Is Government approach to housing short sighted?

by Mark Alexander

A month ago

Is Government approach to housing short sighted?

Make Text Bigger
Is Government approach to housing short sighted?

Maybe Government should focus on only two things to solve the Housing crisis:-

  1. That supply meets demand
  2. Available housing is lived in

Instead, Government seems to be obsessing about ownership.

No, no, no, no, no!

In my opinion focus should be to incentiving the building of new housing and empty housing to be sold or rented to people in need of living in it.

Government seem to view housing providers as a cash cow to fund HM Treasury but that is stifling supply, which many think is a very short sighted approach.

So what could Government to to reverse current trends?

First, they could discourage investment strategies which leave housing empty and treat it as an investment as opposed to its primary purpose of providing shelter for human beings.

Second, Government could make more grants available to bring empty housing into use.

Third, is that Government should incentivise new development of all tenures. It doesn’t matter whether housing is built for owner occupation or the rental market because once supply matches demand the pressure on prices will stabalise.

To achieve the above the whole system of planning and taxation needs a complete re-think.

Anything you would like to add?

Please comment below.

 

Comments

Sam Addison

A month ago

Grants/incentives for converting houses/commercial/retail into HMOs thereby supplying more residences without building new and using up valuable land.

D D

A month ago

Mark
I've been thinking (and privately saying) this for ages - but was reluctant to voice my views any more widely than to family because I was worried that I was maybe looking at things in too simplistic a way.
Thank you for validating my views as sensible ones.
Now ... how do we get those in charge of this mess to take this on board?

Kay Landlord

A month ago

Yes there could be lots of incentives. I'm still stuck with a few 'empties' . A Landlord's nightmare is paying the mortgage on the smashed up property, then being liable for 150% council tax for an empty home and having trouble raising the cash to do property up so you can let it out. I've been very fortunate, at one time I had 7 empty properties and through blood, sweat and tears I've got 5 bank into use. I've looked at JVs with willing tenants, borrowed from friends and looked at charity schemes as well. At anytime, there has been little government assistance and the councils only have limited funds now. The long term lease schemes are not allowed by mortgage lenders, So we are reliant on very few charity based schemes-available to help with bringing a homes back into use. But certainly not not enough.

Mark Alexander

A month ago

Reply to the comment left by D D at 15/09/2017 - 08:58
Read and respond to this - it's what the MP's read. My comments are all over it.

https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2017/09/rosalind-beck-homelessness-report-dodges-the-immigration-issue.html

Dr Rosalind Beck

A month ago

I agree, Mark, that where property is bought not to be lived in, there needs to be a disincentive. I wouldn't say this for holiday homes though, which might only get used part of the year - if they have been created specifically for holiday rental (eg barn conversions) and wouldn't have existed otherwise. Conversely, I would say that there should be all kinds of incentives and allowances for HMOs (as long as they are checked to make sure they are in good order) - as these make the absolute optimum use of space and ease the housing shortage massively.

Ros. you have lit the blue touch paper again with this article. Reading the comments, but not engaging with them I sense more encouraging support than substantiated criticism. It is still a cauldron of misconceptions though. Thanks for writing it.
Chris

Ross Tulloch

A month ago

The HMO issue, where minimum room sizes are stipulated, is a problem. I have a property in Camberwell, with 4 rooms (no living room) and had to apply for an HMO. The council said that 8.61 meters too small, had to be 10m. The tenant in that room was perfectly happy, as were previous tenants, and horrified to learn that Southwark said that the room had to remain permanently empty. I promise I have never forced anyone to rent from me. So the tenant would have to choose to spend more in the area or commute further to spend the same. This must mean that across London, there will be many (I do not know how many) fewer rooms available. I remain unsure how this will help those looking for good value rooms as this can only put a further pressure on rents.

I went to Tribunal, before which a mediation with the council was offered, and after they consulted their legal team I was allowed to keep the room let out and got the license. None of this cost and process did anything to help me or the tenant.

Dr Rosalind Beck

A month ago

Reply to the comment left by Ross Tulloch at 15/09/2017 - 18:50
Yes, their way of helping in a housing shortage is to dictate that perfectly good rooms be left empty.

Mark Shine

A month ago

Call me Mr Cynical, but I still 💭 the attacks on PRS (particularly the big one: S24) were obviously never anything to do with helping FTBs or to create a healthy housing market for all but more an attempt to *manipulate* & *distort* the market in favour of the "corporate" BTL/BTR big boys who clearly saw an opportunity to influence their Westminster buddies. Osborne was merely the pawn.

Mark Alexander

A month ago

Reply to the comment left by Mark Shine at 15/09/2017 - 21:22
Many of us share your cynicism

1 2 3

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

OR

BECOME A MEMBER

Council tenant received 200 hour work order for subletting