Cyclone Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 There will still be a rental market but it will involve building houses and not buying the cheapest houses from under the feet of first time buyers. Like I said, there is practically no market for self building, which is effectively what you are suggesting for would be landlords. And if they were doing that you'd say they were snatching the plots from under first time builders. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 20:52 ---------- I wouldn't want to stop anyone buying rundown properties and renovating them for rental, but competing to buy first time buyer houses in unfair on the younger generation and should be discouraged. You've contradicted yourself in the space of a sentence there. The increased need for rental properties was caused by the housing bubble which was caused by government policy, cheap credit, immigration and Buy to Let. I doubt you will find many renter saying they would rather rent than buy an affordable house. The idea that everyone can own a house is a recent one, renting is the norm when you look at a longer time frame, or indeed when you look at the rest of europe. It's the obsession with buying houses that has distorted the market, not an obsession with letting them. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 20:40 ---------- I would prefer something in planning law in which some properties can only be bought for the owner to live in and some can be used for let. As it stands many low priced houses coming onto the market are snapped up by BTL because they have a better access to funds and can out bid first time buyer. I don't think this is happening at all now, you're trying to fight a battle that has been won. The cost of BTL mortgages is now much higher and the requirement for equity more stringent than those for FTBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 Like I said, there is practically no market for self building, which is effectively what you are suggesting for would be landlords. And if they were doing that you'd say they were snatching the plots from under first time builders. I haven't said anything about self build, no idea where you got that idea from. The idea that everyone can own a house is a recent one, renting is the norm when you look at a longer time frame, or indeed when you look at the rest of europe. I take it you own an house, or maybe more, nice that you think the younger generation should be happy to pay high rents to the people that do own them. The landlords get richer whilst the tenants provide them with their wealth, that a good plan for the future. NOT It's the obsession with buying houses that has distorted the market, not an obsession with letting them. It’s not about buying houses, that’s something investors do. It’s about buying an home, something that’s your own, with no need to ask permission to do what you want to it, security of knowing you won't be given your marching order when the owner wants to sell or can let it at an higher price. I don't think this is happening at all now, you're trying to fight a battle that has been won. The cost of BTL mortgages is now much higher and the requirement for equity more stringent than those for FTBs. It’s starting to happen once again because many investor think prices have bottomed out. Young 'locked out' of owning home, report claims More than a million young people will be "locked out" of home ownership by 2020, a new report claims. The study, by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), found an extra 1.5m 18 to 30-year-olds will be forced into private renting in eight years time. 7 February 2013 For the first time since the 1960s, there are more people in England renting from private landlords than from councils or housing associations. Campbell Robb, chief executive of the housing charity Shelter, said: "This historic shift in our housing market is bad news for anyone struggling to find a decent and affordable home. With the security of home ownership or social renting harder to find than ever, more and more families have no choice but to live with the insecurity and expense of private renting. 13 March 2013 Why buy-to-let is a booming business Rental demand in many parts of the UK has never been higher. Graham Norwood speaks to top experts to get tips on starting a buy-to-let empire. The rental industry’s figures show why BTL is set to be 2013’s favourite career change. Average UK rents have risen by 13.6 per cent since 2009, according to Rightmove, while capital values in most places have stagnated or fallen. The property website predicts another two per cent rise across the country this year. November 2012 The number of landlords snapping up rental properties continues to increase, according to new figures. But is a buy-to-let bubble looming on the horizon? Investors hoping to cash in on a dream combination of rising rents and falling house prices took out 34,400 buy-to-let loans over the summer, 2 per cent more than in the previous quarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 There's plenty of sites that could be freed up for build to let landlords. If the land can be provided at reasonable rates then quality small homes can be constructed at 50k a piece. If you could put up three new homes for 150k then why buy a shack to do up for 150k. Freeing unused land to build many new units is more economically efficient than doing up old housing stock purchased at crazy prices. If the big builders won't provide the supply let others do it. As cyclone says it would all depend on land being freed and more supportive planning law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I haven't said anything about self build, no idea where you got that idea from. What is build to let if it isn't a variation of self build? (You realise that self build doesn't mean with your own hands, it means privately, not done by a developer building speculatively). I take it you own an house, or maybe more, nice that you think the younger generation should be happy to pay high rents to the people that do own them. The landlords get richer whilst the tenants provide them with their wealth, that a good plan for the future. NOT Indeed. I'm only just out of 'the younger generation' though (at least in my mind). I'd have much rather sold my 2nd house, but the market what it is I'm one of the reluctant landlords you'll have seen mentioned in the media. It’s not about buying houses, that’s something investors do. It’s about buying an home, something that’s your own, with no need to ask permission to do what you want to it, security of knowing you won't be given your marching order when the owner wants to sell or can let it at an higher price. Something that the majority of europe isn't concerned with and that only started bothering us in the last 40 years or so. It’s starting to happen once again because many investor think prices have bottomed out. I hope prices stay flat, but I do hope activity in the market picks up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I hope prices stay flat, but I do hope activity in the market picks up. I suppose once more people start buying then prices will rise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 There's plenty of sites that could be freed up for build to let landlords. If that's the case they could be equally freed up for people who want to build to live in it. If the land can be provided at reasonable rates then quality small homes can be constructed at 50k a piece. Shoe box sized maybe. If you could put up three new homes for 150k then why buy a shack to do up for 150k. That's several big ifs. Google the price/sqr foot or metre for a self build. Even a low spec, basic box of a 100 sqr metres (about average 3 bed terrace size) would cost far more than that. Even the plot would be likely to cost more than that! Freeing unused land to build many new units is more economically efficient than doing up old housing stock purchased at crazy prices. Agreed, and there are many people that would love to build in order to live in it. If the big builders won't provide the supply let others do it. As cyclone says it would all depend on land being freed and more supportive planning law Yep, changing planning law, and the weird culture we've developed would be key. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 21:32 ---------- I suppose once more people start buying then prices will rise... It's not that simple, ever increasing prices isn't sustainable, or desirable and just results in a bubble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I It's not that simple, ever increasing prices isn't sustainable, or desirable and just results in a bubble. Quite,but if people see a demand for the house they want to sell then they'll ask more for it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 What is build to let if it isn't a variation of self build? (You realise that self build doesn't mean with your own hands, it means privately, not done by a developer building speculatively). Indeed. I'm only just out of 'the younger generation' though (at least in my mind). I'd have much rather sold my 2nd house, but the market what it is I'm one of the reluctant landlords you'll have seen mentioned in the media. Something that the majority of europe isn't concerned with and that only started bothering us in the last 40 years or so. I hope prices stay flat, but I do hope activity in the market picks up. Despite being an home owner I hope they crash big style, but for now it looks like the government is set on keeping the market flat, they are even coming up with ingenious ways to get young people to borrow more than they should. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 21:40 ---------- It's not that simple, ever increasing prices isn't sustainable, or desirable and just results in a bubble. This is the problem with BTL and property investors, they will drive the prices up for their own benefit, aided by the banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 Despite being an home owner I hope they crash big style, but for now it looks like the government is set on keeping the market flat, they are even coming up with ingenious ways to get young people to borrow more than they should. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 21:40 ---------- This is the problem with BTL and property investors, they will drive the prices up for their own benefit, aided by the banks. I'm the same. I own a house and I wouldn't care if the market tanked. If I wanted a new property prices are generally relative at the modest end of the market. The great advantage of the long overdue price correction would be obvious. Anybody who argues there is anything sane about the current housing market is insane. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 23:38 ---------- If that's the case they could be equally freed up for people who want to build to live in it. Shoe box sized maybe. That's several big ifs. Google the price/sqr foot or metre for a self build. Even a low spec, basic box of a 100 sqr metres (about average 3 bed terrace size) would cost far more than that. Even the plot would be likely to cost more than that! Agreed, and there are many people that would love to build in order to live in it. Yep, changing planning law, and the weird culture we've developed would be key. ---------- Post added 13-03-2013 at 21:32 ---------- It's not that simple, ever increasing prices isn't sustainable, or desirable and just results in a bubble. If people want to build homes for themselves too then great. No the homes could be a reasonable size. Kit homes are cheap and good quality. You would be surprised. As for the land I'd say land that has been unused for a certain time in areas zoned for residential properties should be punatively taxed, maybe even confiscated if that is what it takes to bring it into use. Radical solutions are needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 I'm the same. I own a house and I wouldn't care if the market tanked. If I wanted a new property prices are generally relative at the modest end of the market. The great advantage of the long overdue price correction would be obvious. Anybody who argues there is anything sane about the current housing market is insane. Or a vested interest, private landlord, money lender, ect. January 2013 According to a host of experts polled by the Financial Times, 44 said houses were overvalued compared to 26 who said they are not – yet despite this few of them expect any sharp falls this year. The 12-year recovery period would be the longest since records began in the 1950s. The report said that once the impact of inflation is stripped out, the slump would be even longer and average prices will not return to 2007 levels until 2031 – an incredible 24 years after they peaked. In the previous market crash, prices peaked at £62,782 in 1989 and did not reach that level again until 1998 – a nine year slump. Grainne Gilmore, head of UK residential research at Knight Frank, which produced the report, said: ‘Some five years after the start of the financial crisis, the housing sector in the UK still does not bear the hallmarks of a fully functioning market.’ A clutch of experts believe that housing is overvalued – but the situation is unlikely to change in the coming years. Speaking to the FT, George Buckley at Deutsche Bank, said: ‘Possibly the most worrisome statistic on the housing market is that affordability is still worse than average despite interest rates being at their lowest for more than 300 years. ‘If interest rates were ever to return to “normal”, we would soon realise how overvalued the housing market actually is. That does appear to be some time off, however.’ David Blanchflower, a former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee, noted average prices were still about 4.5 times average earnings compared with a long-term average of about 3.5 times. He told the FT: ‘My guess would be that nominal house prices will have to fall by a further 15 per cent or so.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.