Are second homes and short-term rental properties immoral?

[maranella]

We have a huge shortage of housing in this country and there and more and more stories about seaside towns and pretty villages being hollowed out by homes that stand empty half the year.

So I'm just wondering how other people feel about second homes and ones bought specifically to be holiday rentals? I really feel for people in places like Cornwall, Devon, north Norfolk, parts of Wales and the Lake District, who can't find affordable homes in the towns and villages where they've always lived and worked.

@buddhasbelly but a fall in demand for tourist lets and perhaps selling off of 2nd homes won’t matter a jot as prices have now been raised substantially for demand in these areas
If this is true then 2nd homes and holiday let's aren't really the issue then. House prices will only be maintained/rise if there is enough demand to sustain them. If you have demand coming from people that just want to move into the area and own a home as their primary residence as opposed to own second homes then this is a whole other issue and one that I struggle to see anyone argue the 'moral' case against people moving to a beautiful area if they can afford it.

businesses very much do have to exist in specific locations. Would be quite difficult to have forestry business without trees
My point is that the trees don't have to be cut down as part of a forestry industry. In the same way that coal doesn't have to be mined and land doesn't have to be farmed. There are lots of natural resources that aren't exploited as part of a business as the economics don't work.

@Lockheart Being able to see or visit an area of beauty isn't a basic human right or need. Housing is
There are lots of empty and affordable houses in the UK but they're not in areas of natural beauty or areas considered generally desirable. The thing is the people that live in beautiful places don't want to move to these places. It's understandable really because for those of us who weren't born in beautiful areas, our dream is often to work hard and earn enough to be able to afford a house in a beautiful area. They are born with this privilege and feel that they should be able to maintain this privilege regardless of their financial circumstances.

People holidaying locally is a lot more sustainable than going abroad.

The reason these affordable houses are empty is not because they're in an ugly area (Yorkshire, for example, is beautiful) but because there are no jobs.

The privilege of being able to afford to buy more houses than you need vastly outweighs the privilege of growing up in a pretty area.

I wouldn’t worry too much. Within 40 years sea levels will rise and seasonal storms will periodically remove the sand from all the places mentioned and dump it out at sea. Beaches may even disappear altogether. Nobody will want the coast anymore and will look to travel to other places overseas. Long before then all the fishermen and women will have long retired and their boats scrapped and there really is nobody willing to replace them. The British coast as we know it is not there forever.

Being able to afford a lovely home where you grew up isn’t a human right either. If we’re going down that route then let the poor Cornish people who are priced out buy a flat in Hartlepool.

Immoral is a strong word, but I do think this should be regulated a lot more. Owners should have to apply for planning change of use to change a property into a holiday let, so that local authorities can manage the numbers. Not sure how to deal with second homes though. You could tax them more (stamp duty or council tax), but people who can afford second homes are probably wealthy enough not to care.

Houses are empty for lots of reasons and not just because there are literally no jobs. There are some in major cities etc that have lots of employment opportunities. There are also plenty of cheaper houses that are in less beautiful and desirable locations but have better job prospects than the areas of natural beauty.

It's not about just the privilege of growing up in a nice area but the fact that the locals want this privilege to be maintained for infinitum so that they and their offspring always have access to housing even though demand for housing is through the roof and they have no job or a very lowly paid job. Everyone knows in all cities/towns/villages that sometimes certain areas get disproportionately more expensive for whatever reason and this prices out people who otherwise would have lived there. The difference is that in most places people just suck it up and move to the next nicest area they can afford. The difference is in these beautiful places is that the locals insist that they simply can't leave and that restrictions must be placed on others so that locals can afford to live there.

We all have a chance in life to become privileged through wealth but none of us can change or influence where we were born. This is why I think the latter is the more morally suspect form of privilege.

Yes.
I have a second home in a popular seaside area. I’ve stopped using it and now it’s on a long term let with a lovely family. I just felt it was wrong to carry on and despite a lot of pressure from the letting agent I didn’t want to do holiday lets. In the last five years I’ve done it I’ve had three tenants and it’s worked really well. It’s a lovely property I get a fair - not as much as I could ask for - rent and everyone is happy.

@Bumpitybumper very much welcome people to relocate and work here; they too are priced out of the market. 2nd homes are being purchased well over asking price.

Haven’t seen them in a while but there used to be companies that would advertise on the tube in London and their whole business model was convincing landlords to turn their properties into AirB&Bs.

It would be more socially moral to build places for people to live

I don’t think people are arguing that at all! If it was simply people moving to e.g Cornwall because it was a nice place to live and work (as with your analogy about more desirable parts of cities) I doubt the locals would have any real issue. The point is that the holiday lets and second homers are a huge distortion to the local economy. They make their money in places where salaries are much higher, and use that money to outcompete locals for property in places that have beauty but lack high income jobs.

Leaving a holiday home empty seems worse than renting it out in Airbnb or similar. At least if it’s occupied by holiday makers it’s boosting the local economy.

Young and low paid people being unable to afford housing in the area they grew up in is a problem all over the country. It’s not something that only affects people that live in beautiful tourist areas so I have limited sympathy for people who complain as if it is.

I don't agree that second homes and short-term rental properties are immoral.

I don't agree that buy-to-let landlords are immoral, either.

I do feel there's something wrong with people staying in homes that are much bigger than they need and they may struggle to maintain/heat "because it's been their home for 30 years". And I'm ambivalent about single people living in 3 bed properties, but probably because I may be such a person in future not because I believe it's actually ok. I know a guy who lives in a 5 bed house alone: it is his investment he gets all the tax advantages from. He has fixed it up, but honestly, 5 beds ! I'd be happier if he did BTL. I know a few older people now living alone in detached 3-4 bed properties. One has a garden he can't maintain and in fact rarely goes out in. Just argh. We knew a child-free couple who insisted on buying a 3 bed house (they could barely afford, heard a lot about their mortgage challenges) with one bed room set up (expensively kitted out) as a cine-room.

If people are immoral for renting a holiday flat, where should they stay when on holiday. Camping, caravans, Hotels? BnBs?

Totally immoral.

Second home and holiday home owners are killing the very communities which attracts them to the area in the first place.

Holiday home owners bleat on about how their money helps keep local economies going - what a load of rubbish - the local economy would benefit far more from families and local workers living in those houses 12 months a year.

Most holiday home owners exploit a loophole meaning they don’t pay council tax, or indeed any form or local tax, and the majority of holiday home owners claimed as much as they could under covid grants £10,0000s - despite having a bumper letting out year and not losing any money - immoral.

The holidaymakers of these des res’ arrive in their be-top boxed SUVs to find their holiday home key safe - swiftly followed by a supermarket delivery. The £1000s the holidaymakers pay for their holiday home go to people who don’t live in the areas the holiday home is - therefore not a lot of the money stays in in the local economy.

Family homes, even those on housing estates and ex social housing are holiday homes - they are empty and dark through the the winter, people who used to rely on neighbours for help no longer have neighbours. Key workers, who could keep the economy going all year around cannot afford to live there and move further out, meaning the local services - buses, churches, schools, post offices, village shops cannot go all year around so these become ghost villages/towns outside April-September.

Families who have been evicted in favour of the holiday home and are being housed in caravan parks and travel lodges - whilst holidaymakers make themselves at home in the family homes.

Whoever can say this is not immoral is obviously rotten to the core and just trying to excuse their own greed and entitlement.

Ok then @Bumpitybumper I will shut down my care business which I barely make a living from because I live in a tourist area. And then what happens to my clients???

There's no space or money for them to go into care home nor do they want to. They want to live out their days in their homes!
There are no carers it's impossible getting help with care because nobody can afford to do it anymore.
So I now loose my home so it can be turned into an Airbnb or the likes and what my clients get left to rot? Because that's what's going to end up happening! All so some greedy so and so can have a weeks holiday!!!

Wow, the jealousy and failure literally drips from that post. What awful people, having a car with a box for the luggage, and horror of horrors, an SUV.

Yes.

And why shouldn’t they stay in those places? At the moment where I live homeless people inc families with children stay in tents, caravans, hotels, campsites - surely that isn’t right either?
if holiday makers used services purpose built accommodation, this would create more jobs rather than the once a week cleaner and letting agency.
Why on earth do holidaymakers have to stay in family homes? Why can’t they stay in holiday accommodation? You say they like it’s asking something unreasonable!

Jealousy? failure? Not really, I live in one of those places the idiots pay upwards of £2k a week to stay in.
Just fed up with holidaymakers and the ridiculously big cars that they drive, or rather can’t drive - particularly in reverse, or park.

There is a massive amount of jealousy on this thread.

I’ve lived there all my life and seen it slowly being killed by holidaymakers.
Others are welcome to enjoy it - just stop using family homes to do so and creating homelessness and ghost towns out of season.
Views on the hapless holidaymakers being unable to park their oversized cars is now bigoted? Never mind the bin - you get in the sea 😁😅

Yes, IMO they should be taxed in a way that makes them an undesirable investment. I would not ban them but would make them menaingfully revenue raising for the state (local council probably).

I am not jealous, that is just the go-to insult for people to chuck about. Have a for that bollocks.