Housing Crisis ?

[observer]

How will a Gov policy to demolish "Council"  "sink" estates, help provide housing for those who simply can't afford to buy?    

[asperity]

I think the idea is to move the residents out of the existing properties temporarily while the existing properties are demolished and rebuilt. Then rehoused in the new properties. A friend of mine who lives in a council house in Swinton is in this position and is waiting to hear when it will happen. It has been done before, although the results haven't always been successful, but it would seem to be the only way to get rid of "Sink Estates".

[Davy51]

But people can't afford to buy because landlords are allowed to charge exorbitant rents which prohibits most would be house buyers from even saving a deposit to buy a house. If the government want more house buying to take place then private rents must be capped in line with social housing with possibly a central government fund available to cover damage done by undesirable tenants.

[Sha]

Does anyone seriously believe that the demolishing & rebuilding of 'sink' estates has really any other purpose than to provide profit making opportunities for developers?

[asperity]

In my friend's case it's more a matter of pulling the houses down before they fall down. His house was built in 1932 on top of a mining area.

[observer]

But is the built environment responsible for the culture that develops within it, or are social attitudes developed by other factors? The fact is, that housing demand exceeds housing supply, the provision of cheap rented Council housing is essential to reducing demand, which will knock on up the food chain into cheaper house prices generally. Unfortunately we have a Gov obsessed with the dogma of "private ownership" regardless of ability to afford.

[Davy51]

At least more affordable social housing leaves enough fuel in the tank to be able to start saving for a deposit to buy, unlike private rented which provides wealth for the relative few at the expense of the many.

[observer]

I think what we are seeing is the Tories taking us back beyond the 1930's under the guise of austerity. It's clearly austerity for the many but not for the few. Ironically, new thinking in places like Finland, is that "the many" should paid a living wage, regardless of whether they work or what hours they do work; in order to stimulate demand and regenerate economies; this of course is the direct opposite of current Tory dogma; and it'll be interesting if "the left" adopt it. What is clear, is that under current circumstances a "home owning democracy" is no longer a viable proposition.

[Bazj]

At least more affordable social housing leaves enough fuel in the tank to be able to start saving for a deposit to buy, unlike private rented which provides wealth for the relative few at the expense of the many.

 

You obviously don't rent out houses Davy.... rental income is subject to tax.... each property has to be insured and each property has to be maintained in line with current health and safety standards with such things as annual gas checks and 5 yearly electrical; safety checks (something even a private householder doesn't have to do) then there are general maintenance costs and the mess that a lot of tenants leave behind them when they leave which in most cases is far in excess of any deposit they may have paid...

[Evil Sid]

or rent for that matter judging by the number of times my next door owner has had to pursue ex tenants through the courts for unpaid rent etc.

[Bazj]

Obviously Sha thinks all landlords are multi-millionaires feeding off the poor down-trodden socialist workers that are so underpaid by their multi-millionaire bosses that they can't afford to feed Tiny Tim at Christmas...

[Davy51]

You obviously don't rent out houses Davy.... rental income is subject to tax.... each property has to be insured and each property has to be maintained in line with current health and safety standards with such things as annual gas checks and 5 yearly electrical; safety checks (something even a private householder doesn't have to do) then there are general maintenance costs and the mess that a lot of tenants leave behind them when they leave which in most cases is far in excess of any deposit they may have paid...

That's why in an earlier post i suggested a government fund to compensate private landlords for damage done so rent could be lowered more in line with affordable social housing & i do understand the misguided idea that giving tenants rent money will turn them into responsible citizens which didn't work for many & left landlords chasing their money.Has that system been abandoned now ?

I did once rent my house for a couple of years due to a marriage split  & because i was  away with work all week it made more sense to do that & rent a room myself.I did notice that the tenants i had were not the most caring or house proud & i got sick & tired chasing my rent from the DHSS which i still believe owes me money. I think the most annoying part though was how it interfered with my PAYE affairs for a good few years even after i moved back in the property.

[Bazj]

The DHSS still pay rent money to the tenant (although I believe this can be paid directly to the landlord now)

[observer]

Thought originally, that HB was paid directly to the landlord, which avoided it being spent on beer and fags; however the problem was some landlords just kept upping their rents and there doesn't appear to have been any checks or questions asked. Hence they changed to paying it directly to the tenant. If we returned to "Council" Housing, HB could be paid to the LA or Housing Assoc; thus ensuring even the poorest had a home. The knock on effect of a massive reduction in demand by such an increase in supply, would be to reduce house prices generally.

[asperity]

The way to reduce house prices is to not sell them at high prices.

[observer]

Market rules Asp; supply and demand:  High demand for housing and not enough being built to meet that demand = price inflation. Add to this speculation by some developers, by using their land as land banks, rather than building,  as the price increases. A tax on unused building land, with planning permission, should stimulate some movement. With price inflation deterring most from the ownership sector, demand pressure then transfers to the rented sector, with inflated rents.  The only way to reduce prices is by reducing demand, by building sufficient to meet that demand; starting with the public rented sector. If we ignore the "red door" issue !     The provision of subsidised Council Housing for rent, will sate demand at the bottom of the food chain, knocking on to reduced demand and lower prices in the ownership sector. Even at the top of the food chain, foreign investment in property, especially in London, where billionaires keep empty properties isn't helping either, so perhaps a tax on such, would concentrate minds..