Poor people being priced out

[veggifriedbreakfast]

I live in East London and need to move, I currently rent a 2 bedroom flat. But, looking around now, for a 2 bedroom the minimal is £1400 a month up to £2000 for a 2 bed!!!

It seems to me that what is happening is that actually poor people are being priced out of London. I lived in Stratford and had to move out of there due to the market going up and now where I am again it's happening. How can people on lesser incomes afford this? I am now looking to having to uproot ds again and move even further out because of this. Aibu in thinking that this is a part of forcing the poorer people out of London?

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-73635611.html

In Newbury park and there are cheaper ones too. Schools are excellent in the borough. Only twenty mins from stratford.

I see no one has responded to my links to different sets of quite affordable flats.

I'm on the money about people not compromising.

Labour had plenty of time to change that in the past when they were in power.

it’s the knock on affect though. Years ago if you wouldn’t be able to afford the area you grew up in your move to the next town, not far.
Kids grew up seeing grandparents
Grandparents had children near by to look after them as they got older. Everyone’s supporting each other
All is right with the world

Now your forcing families 2 / 3 + hours away. They can’t support, it’s mentally bad as well as financially bad as social services etc have to step in with elderly care.

I see no one has responded to my links to different sets of quite affordable flats.

I didn't feel the need to comment since I'm not looking for a flat in London. (When I worked in London I compromised by renting cheaply with family and commuting for three hours a day, and now I have left the UK altogether for a better life.)

But for what it's worth, I have friends (with well-paid jobs, higher rate taxpayers etc.) either renting or owning 25-50% of a flat near Seven Sisters or Blackhorse Road.

We moved 100 miles away from London to somewhere more affordable only to find rents have shot up by £300 pcm in as many years and despite us both working full time we are struggling to afford our 1250 pcm rent for a 3 bed house. But our children have settled in new schools, took a while to make new friends, new life etc and our jobs and suppprt network is here. If we move somewhere cheaper I’d have nobody to help with kids and no job so we don’t know what to do. It’s not our fault government policy forced house prices up. I think if you both work full time, the least you should be able to do is afford a modest home to live in.

Zaphod I heard they were renaming it Surreyshire

"Labour had plenty of time to change that in the past when they were in power"

Cop out.

Rents weren't as high as they are now as a % of income when Labour were in power, in fact the median percentage of income spent on rent went down during these years, only rising once the financial crash occured ( and people chose to rent rather than buy increasing demand) .

uk.businessinsider.com/generation-rent-londoners-spend-40-of-income-on-rent-says-ifs-2017-10

I hate this idea that people should be ‘entitled’ to live in the same town/suburb that they grew up in.

I grew up in a deprived area of the midlands. I pretty much had to move away in order to find ‘decent’ work in the field I studied in. Eventually, I got a job in London.

DH and I couln’t afford the property we wanted in London so we moved to a commutable town. We started from scratch - no family and no friends. We have made our life here.

I don’t get why anyone feels the government should be responsible for enabling them to be able to live and work in the place of their choosing. The most vulnerable, of course, should be prioritised for social housing in areas they have links to, but that is already the case.

*mrsm43s "I've never felt that we have the right to live in the most expensive place in the country, because we are fairly middling earners. "

but what happens about essential staff like nurses, hospital porters, cleaners?*

If I was in a low paid job, personally I wouldn't choose to do it in London unless the salary compensated for the commute or premium of living in London. If it doesn't, I choose to work elsewhere.

Only if everyone does that will there be any incentive for employers to up their wages/London weighting to reflect the extra costs of living in London.

As far as I'm aware, there's not a recruitment crisis in London, and so therefore enough people must feel that the salaries of jobs in London are adequate compensation. London will also always attract an influx of people who are happy to do a low paid job for a year or two, living in shared houses etc for the experience of living in London.

If there is, or becomes a recruitment crisis, then employers need to put up salaries. That is why we have things like the London Living Wage, which is commonly paid in London in preference to the Minimum Wage.

If you only have a low paid job, it's a bit unreasonable to expect to live in the most expensive area. That seems fairly obvious to be.

I am not considered poor because I am in a high-tax payer bracket, - not a stealth boat, just a tax fact! - and I had to move out of London more than 15 years ago! It's hardly news, city centres are expensive, and always have been. Prices go up, so the suburbs get more and more expensive and you have to relocate further.

It's not great, I don't think anyone really enjoy commuting and the wasted hours in the nightmare that are trains at the moment, but if you have a family, you don't really have a choice.

we're zone 5/6 borders btw and price increases are insane here too. If you started out here and can't stay, London is indeed saying "fuck off".

all the social housing tenants here were turfed out and sent to Beds and Cambridge. We had demos about that too but nothing helps.

teas we did similar, kids are settled in school, happy have friends doing well. Self employed, business doing well, employing a few people.

Suddenly we are in commuter land and it’s gone mental £250,000 houses are now upwards of £500,000
Rent £800 to £1500 upwards.
Nothing’s changed for us, we aren’t London we aren’t commuters. But as everyone’s been pushed further and further out the prices reflect it.

Our council house would have been 380 and that’s with 100k discount we cut our loses and have a bed in Milton Keyes

20k deposit would of got us nothing in London in my soffeny story

This dont live in London then
Doesn’t work when your kids are in school settled, your self employed, your parents are aging and need you.
It’s not easy to just go ‘fuck it’
Let alone if you didn’t live in ‘london’ to start with

Well lots of people want to live in London. If you want to live there you have to pay for the privilege. Basic economics.

I think "basic economics" would cover the fact that if you want someone to run your business that person must first have a home to live in, near that business you run.

because so many want to live in London, supply and demand means that it does appear to be possible to charge a fortune for a shithole and have pepple begging to live in it. elsewhere shitholes dont rent , as it should be.

the answer is to spread the jobs, transport etc etc out, reducing the demand. an overpriced destructive railway and another runway for people who wont leave the airport are not the answers.

London will be brilliant once it gets rid of the poor.

All the beautiful restaurants and shops unsullied by their grubby little hands.

Not sure who will actually serve you your food or sell you your clothes, but worry about that later.

It wasn't the same in the 80s. At all. The fact that there were well paid people in the 80s who couldn't afford to live centrally because they were spending so much of their money on childcare does not prove that.

The 80s wasn't some paradise where the poor could afford to live wherever they liked, but accommodation costs as a percentage of median salaries have grown since then. They just have.

This isn’t a problem that’s exclusive to London unfortunately. The whole of the south of England is the same and larger cities elsewhere in the country. Somethings got to give eventually- either the market will crash in spectacular fashion or the regulations regarding mortgage lending will have to lessen to allow those on low incomes/with no deposit to get on the ladder.

I think "basic economics" would cover the fact that if you want someone to run your business that person must first have a home to live in, near that business you run.

Yes, and you need to pay higher wages if the cost of living is higher.

If you consider nannies or cleaners, which comprise a super-fluid, responsive labour market, you can see how this works - you have to pay a premium to get one in London. They are earning more than teachers.

The average ( not note every before anecdotes start) minimum wage job in London has an annual take home pay of £16,110 or £1342.5 per month after tax.

That flat in Newbury Park would leave someone with £692 PCM for all other necessities and living.

Its hard, but do able. But remember that the London average salary is significantly higher than the national too.

Wow £600 a month mortgage on a 4 bed detached here. Quiet cul de sac, 20 mins from airport, 1/2 mile from school. 1/4 mile from high street and supermarket. 1/2 mile from beaches and woodland walks.

London ? Keep it.

The minimum wage is irrelevant to London, I suspect.

Both major parties are to blame. The Tories introduced right to buy, but Labour, who endlessly denounced it as pure Thatcherite evil, had many years to reverse the policy, but didn't. Why not? Because they thought - almost certainly correctly - that it would lose them votes. I know at least one diehard Labour voter who was only too happy to buy her home at a discount.

Tony Blair loved a load of super-rich people buying in London - he pontificated about the 'trickle-down' effect, which is a sick joke. Exactly the reverse has happened.

The one thing the current govt. has done, and not before time, is to cut down (and eventually abolish) the tax breaks for landlords, which skewed the market so unfairly against owner occupiers. In the short term this may have the effect of raising rents, but in the longer term, the number of landlords selling up because it's no longer easy money, or they can no longer make the sums add up, should help to bring prices down.

In an area I watch closely, in SW17, the price of 2 bed flats has already come down quite a bit - albeit from a completely crazy peak. E.g. a relatively spacious 2 bed Edwardian maisonettes with its own garden - originally priced at just under £600k - yes, it's mad, but not unusual a year or so ago - and this was in Tooting! - actually sold for £525k.

IMO there should be a lot more control and restrictions on social housing - there is supposed to be a lot of fraud, including people using all sorts of dodges to 'qualify' for right to buy, for properties which they later just rent out. Also, on a TV documentary some time ago, a man was shown to be trying to sublet a council flat in a prime area of London - for a lot more rent than he was paying the council - when he owned another flat just across the landing! I doubt that he was a one off, either.

I suspect that there is quite a bit of looking the other way, not to mention brown envelopes, within council housing depts, too. There has certainly been some of this proven in the past, and I doubt that very much has changed.