Mumsnet Logo
My feed

to access all these features


to ask what you think about Corbyn and Lammy's suggestion that houses of the rich should be requisitioned to give to homeless Grenfell victims?

608 replies

nutter19 · 16/06/2017 12:34

I am not sure what to think about it. On the one hand I agree that there are a lot of very big houses in the borough that are empty and could be used to house the homeless rather than left empty.

On the other hand, it seems a bit sinister to think they would just take private property off those they deem rich.

What do other people think?

OP posts:

Saucery · 16/06/2017 12:41

No. You can't just take over properties like that. By all means ask, encourage and support this would be unfair.


Southwaite · 16/06/2017 12:44

No. not a good precedent.

It is not the fault of the "rich people" that this happened.


Hapaxlegomenon · 16/06/2017 12:46

Very very sinister to start suggesting things like this


Sittinonthefloor · 16/06/2017 12:46

It does seem unfair that there is such a divide and empty houses while people are homeless. But you can't just take things - how would you legally define the boundaries of who you could take stuff from? The legal objections would go on for years! It's a daft idea, Only option, if these houses were really needed, would be compulsory purchase order at full market value. Then they'd need conversation. Cheaper to build from scratch. Very irresponsible of Corbyn to suggest ideas that can't happen and won't happen.


Moanyoldcow · 16/06/2017 12:46

Did you read the actual quote or just the reports in the more right-wing press?

He didn't state whose properties, did not specify rich people and did not specify the location.

'Homes must be found - requisitioned if necessary'

Pretty far from taking rich people's houses.

to ask what you think about Corbyn and Lammy's suggestion that houses of the rich should be requisitioned to give to homeless Grenfell victims?

sashh · 16/06/2017 12:48

It is not the fault of the "rich people" that this happened.

I think you need to do some reading.


jammyjamjamjam · 16/06/2017 12:48

IT isn't a simple as taking the houses and I'm guessing Corbyn et al know that.

But it is a shame there are whole streets of fancy houses going to ruin because someone abroad got them as an investment 5 /10 years ago and hasn't maintained or lived in them. Plus by not living there I assume they don't pay council tax? If I'm right on that a tax on empty houses would be good. Could use it fund council houses.


Madbengalmum · 16/06/2017 12:50

Marxism at its worst.


TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 16/06/2017 12:50

I thought, 'Good for him for shifting the Overton Window a bit in the right direction.'
It isn't going to happen. But it is a useful reminder of the stupidity of the fact that so many houses in the area stand empty while people are crammed into overcrowded and unsafe accommodation.

If we suddenly did this it would crash house prices with very negative effects on the economy. But we do need to start thinking about a gentler solution to this contributing factor to the London housing crisis.


ShotsFired · 16/06/2017 12:50

By inference though, that "requisitioning" is coming from richer people. Poorer people don't tend to have spare houses lying about anywhere, let alone in Kensington.

And he clearly states in his next sentence about "luxury flats left empty". Of course he's going after "the rich". He is who he is, that's what he does.

But I agree with pp - it is the thin end of the wedge and impossible to enforce at the snap of a finger anyway. Therefore it does seem a rather deliberately provocative and rather pointless thing to say.


Southwaite · 16/06/2017 12:51

What, rich people just going about their business and living their lives? How's it their fault?


tiggytape · 16/06/2017 12:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

user1471439240 · 16/06/2017 12:52

They are Marxists, they believe all property is theft, (except their own)
Its what they do, the state takes over its subjects lives.
See Corbyns land tax idea for further insight.
Corbyn and McDonnell are telling you who they are, its not as though they hide the fact.


Cantseethewoods · 16/06/2017 12:52

I agree with a tax on empty property but either you believe in private property or you don't. Once you don't, you can kiss goodbye to any investment in the country whatsoever.


Hermagsjesty · 16/06/2017 12:53

He didn't actually specify "rich" houses ever. i think this is probably too complicated to put into practice in the short term. However, it is horrifying that in a rich borough of a rich city traumatised families are sleeping on the floor of a sports centre. There is historical precedent for requisitioning property during a time of national crisis, so, I suppose it depends on if this is a national crisis. And absolutely there needs to be a debate going forward about how it's okay for so many properties to be sitting empty when there isn't enough affordable housing. (I think empty houses already pay more tax - but maybe that needs to go up further.)


FinallyThroughTheRoof · 16/06/2017 12:53

Marxism at its worst

Wanting to house homeless people.

How bloody awful


CardinalSin · 16/06/2017 12:54

What Moany says - please actually read what people say before automatically believing the Daily Heil.

In fact, don't read the Daily Heil, as it will automatically be lying to you.


purits · 16/06/2017 12:54

Did you read the actual quote

What did he say apart from a hand-wringing "something must be done". It's a sound bite with no actual solution.

They have already pledged that they are going to re-house locally.


Sittinonthefloor · 16/06/2017 12:54

Moany - if he didn't mean taking them from rich people who did he mean? I have a feeling you do pay council tax on vacant properties as long as they are habitable.


Birdsgottaf1y · 16/06/2017 12:57

There are people that lived in those flats for over 30 years and who are now priced out of the area, so they should be housed as close as possible so they don't have to change Doctors, Carers, Schools, Hospitals, Support Workers etc.

It doesn't have to apply to everyone, those that have been there less than two years, say.

Similar happened to my Grandmother and Mother, but via compulsory purchase to build Liverpool University. They built up the area a few years later, but they couldn't return because they were considered housed (in Kirkby some distance away).

It wasn't fair and there should be a pledge to re-housing people later on, even if they are housed.

Otherwise here is a form of social cleansing going on.


Cantseethewoods · 16/06/2017 12:58

I have a feeling you do pay council tax on vacant properties as long as they are habitable.

Yes, but I think there should be an additional tax on homes which are not occupied for a certain number of days per year (i.e. kept as second/third/ fourth homes by people)


Birdsgottaf1y · 16/06/2017 12:58

""I have a feeling you do pay council tax on vacant properties as long as they are habitable.""

You don't for a time period, then just a very reduced amount, if at all.


Cacofonix · 16/06/2017 12:59

Don't be so naive that he isn't targeting rich people- it is plainly inferred in his second sentence that luxury property that is left empty is a target. Who owns luxury property ffs? Now I agree that second homes that are left empty should be taxed rigorously but that is another thread.


sashh · 16/06/2017 12:59

What, rich people just going about their business and living their lives? How's it their fault?

The cladding was to improve the view for the rich people in another block. It did not benefit the residents and is probably why the fire spread at more than a floor a min.

Lots of residents tried to complain about the crap work and the fire hazards, they tried to go to court but couldn't get legal representation because they could not get legal aid.

To improve the view of the rich poor people's lives were put in danger.


tabulahrasa · 16/06/2017 12:59

I'm not seeing a huge issue with it tbh, I'm assuming it'd be some sort of fixed term emergency rental agreement at the rate they were paying for their original housing until a longterm solution is in place rather than actually taking people's property from them.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Sign up to continue reading

Mumsnet's better when you're logged in. You can customise your experience and access way more features like messaging, watch and hide threads, voting and much more.

Already signed up?