PRS critical HFI report – A Time for Good Homes

by Property118.com News Team

14:29 PM, 31st July 2018
About 3 years ago

PRS critical HFI report – A Time for Good Homes

Make Text Bigger
PRS critical HFI report – A Time for Good Homes

The Housing & Finance Institute have released a report titled A Time for Good Homes – a discussion paper on meeting the needs of the generation that housing forgot. Click Here to read the full report.

The report is Critical of the Private Rental Sector stating:

“Over the last 15 years the type of housing that is provided across the country has been dramatically reshaped. This shift is harming the life chances, health, financial prosperity and wellbeing of millions of
people. That must change.

In the recent past around 90% of households have been housed in traditional forms of stable housing, namely home ownership and social renting. This changed after 2002 with a sustained growth in private rented housing. The result is that proportionally there are 2.4 million fewer households with access to a Good Home than 15 years ago. This is the Good Homes Gap and it affects around 6 million people.”

The reports definition of a ‘Good Home’ is displayed below:

The paper then sets out a ten point plan to “reverse the damage caused by the explosion in private renting and to make sure that millions more people can access an affordable, stable home that supports job mobility and creates a springboard for opportunity.”

Natalie Elphicke OBE, Chief Executive of The Housing & Finance Institute, writes a summary in conservativehome:

“Over the last 15 years Britain has embarked on a housing experiment that has failed six million people, the majority of whom have been the young and the least well off. The experiment has been the state-supported explosion in private renting.

“Successive Labour and Conservative governments have overseen a doubling of private rented housing since 2002, at the expense of both home ownership and social housing. Just 15 years ago, people would have been expected to own their own home or live in social housing. Now, too many have little choice but to live in the private rented sector.

“These reduced levels of home ownership and social renting have been harmful to family and financial stability. Furthermore, as well as damaging family stability and opportunity, the high levels of private renting have failed to promote labour market mobility. Fewer people are moving than in previous decades. The doubling of the private rented housing sector has not resulted in greater labour market flexibility.”

Comments

Darren Peters

19:35 PM, 1st August 2018
About 3 years ago

"This changed after 2002 with a sustained growth in private rented housing. The result is that proportionally there are 2.4 million fewer households with access to a Good Home than 15 years ago. This is the Good Homes Gap and it affects around 6 million people.”

By a complete coincidence the increase in population between 2002 and 2017 was just over 6 million people.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/2013-12-17

and https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/ukpopulation2017

John Walker

14:25 PM, 2nd August 2018
About 3 years ago

My own properties are all to a good standard of repair, with CH, DG, etc. including EPCs. yet are blithely classed as 'unsatisfactory' by this opinionated lady. She is obviously completely deluded when asserting six million people have been disadvantaged by the PRS, providing poor quality homes at greatly inflated rental charges. All PRS properties are 'bad', all social housing is 'good'. What arrant nonsense!
How does such an ignorant person manage to have her views published?

Appalled Landlord

21:57 PM, 2nd August 2018
About 3 years ago

It’s a shame that she attacked the PRS with imbecilic assertions that every social house and flat is a Good Home and no PRS housing is, or that the growth of the PRS has reduced labour mobility (page 17, in bold), or that the level of owner-occupation has declined to 1985 levels. (In England in 1984 there were 11.0m such households; in 2015/16 there were 14.3m, an increase of 30%, not a decline).

It’s a shame because no-one will take the discussion paper seriously. If she had reined in her blatant prejudice and merely extolled the benefits of owner-occupation, people might have ploughed through to her recommendation - lend 10% deposits to the 4 million people in the social and private rental sectors who she says expect to be home owners. We might as well add the million people who are living with relatives but who want to buy, according to a recent survey.

Adding 5 million people to the effective demand for properties would give prices a welcome boost, finally allowing me to off-load my properties, pay my CGT and retire. What a wasted opportunity. Such a shame.

Mandy Thomson

11:11 AM, 5th August 2018
About 3 years ago

Reply to the comment left by John Walker at 02/08/2018 - 14:25
I have visited quite a few socially owned homes which do not meet the decent homes standard. While they are adequately heated and structurally sound, the decor is often extremely shoddy - tired paint work, plaster falling off walls, broken floor tiles, out dated and broken kitchen units, no shower and only one tiny low level bath with a tiny washbasin (and these were installed in 2017).

One social management company even ignored repeated requests to come out and check an inlet cover which had fallen away and had broken in two on the ground; a sign on the back of the cover states, "Warning, asbestos".

Old Mrs Landlord

14:40 PM, 5th August 2018
About 3 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Mandy Thomson at 05/08/2018 - 11:11Although your post confirms anecdotal evidence I've heard from people with relatives in social homes, your eyes must have deceived you because the "discussion paper" clearly states that social rented homes are good and privately rented are bad. Next you'll be telling us that homeownership has declined, despite the figures quoted above by Appalled Landlord! However, these inaccuracies will be seized upon and disseminated by the press and all the anti-landlord groups and activists with the result that the public will be confirmed in their prejudices and calls for more controls and regulation of the PRS will increase. I don't agree with John that the fact that it's clearly not true will prevent it being taken seriously because what matters to politicians is the public perception, because that is what influences voting patterns.

1 2

Leave Comments

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

Forgotten your password?

BECOME A MEMBER

5 Top UK Buy To Let Property Investment Hotspots