they lived...
If they get somewhere bigger it will cost relatively more if prices go up. So that's a bad thing. It's only downsizers that can benefit.
No idea? What a strange thing to say.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/censu.../short-story-on-detailed-characteristics.html
http://www.savills.co.uk/research_articles/141280/146154-0
Only 1% of homes are second homes. 28% are privately rented.
Therefore we can conclude without doubt (although it is obvious) most people do not have more than one home.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
This is definitely true.
Our house is not well maintained. We have rented it for six+ years, and we don't do improvements because it's not ours and we might leave at any point.
If it were ours we would have spent tens of thousands of pounds on it and it would look very nice. But it doesn't.
The landlord wouldn't spend money on it other than emergency repairs because we are here and if he spent money it doesn't benefit him, so why would he? The only time he might spend money is if we moved out and he wanted to attract tenants.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,611
Also at least in my experience in this country, it can be common for contracts to specifically include a clause saying that the tenant is not allowed to make significant modifications to the property.
Yeah that's true, but there are even things like garden maintenance/planting. Why would we plant trees, etc., if we are not going to be here when they come to fruition?
My parents live in a rented property and also own a property that they rent out (strange I know). They have experienced tenants who make 'improvements' to their property. One painted the place awful colours, removed all of radiators leaving the place with no heating, did some dodgy wiring. It costs thousands to put right, especially as they refused access whilst simultaneously complaining to the council that the landlord didn't maintain the property. :cry:
This is why landlords don't allow modifications to properties. There is too much potential for tenants to do it wrong, and leave the house unappealing for future tenants, or unsafe which the landlord may then have legal responsibilities to put right.
It's sad to see so many don't care. I often read about spy bins and fines - no one has ever been fined for leaving rubbish out in areas I know, or littering, or parking cars on grassed areas. If they did then presumably it wouldn't continue from the same people, and grow and grow to more households.
At least you have bins!
Southwark council told me I can't get one as I live on the main road and that I should leave my rubbish in the street. They don't do a separate recycling collection on my street either, so it's all sent to landfill.
Southwark council told me I can't get one as I live on the main road and that I should leave my rubbish in the street. They don't do a separate recycling collection on my street either, so it's all sent to landfill.
It's weird how each council can have its own rules. It really should be standard nationwide.
My parents live in Herts, but under Broxbourne council. There, they get 52 bags a year for rubbish (and must buy more themselves). Here, under Welwyn Hatfield council, we have bins and can't put out bags at all. Too much for the bin? It has to wait for another fortnight, or you take it to the dump yourself.
Bags get torn up by animals, so it makes sense for everyone to have bins - but we now have three and many people don't have anywhere to put them - so they're all left out.
Of course, those that don't care can just dump their rubbish anywhere they like. If they're not filling the bins of neighbours, or leaving bags to be torn up, they're going into car parks or bin stores for other residents and dumping it all there.
While not defending their actions, given many students are living in homes that are now converted to multiple occupancy (some legal, some possibly not), there is a valid argument that they can't be expected to fill a single bin (or even the slightly larger bins allowed for SOME properties, judged on a case-by-case basis).
My parents live in Herts, but under Broxbourne council. There, they get 52 bags a year for rubbish (and must buy more themselves). Here, under Welwyn Hatfield council, we have bins and can't put out bags at all. Too much for the bin? It has to wait for another fortnight, or you take it to the dump yourself.
Bags get torn up by animals, so it makes sense for everyone to have bins - but we now have three and many people don't have anywhere to put them - so they're all left out.
Of course, those that don't care can just dump their rubbish anywhere they like. If they're not filling the bins of neighbours, or leaving bags to be torn up, they're going into car parks or bin stores for other residents and dumping it all there.
While not defending their actions, given many students are living in homes that are now converted to multiple occupancy (some legal, some possibly not), there is a valid argument that they can't be expected to fill a single bin (or even the slightly larger bins allowed for SOME properties, judged on a case-by-case basis).
Last edited:
Arglwydd Golau
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2011
- Messages
- 1,449
I think you've got it spot on, sadly, even in a very rural area where I live the roadside can be littered with stuff thrown out of cars, usually fast food trays, cans and bottles...I do keep my stretch of the road clear, ( came back this morning after a short walk clutching an armful of cans) but it's not so easy to do that in a town or city, is it? I guess many would think you were just weird!
I have to supply my own bin bags. It does however mean they aren't rationed 
Just recently, we had a (CRT) TV, TV stand and pouffe dumped on the verge about 20 metres up the road. The frequently passing travellers (with old-school bell) nabbed the TV in no time at all, but the stand stayed for a another week or so.
The pouffe is still there, all soggy and marked by every passing dog!
I'd have thought it was pretty obvious to most people that the council won't collect this with the fortnightly rubbish collection!
But then again, when you also have neighbours that park like this...
...you realise just how bad it can be! And that isn't a one-off, it's there again tonight.
The pouffe is still there, all soggy and marked by every passing dog!
I'd have thought it was pretty obvious to most people that the council won't collect this with the fortnightly rubbish collection!
But then again, when you also have neighbours that park like this...
...you realise just how bad it can be! And that isn't a one-off, it's there again tonight.
They're fortnightly now? I recall when they were weekly in most places. I suppose now that people have more bins for different types of waste, they all don't need emptying as often.
I'm lucky enough to have a daily collection at 11pm (I suppose that indicates just how much rubbish my street accumulates), and before that lived in a flat block where there was a private company to handle it.
As for furniture dumped on the street, it's a common sight in parts of London that you become acclimatised to.
We have weekly collections, but on a rotation.. so week 1 it's recycling, week 2 it's general waste.
Recently they changed the way we pack stuff, as it turned out a lot of the cardboard (perhaps more than half) was ending up in landfill anyway [strange that the local press didn't say much about this].
Now we put cardboard in with tins and plastic, leaving people with a huge brown bin that's only for food and garden waste - while the bin that was for plastic/metal is now expected to accommodate cardboard too.. which is rather difficult.
No doubt in a year or two they'll change it all again. I don't even think the colour of the bins is standardised* in the UK so God help people that move around the country fairly regularly.
[* Ours are black (general), black/blue (recycling paper [small insert that hangs in bin] and plastic/tins/cardboard) and brown (garden waste/food)]
Recently they changed the way we pack stuff, as it turned out a lot of the cardboard (perhaps more than half) was ending up in landfill anyway [strange that the local press didn't say much about this].
Now we put cardboard in with tins and plastic, leaving people with a huge brown bin that's only for food and garden waste - while the bin that was for plastic/metal is now expected to accommodate cardboard too.. which is rather difficult.
No doubt in a year or two they'll change it all again. I don't even think the colour of the bins is standardised* in the UK so God help people that move around the country fairly regularly.
[* Ours are black (general), black/blue (recycling paper [small insert that hangs in bin] and plastic/tins/cardboard) and brown (garden waste/food)]
Captain Chaos
Member
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2011
- Messages
- 840
jonmorris, how on earth did your neighbour pass their driving test? I thought mine were bad for just parking on a junction corner. But on a mini roundabout junction? Remarkable.
- Status