Pinkman Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 Is all that included in the original tender contract? I do believe the company will be aware of their obligation yes. I could find out for you exactly how it works but I gather the point you are making is that the people who bought houses as investments never agreed to habitate them or forfeit them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 North Sea Oil rights. Companies bid for the licence to a bloc. If, for whatever reason, the licence-holder doesn't drill/survey the bloc it can and does go back to tender for another bidding round. The UK government issues the licences. So, whilst very different, there is fundamental precedence. And that's a licence to occupy a block of seabed - which is rather different from land that my family has owned since time immemorial..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JNewton69 Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 And that's a licence to occupy a block of seabed - which is rather different from land that my family has owned since time immemorial..... I didn't realize we had the Duke of Devonshire on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinkman Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 (edited) And that's a licence to occupy a block of seabed - which is rather different from land that my family has owned since time immemorial..... That's why I said it was very different but there is a fundamental precedence. I don't share Corbyn's idea (or at least the way it has been reported) and it couldn't be applied retrospectively but perhaps there could be some rule changes regarding housing in London along the lines of what Kate and Tjzilstra mention. NYC has rent controls (of which I know nothing other than I heard it on Friends once) and other cities have other solutions. Edited June 16, 2017 by Pinkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 I didn't realize we had the Duke of Devonshire on here. Please. My tree goes back to the Plantagenets, that upstart Cavendish is a relative newcomer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny5 Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 They have to pay at least market value to compulsory purchase... Not a problem. We can raise Corporation tax to fund it. This is the answer to everything. Corbynomics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 That's why I said it was very different but there is a fundamental precedence. I don't share Corbyn's idea (or at least the way it has been reported) and it couldn't be applied retrospectively but perhaps there could be some rule changes regarding housing in London along the lines of what Kate and Tjzilstra mention. NYC has rent controls (of which I know nothing other than I heard it on Friends once) and other cities have other solutions. So what happens if someone falls ill - they come back from hospital to a place occupied and they do what? Oil rig workers - or for that matter any number of people who do long periods offshore. One of my houses has been empty seven months no - he's paying the rent but hes somewhere in the South China sea on some engineering project. If he owned a house is that fair to take it off him for daring to have a well paid job overseas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinkman Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 (edited) So what happens if someone falls ill - they come back from hospital to a place occupied and they do what? Oil rig workers - or for that matter any number of people who do long periods offshore. One of my houses has been empty seven months no - he's paying the rent but hes somewhere in the South China sea on some engineering project. If he owned a house is that fair to take it off him for daring to have a well paid job overseas? I simply cannot be bothered to answer that because I said I didn't agree with Corbyn's idea. Edited June 16, 2017 by Pinkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 I understand the thought behind what he is saying but it can't happen. You can't just take someone's property and do as you please with it, that's verging on a dictatorship. Hopefully the owners of these flats will voluntarily give them up to help. Wouldn't that be nice. Neighbours and locals of all creeds have shown great charity by donating whatever they can, and doing whatever they can to help. One bloke drew £1,000 out of his savings (which I'm guessing wasn't much,) and handed it out in £50s to those in need... (BBC News) This is something those further up the social scale could do to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 They have to pay at least market value to compulsory purchase... So what. Do it and get these people housed in their own borough. This is a national disaster so just get it done already. ---------- Post added 16-06-2017 at 17:58 ---------- Not a problem. We can raise Corporation tax to fund it. This is the answer to everything. Corbynomics. Utter rot. 120 residences purchased would not cause corporation tax to have to be raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now