To think more people should be incentivised to downsize?

[Sprockerdilerock]

I'm sure I will be flamed but here goes.

I know so many older adults who live in family size homes long after their children have left. Would it not be better for the government to offer incentives eg no stamp duty, removal costs paid for them to downsize to free them up for those that need them more?

We do have a housing shortage and I get that we could always build more homes, but we are also heading towards a climate crisis and surely it's better to use what resources we do have more efficiently and plough less energy into creating more.

My MIL is case in point - she still lives in the home my DH and his siblings grew up and often expresses a wish to downsize but she doesn't have a lot of money to spend on things like legal costs etc.

[quote Sprockerdilerock]@CorianderBee increase supply of 1 and 2 beds for couples of all ages so as not to price anyone out. More smaller houses can be build on x amount of land than larger ones therefore less land is needed.

Living within our means collectively for the sake of a dying planet.[/quote]
You are talking about starter homes. How would you prevent them all from being snapped up by buy-to-let landlords then, making them unavailable for homeowners to buy them?

You can't sell your house and downsize if there's nowhere to buy.

I wasn’t swears there was a shortage of large houses, although I’m not sure how many young families can afford to upsize n any case.

I have thought about this when a lovely old lady across the street from me with a four bedroomed house had dementia and she was so lonely with just her carer. I thought that those extra rooms could be filled up with other lovely old ladies so that they could chat and watch tv together, her house was literally rotting around her but with more people living there the repairs could have been made.

Sorry, meant to type: “I wasn’t aware”..

The problem is apart from all the wonderful reasons listed:
Personally I detest one of my immediate neighbours, but love all the other 32 and don't like thoughts of moving to another property and saying goodbye.

Depends, OP - would you extend it to those in LA and HA housing too?

Not really. It is the same as saying younger people shouldn't own a computer, an expensive phone and an ipad and going out to restaurants and bars. The reason a house holds its value is because it takes a lot of sacrifice to buy it, and maintain it. Also 'good' areas become good because of the people who live there.
However, I agree that property developers are building awful homes. They are cramped and badly designed.

There could be 300 vacant bigger properties in my area, it would be irrelevant as I can't afford to move. The issue for many is the ridiculous deposits needed for a mortgage nowadays making it near impossible to achieve if you've already got a mortgage and not a massive amount of equity

I have always thought it would be better if older people downsized, better for the older people to be living in accommodation which is easier to manage if they have care needs, and selling up will free up capitol to pay for care

5% isn't really ridiculous. (The final sum can be if we are talking 500k+ house though)

I think it's entirely dependent on your personal circumstances.......I'm already planning on moving once the kids are older (16, 13 &11) as I don't want to Impact their schoolwork. Where I am now holds painful memories of an abusive ex so I can't wait to start fresh. On the other hand, my ex MIL was forced to downsize through the council despite being partially blind & this really upset her.

Oh sorry, yeah 5% isn't really second buyer. Sorry

It must be frustrating to be in your position if you can’t find a house.

Granted my house suits my needs as I have 3 little kids - I won’t be going anywhere for at least 20 years.

However when my kids move out I feel no obligation to move until it’s the right thing for me to do. We worked hard to have what we have. I love my home that I have worked for, and yeah I got a great deal. When I downsize I know I will be picky- because I can. They don’t build houses the size of mine any more, but I certainly won’t be rushed out of it.

However my family home (from when I moved out at 22) was a large Victorian house, and when my siblings and dad left and it was just me and my mum it was a horrible feeling as it felt so empty. So I can see some of your point.

I think it’s a good idea. But are large houses really so sought after? My parents house has been on the market for two years.

I think it depends on the house.

My DGM's (she's gone into a nursing home) sold quickly because it has four bedrooms (one already set up for a home office), a nice garden and a park at the end of the road. It was bought by a family with a toddler and baby, where dad will stay in London two nights a week and work from home the rest of the time. It's nice to think of it being a family home again.

My other DGM's house is different. It's three bed, but on a big plot with a lovely garden and separate garage. Huge windows, and very light and airy. Whoever buys it is going to knock it all about and build a massive extension, and that will be one less medium-sized house on the market.

That’s such a shame @PolkadotsAndMoonbeams. Maybe part of the answer is to stop giving planning permission for all these extensions, the fashion for vast kitchens with bifold doors has a lot to answer for.

I completely agree with this. Obviously nobody should ever be forced, but in my parents Close of twelve houses alone there are over 25 empty bedrooms. All 3 and 4 bed semi detached houses that would be ideal for families. All still occupied by couples in the their 60s and 70s. It should be massively incentivised instead of building more and more houses - it’s what they do in Europe x

I did the reverse and upsized when I was a 69. I always wanted a big house to spread out in and I thought its now or never. Young first time buyers bought my old house and I bought a big house that they would never be able to afford. (cashed in my shares and savings) So I did make room for a family who could afford it. I sold it exactly one hour after it went on the market. My new house had been on the market for months.

@OverTheRubicon

It's not rubbish, there's a pretty long history of thought on this, from John Stuart Mill to Proudhon and Marx and beyond

Those ideas were coined and attempted 100 years ago. The regimes have now been abolished (bar a few countries) - why do you reckon that is?

Have you tried talking to those (or their descendants) who lived through those times? You may learn a thing or two.

If someone came to me hailing those ideas, I would assume they are very young, naive and not that well versed in history.

This Could be an idea.
With your mil situation, do you need a bigger house?
I ask, if she is after a smaller house and say you could do with a bigger one, could you look at swapping houses.
I don't how it could go, if would be nice, if the council, could have a list of people who would like to down size, so people could swap, in the there village or local area.
I guess there is legal stuff involved. But it would help people.

We’re in our 50s still got children in their 20s at home but older ones have left and gage their own children.
We have a large 5 bedroom house.
We feel our house is finally being used properly.
It is large enough to entertain our children, their partners and our grandchildren.
We all gather at least once a week and the garden is great for us all in the summer.
When our children were younger they were all off doing their own thing, we were in the house alone then.
I don’t see us downsizing for a long time if at all.

@sadblackcat

I did the reverse and upsized when I was a 69. I always wanted a big house to spread out in and I thought its now or never. Young first time buyers bought my old house and I bought a big house that they would never be able to afford. (cashed in my shares and savings) So I did make room for a family who could afford it. I sold it exactly one hour after it went on the market. My new house had been on the market for months.

Yes I want to upsize or have a different house, we will definitely move out of the area in the next 10 years'

@Sprockerdilerock

Good points actually *@surfingwolf*

But I wonder it really be that difficult to plan housing by population demographics?

@Glenorma but good size flats with good accessibility might be profitable?

Local authorities do try to plan housing by demographics. That is why housing needs assessments exist. bowennational.com/what-is-a-housing-needs-assessment-and-how-do-you-use-it/

Our culture and tradition in the UK is built upon certain principles, which means I'm likely to get flamed here too.

But our housing market is one of the only in the world where you can hold onto assets virtually free of charge.

Elsewhere in the world, taxes are higher on simply owning wealth and property.

Here the only tax on property ownership is "council tax" which is specifically hypothecated to councils and people identify as paying for local services.

If there was instead a recognition in the tax system that by owning property, you are effectively sequestering an irreplaceable asset (part of the severely limited housing stock) then I think that would encourage more healthy movement.

If instead of taxing only on moving, there was more tax on occupation/ownership, it might incentivise people to only utilise what was appropriate for their needs.

The main problem is our attachment to property - we all culturally aspire to "own our estate", and we imbue it with incredible emotional attachment.

Hence if we changed the tax system now, it would bring an enormous backlash from the Daily Mail/Express reading middle England.

I think we're stuck with that culture for now, whilst the younger generation have been entirely ripped off - in my opinion.

Sorry that was a US example but they also exist in the UK
www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-and-economic-development-needs-assessments