Guest blog: Shelter's Chief Exec on the rise of unaffordable housing

[JessMumsnet]

This week, to highlight the fact that housing is increasingly unaffordable for many, Shelter published research which showed what our weekly shop would cost if food prices had risen to the degree that housing costs have done over the last decade.

In this guest blog, Shelter's Chief Exec Campbell Robb warns that unless something changes, the next generation will find it even tougher to get a stable and affordable home.

What do you think? Are you struggling to get on the property ladder, with rising rents making it increasingly difficult to save for a deposit - or are you worried for your children's prospects? How do you think the situation could be improved? Post your URLs here if you blog on the subject, or tell us what you think here on the thread.

If tehre were rent control landlords woul not let. They only get about 6% as it is and as soon as they have a month or two vacancy or repairs they often end up with no profit at all. They take a massive risk to provide homes for people and obviously as is clear on mumsnet not get one iota of thanks. If they simply could make no return from it they would not let. If that meant the populace revolted because there was no state housing and their alternatives were sleeping on your mother's sofa for 15 years or in a tent then I suppose change would have been effected through some other means. I don't however believe any political party in the UK wants to move lettings back solely into the public sector therefore rent control is not not at all likely.

Recession if not a clearing house for the rich. Th rich bear more and more of the burden of tax - 1% of us pay 30% of tax as it is. My not rich daughter buying fist flat BTL had to pay about £10k stamp duty much more than was ever the case - we are taxed at every turn until the pips squeak. We lose our child benefit. We lose our single personal allowance.Few have sacrificed so much for the poor of this nation in this recession as the rich but as ever those who work and do well are kicked in the teeth by an ungrateful poor many of whom do not even work and live and are fed solely because the rich are prepared to work hard for their benefit. More than half of every penny I earn in 50 weeks of full time work a year is handed back to the state. Every day it will not be until about 6 or 7 hours into a long working day that a single penny is to feed me or my children.

Dreaming do you also have to pay council tax on the buy to let or is that incorporated into the rent.

I think buy to let is quite a risk for the owner and you have to be quite firm and business like otherwise people will take you for a ride. sounds like a lot of hassle particularly if someone trashes the place and doesn't play fair.

What I dont actually understand is what the objective is regarding housing - if pprices drop a lot of people will be unhappy because of negative equity - if they dont drop a lot of people will not be able to afford homes. surely the first thing is to work out what it is we want to achieve!

I would suggest the solution is the opposite. Don't interfere in the market. Don't seek to control it. Leave it to market forces and leave prices and rents and interest rates to market forces. We never do however.

Buy to let is risky and tenants are very very lucky people are prepared to take the risk to make huge losses to keep them housed.

James - that is exactly the problem. The older generation (who tend to vote more than young people) and wealthy (which includes politicians with property portfolios) and bankers (who need people to pay their mortgages back) tend to lobby most aggressivley for higher house prices as they depend for most of their income and wealth on property prices.

Meanwhile young people and those with with relatively little wealth on low incomes who tend to rent want a price drop so they can raise their standard of living.

This issue divides the country on wealth and generational lines and NOT so much on political lines. The political and voter majority consensus is for higher house prices - even though IT WAS borrowing against property THAT led directly to the financial crisis.

i wouldn't care if my house price dropped as I wouldn't have to pay as much for another house or downsize. I don't think most ordinary homeowners do. It is only if you had the misfortune of having to pay too much for a house then the value drops.

If the prices drop then at least my DC have a hope in hell of buying a property.

alemci - tennants pay council tax - thats the market norm. BTL is cetainly not the easy option suggested by some people on here (notably none of them seem to have done it) - its only because interest rates are so low that a profit can be made - when we started we had a net loss each month

mrebeta - though of course the young only want prices to drop till they've bought then they want them to rise or at least stop dropping.

prices are stagnating here - and in many ways that seems to be a good thing as it will allow people's salaries to catch up and give them time to save deposits

House prices in my city are the same as they were seven years ago but local wages are still falling and unemployment rising so they still do not reflect the reality of our local economy.

Old people selling large houses still typically bring them on to the market at 30% more than the actual sold prices achieved 7 years ago though. They still dont get it - they have come to expect their hosue to be a piggy bank.

It will take a generation for that mindset to change.

Hello all

Shelter have been in touch to thank you all for your insightful posts - they're reading them all and taking them on board.

If you want to get involved in Shelter's campaign for more affordable homes you can do so here. Alternatively, share your own housing situation, or your hopes and fears for you children's future here.

dreaming - a longer tenancy can mean a better sense of security.

Every time you move, your routine is broken up, and has to be re-established which can take months - simple stuff like doing the washing up, trying to get your kids to settle at night in a room which smells alien and may be painted lurid colours.

In a longer tenancy, its worth decorating how you want, things like putting in stairgates, making it work with your lifestyle, making it safe - all simple stuff but essential to get that 'home ownership' feel. Making friends with neighbours, finding safe babysitting etc

More security means happier families, who are more likely to stay together and more able to make contact for solutions when they can't pay the rent.
Stable familes also have fewer accidents in the home. (Be interesting to know if this statistic has gone up in recent years).

Difficult familes who've not known security and are not known within the community, are far more likely to give up in despair and feel 'owned' as people by their landlord, to suffer the stress of a master/servant relationship (even though they are paying rent initially) then trash the place and run off. As evictions add up, insecurity becomes the norm and a sense of 'ownership and pride' becomes impossible. Even with a house, they are homeless.

Landlords need to act as if they are the ones being hired by tenants, not the other way around. They are not charities, doing everyone a favour, they are not volunteers helping the homeless! They are gaining or hoping for wealth or they wouldn't bother.
Nothing wrong with that - but it comes with responsibilities in this particular investment option.

diamond - i can understand what you are saying - i've been a tenant as well. Its a shame the bad ones spoil it for the good.

The two difficult families we had, were both local and were difficult from the start. one put his fist through things whenever he got stressed and didn't want to hit his girlfriend, and the other didn't pay rent (it was when we first started and she told my husband that her abusive partner had ripped the deposit cheque up so he let her move in on the basis that she would provide a new one from the bank the next day - he learnt his lesson from that as we didn't get any money till we went through the small claims court).

i agree being a landlord comes with responsibilities. All I am saying, is that if any more responsibilities were placed on us we wouldn't do it and then a single parent paying slightly under market rate for a new build, and a couple also in well maintained new build would both be homeless

how would you feel if someone you didn't know asked to borrow your car? its a similar situation for a landlord

To add - evictions cause lasting damage and are currently far too easy to do.

They should never be done just for not paying the rent, without lots of serious discussion and alternative options presented.

Criminal convictions, rent strikes, greed - yes, evict, maybe if not making children homeless.

But with real financial hardship, non-payment of rent evictions SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING!
Every landlord should be forced by law to have a contingency fund to pay up to a years rent where there is genuine, proved hardship before being allowed to evict any family for not paying rent.

our current tennant has been with us for about 5 years or so. the end result of what you suggest is that she would be homeless because we would sell up

The likes of you selling up is the desired effect. The tenant would not be homeless, the house would still be there but would be managed by a competent qualified professional rather than some del boy chancer.

monday - what right have you to call me a del boy chancer? You do not know me, my tenant or my property. With one tenant who's been there for 5+ years and the other 2 years I imagine I can't be that bad.

What qualifications are you expecting?

diamond - there was lots of discussion before she was evicted. Unfortunately she just wanted to live there rent free, which was not the arrangement we entered into with her. what 'alternative options' had you in mind? Your suggestion ref a years contingency fund would be totally impractical unless rents were increase to cover this - which i imagine wouldn't be acceptable. Even housing associations and the council don't do this as i understand it - they evict people.

Some of you are really living on another planet

They only get about 6% as it is and as soon as they have a month or two vacancy or repairs they often end up with no profit at all.

its only because interest rates are so low that a profit can be made - when we started we had a net loss each month

So stop doing it! Sell up, get out. Oh but where will the tenants live? The same bloomin houses but they will be able to afford to buy them having not been priced out by buy to letters who can't even make a profit themselves!

You've priced the young out of the market by paying too much for property. You all admit yourselves its not a money spinner for you, so you've priced out the young and even messed it up for yourselves in the process.

Sell up! Get out of the market! Go!

You'll be selling at a loss but thats your own silly fault for being so poor at business!

See what I mean about the irresponsible lending by the banks? You guys were given heaps of money you didn't earn and so you show no aptitude for investing it sensibly.

All you have done is bought up the properties your current tenants would have bought themselves had you not offered more than they were prepared to borrow and then rented to them instead.

What a mess you people have made. Shameful.

what right have you to call me a del boy chancer?

I quote 'when we started we had a net loss each month'

Not quite the business person you claim!

dreaming - its not an easy life, being a landlord and maybe there should be more support for you all. I have friends that are landlords - they find it hard work.
No one wants homelessness - you are obviously not the kind of landlord that needs to hear this, I know a lot of them really care about their tenants but there are others who are really ruthless.

But its not like a car that you can live without. You are selling (on a monthly basis) a home, that is essential for life - especially where there are children.

You've had a bad and difficult experience - but don't let this make you cynical - expect a good business relationship with future tenants. Difficult families is not a new problem - sorry you had such a bad experience. Good luck with future tenants - let them decorate?

diamond - its not put us off - we always thought there would be good and bad. some of the tenants are really good - you just cannot tell by looking at them or from their references. and yes several of them have decorated.

Monday - our business plan is for the long-term - so it makes no difference to us if we make a profit or loss in the ST. I find it odd that you are so critical of landlords, yet you make no mention of 2nd homeowners or old people living in large houses with big gardens. you seem very blinkered.

anyway i've said my bit and i've got leases and a gas safety check to sort out as well as my paid employment...so i'm off.

our business plan is for the long-term

What's that saying? A long term investment is a short term one that didn't go to plan? Something like that. You're well passed your window for a profitable exit, we won't see a bubble like this again in our life times.

so i'm off

Im glad you heard from the other side, you've got some thinking to do about the consequences of your actions.

The vitriol against landlords most of whom have only one or at most two properties and tend not to be very well off who make not much more than building society interest rates on their properties and house people is amazing on this thread. Most look after tenants very well.

In an earlier post I said ?parliament a clearinghouse for the rich? It was said in the context of big corporations lobbying and getting much more of a say than we the voters end up with.

Bugger the buy to let landlords up the interest rated and let prices of houses find a truer level to reality of incomes. It?s got out of hand the new reality is many have to look for a shared flat or house or even a room. Sadly many low paid will be trapped in that situation as the cost of those are getting out of kilter for NMW

We IMO have to let some of the banks go to the wall, which they will if interest rates go up to historic levels.With the repossessions that will follow.
It?s already been stated that we won?t be able to bail them out again. The economy is like a rabbit caught in the headlights all the while we have these ridiculous accommodation costs.

I am a homeowner and I don?t care about values, it?s about society and the having a chance to have a home that even if it?s social housing that you can lay roots in.

Too many in power are part of this gravy train buy to let profit from peoples misery ponzi scheme

Well past the window of opportunity to sell is right on the button? another 1000 jobs gone today on sky news.
As the economy contracts the price of houses will tumble.
Just like the last recession , people have to sell under certain circumstances .
Those distressed sales become the new price and as it gathers momentum confidence goes. It?s when nobody thinks property is a good so called investment that it takes off again. The savvy move into buying . That can take years. With the possibility of economic recovery looking like the chances of a lottery win maybe decades.

Somebody somewhere in power should see we need to build maybe a million homes.

To all the buy to let landlords, have you considered that after WW2 for many years people were living in requisitioned homes where owners and landlords lost their control over the property. Families were moved into homes the government did not hand them back until the late 1950s .

The vitriol against landlords

You are doing a terrible thing. Sell up.

Most look after tenants very well

You took their chance of owning away from them. Renting certainly has its place, buying doesn't suit everyone and a healthy rental market is fine. We are well beyond that now, people are priced out of ever owning, people with families, and it is you that are causing this.

You were prepared to borrow more than those that wanted the property for their home, so the seller took your money instead. You priced families out of a stable home. You then rent the property to them at a price that ensures they cannot ever save enough to ever buy a place of their own. You are holding them back and picking their pockets. Vitriol is well deserved.

Sell up. Get out of the market. Many many renters feel this way, they all hate their landlords. They won't say it to their face, they want to stay in the property.

You break their legs, lend them a crutch and expect gratitude.

Sell up.

No communist state has ever succeeded. Anyone against capital, money and power will always be on the losing side. Private sector enterprise has ensured the poor are housed so much better than the state ever managed.

this 'we only make 6% income' thing is nonsense and the whole point. your mortgage is being paid for you! in 25 years you will own outright a property that you have never paid for. it's a long term investment not a cash cow on a monthly basis.

if you had to sell up your house would be for sale - if lots had to sell up lots would be for sale - prices would drop. those who then bought them either to live in or to rent out would have lower mortgage costs, lower mortgage costs means lower rents needing to be charged and achievable rent controls.

this idea that you have an entitlement to make a monthly income AND a huge cash pay out at the end all for being able to get another mortgage is daft! it needs to go out with the trash.