To think there would be less of a housing crisis if people stopped buying second homes!

[Okunoshima]

Before anyone says anything, I understand that some people have second homes as private rentals and understand the need for rental properties

What I'm talking about is people buying second homes as holiday homes to live in on weekends/holidays/lend out to their friends.

Where I live there are a huge number of houses used solely for this purpose, and a lot of these houses are 2 beds that would make great homes for couples or families to occupy permanently. Instead they sit empty most of the time, while residents are left with the option of trying to buy (not affordable for many) or trying to find something in the tiny pool of private rentals available.

I don't understand why people can't just use hotels/B&Bs etc. They would be contributing to the local economy by doing so, and creating employment.

I do see your point but second homes also provide jobs in the area, such as employing local tradespeople to do them up and eating in local restaurants.

The owners also pay council tax but won't be there all the time using the services.

Also, where do you draw the line? Should a single person in a 4 bed home have to sell because a family would need the space more?

Yep and people buying homes for investment. But there must be quite a few land Lords on here as when I say this I get flamed.

Thing is people who do this don't want to hear its shitty. They're never going to voluntarily stop doing things which they like to do. But I'm a class war twat and think we need to get rid of the rich so...

@Okunoshima

.A lot of people I know claiming they can't afford a house (pre covid) used to eat out frequently, go on holidays, weekends away, nights out. They are in designer clothes and drive newish cars...

I can't afford a house and I eat out about twice a year, never go on nights out and haven't been only holiday since 2017! I also drive a Peugeot 206. Similar situation among others I know around the same age (early 30s)

But logically op your posts make no sense. Locals have just as much opportunity to buy these houses as those buying a second home.

@Whyistheteacold

I completely agree with you op. I know one family who are currently living in a bedsit, and I've known people who got by sofasurfing among friends as there simply aren't enough rental properties/houses. And some selfish twats have multiple homes that aren't being used. It's lovely for them that they can afford several properties, but they just don't consider (or care) about the impact it has on others

What impact? Even if they didn’t buy those houses these people still couldn’t afford to buy them, when they go uo for sale they have the same opportunity as any one else.

Blame the government and not market forces.

I live in an extremely well known village, the majority of the homes are now holiday cottages that lay empty for huge swathes of time.
In the space of 5 years almost every house has been taken over on my street, there are no families left and the local school is full of children from elsewhere.
In the mean time we have entitled owners banging on our door because we dared to leave our bin out too long and she had guests coming.

Sometimes they get inherited, ie parents dying but live too far away to move into them so keep them as a second home for emotional reasons.

Second homes should be banned. Or taxed prohibitively might be more realistic.

They are destroying a lot of communities in my part of Scotland.

It’s a lovely thing to have, I’m sure, but the damage when they are present on a larger scale is dreadful.

YANBU OP.

Where i live (rural tourist destination) there was a survey and a huge percentage of the properties here are holiday homes, more than us locals. They're all just sat there empty and the prices of properties are forced so high that noone with an average income... who was actually born and raised in the area, can afford to buy a house!

Yes totally agree. But the fault lies with policy and the government enabling this, not the people buying the properties. As long as people can, they will.

But logically op your posts make no sense. Locals have just as much opportunity to buy these houses as those buying a second home.

Hard to believe, but typically locals don't have the same resources available as well off people from the city who can buy a second home.

Housing prices go up substantially when outsiders start to move in and make a village or town a holiday destination. The local jobs don't start paying more, however.

So soon the nicer homes, or even all of them, are out of reach of local people, and they have to move elsewhere. Away from their community, family, work, the schools their kids went to.

The new community ends up being a bunch of fairly transient people who don't do the actual work of making a community function, and aren't even there a lot of the time.

All so some very well off people who already are in a position to choose to live pretty much wherever they want, put their kids in the schools they want, can have a second place to live as well.

I don't think they should be banned. But since it can have an adverse effect on community, they should be limited and licenced. So for example only x houses in a village can be not permanently occupied (owner residents, rental residents), the rest would have to be owner occupier or long term rent. It still allows for some second homes and airbnbs and such, but without that big impact.
Councils can do this with businesses, why not property like that.

But logically op your posts make no sense. Locals have just as much opportunity to buy these houses as those buying a second home.

Unfortunately we don't as the purchases have raised the prices so high that they're now above what the "average" person can afford. We're forced to rent because to save up for the size of the deposit necessary takes an insane amount of time, if it's ever possible. A lot of us have to leave.

i am not a hol home owner and while i agreed with others that 2nd homes can be a problem,i think the real problem is the cost of building or re-furbishing houses.
To put it bluntly its all the tradesmen who do not want the work or quote a fuck off price .
They was a tv prog on ages ago which highlighted the issue : anyone wanting to self build needs to hire a electrician / plumber even if only to inspect the work done and as we all know getting a date booked to visit is nigh impossible ,
And if they live on site in a caravan for longer than 10 months the council evict them.
This is why lots of council houses are empty the cost of paying builders and security to make sure the materials are not stolen, is higher than any potential income from local tax within 25 years etc

the only solution i can see is to pass some laws enabling housing minsters to send in the army logistical corps.
this will also be enlarged to include tradesmen on some sort of alternative to jury service option .

I know you will all shout and say its back door slave labour - but couldn't this civil army get a bond where they own 10% of the scheme or something .

We might buy a holiday home very soon, it will be for our use and enjoyment and as an investment.
It’s not a moral thing to buy a house any or what a it is to buy stocks or shares

I'm struggling to understand the price thing too. Why would person A buying a house, and then using it as a second home, drive up the prices in the area, yet Person B (who is local), buying the house and living in it would have no effect on increasing house prices?

It’s liek when people moan they can’t afford to live in London etc
If you can afford it tough luck really
You will need to retrain get a better paid job etc

@Teakind

I do see your point but second homes also provide jobs in the area, such as employing local tradespeople to do them up and eating in local restaurants.

The owners also pay council tax but won't be there all the time using the services.

Also, where do you draw the line? Should a single person in a 4 bed home have to sell because a family would need the space more?

This simply isn’t true. Where are the people second homes allegedly create jobs for supposed to live when local wages don’t support inflated house prices?

A single person in a four bed home is completely different. It’s not a house standing empty half the year.

I'd withdraw BTL mortgages if it were up to me.

@unmarkedbythat

I'd withdraw BTL mortgages if it were up to me.

You would end up with hell of a lot of homeless and empty properties

@justchecking1

I'm struggling to understand the price thing too. Why would person A buying a house, and then using it as a second home, drive up the prices in the area, yet Person B (who is local), buying the house and living in it would have no effect on increasing house prices?

Person A buys a holiday home which looks ridiculously cheap to them because a) they live in London or another city with sky high house prices and b) they earn a big city salary. Person B is on minimum wage.

Person A pays over the odds, this sets the bar higher for all subsequent sales. This has a domino effect on prices.

I live in a very nice village an hour’s commute from London, everyone here who sells their house rubs their hands with glee when a London buyer hoves into view.

So people always say. If no new BTL mortgages were available would all current landlords with BTL mortgages suddenly evict their tenants and leave their houses empty? Doubt it.

It's locals selling the houses that are reaping the rewards - not really fair to blame those who buy them.

Too many people think they should be able to buy where they were born, their parents live etc. Why? Often that isn't where the employment opportunities are.

I've moved around the country for work and too often hear people moaning about 'incomers'', 'off comers' as we've legitimately bought a house put on the open market by a local. People follow employment opportunities as a rule, I certainly don't expect there to be a house with my name on it should I choose to move back to my home city. Nor do I expect it as a right that my kids have the ability to buy a house on my doorstep.

Second homes (I don't have one) are often in scenic rural or coastal areas where many people look to rent a holiday cottage. Those holiday makers bring revenue in to the local community. Take away the holidaymakers and many of these areas, already seasonal, will die on the feet.

@unmarkedbythat

So people always say. If no new BTL mortgages were available would all current landlords with BTL mortgages suddenly evict their tenants and leave their houses empty? Doubt it.

No they wouldn't all suddenly evict tenants, but if they wanted to sell for whatever reason (many do sell for health, retiring, releasing funds) then either the occupiers would have to buy or they would have to go into a rental market which would be getting smaller and smaller, hence more difficult to get a property and expensive. These people who cannot afford deposits now, won't magically have them ready if this would happen.

Those holiday makers bring revenue in to the local community. Take away the holidaymakers and many of these areas, already seasonal, will die on the feet.

It appears quite a few local councils disagree with you.

thenegotiator.co.uk/northumberland-holiday-home-sales-ban/