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.

*Italy perhaps has a good solution.

When your spouse dies, the estate is automatically split between the other spouse and dcs. So, three dcs, the widow/er gets a quarter. Either the widow/er buys the dcs out, or the property is sold in order to facilitate the inheritance or, in most cases, one or t’other of the dcs takes over the house.*

Perhaps it is no coincidence that the Italian birth rate is collapsing.......

My MIL stayed on in the same 3 bed semi after her husband died, she'd been there since her children were at secondary school when she had lots of friends locally. However most of the people her age had moved on or died long before she did.
She didn't want to move because she'd spent money on the heating and the double glazing, but in reality she was very isolated, lived a long way from the shopping centre, had a poor bus service and didn't enjoy maintaining the garden. She could have been much happier in a place nearer the centre and to her daughter and her family who spent a lot of time visiting her and helping her as she got older.
I absolutely disagree with people who suggest that we should all be packed off to a development for people over 55 - we're not all suited to that way of living.

Is that true for Italy? Another way to put women in their place as they are likely to outlive their spouse.

@Ifailed

Out of curiosity, I just checked Righmove for 2 bed bungalows for sale in the whole of London. There are 43, out of a city of 10,000,000 people. Where are all these older people supposed to move to?

We've moved to a maisonette, about a third of the size of our last very large house, with the potential to open up a lovely room for living/dining/kitchen. We're both around 70 and happy to undertake the building work, but in five years time would probably have been beyond the stage where we wanted to do this. As it was the clearing out and disposal of things we didn't need was very hard work and we still have more stuff than we need. A bungalow is my idea of hell. What people our age need is a good sized main room, a nice bedroom for ourselves and a decent bathroom. If our family live reasonably close we don't need extra bedrooms though one or possibly two small rooms are OK. We'd have liked a garden as we love gardening but as it is we have a large balcony and I'm sure we will grow to love it.

Its a good idea OP, if it changed some peoples' thinking on the issue of downsizing it might be a good thing.

My parents insist on continuing to stay in their 6 bedroom house, even thought its now very inconvenient for them. Its at the top of a ridiculously steep hill, which neither of them can walk up or down any more, with awkward parking which means a number of reversing manoeuvres to turn a car around. DM has given up driving so although perfectly mobile, only leaves the house when DF drives her somewhere. DF is bone idle and rarely leaves the house and 6 months ago broke his ankle, so has sat in a chair ever since and refused to weight bear on it because it is still swollen. DM is having to help him around everywhere, which suits DF as he likes women running around after him.

Anyway, its sad how their mobility has do quickly declined. They would obviously be much happier in a small bungalow on a modern development somewhere with a landscaping service for the communal grounds (their garden in their house is large, full of awkward spaces and takes hours to mow, which they won't do themselves now either (as with everything else, the answer is "We're too old now to do things like that) so the rest of us have to mow it for them as they refuse to pay for a gardener).

Before coronavirus, they used to like to spend 4 or 5 months per year in their French house (which is equally awkward, and in which they have the neighbours running around after them for free cutting the grass, etc) and worried about the security of their UK home, but refuse to pay for security measures or even replace the locks. Of course its been burgled twice while they were away.

For them, a 6 bedroom house is a status symbol. They deliberately won't plan ahead as they like to leave things for other people to sort out for them. They won't consider selling it and moving somewhere smaller, although they admit the house isn't particularly convenient for them. If downsizing became more the done thing, then they would probably jump straight on that bandwagon (and buy yet another holiday home abroad with the money saved that they never use and won't let anyone else use either, but thats another story).

@angela99999, a bungalow won’t be your idea of hell if either of you can’t manage the stairs at any point. My parents wanted a bungalow but couldn’t find one that was suitable. They ended up buying a house with an upstairs shower room and a downstairs bathroom as the next best thing. It saved their bacon when one of them lost mobility and the bed had to be moved downstairs. I’d happily move to a bungalow if there were any where we live.

Great idea OP!

Oh and of course it doesn't have to be a bungalow, it could be a small terraced. But what is this snobbery about bungalows? I live in a bungalow ie a one storey house without rooms upstairs and I never notice anything different about it. True, its not a large Victorian house but its a perfectly good house.

DF now lives entirely downstairs in his 6 bedroom house after breaking his ankle. The dining room had to be converted to a bedroom for him. He moans constantly that its cold and DM is stuck sleeping upstairs because they don't want to move the double bed downstairs or make it a permanent arrangement by buying a new double bed and having it delivered and putting it in the dining room.

[quote VinylDetective]@angela99999, a bungalow won’t be your idea of hell if either of you can’t manage the stairs at any point. My parents wanted a bungalow but couldn’t find one that was suitable. They ended up buying a house with an upstairs shower room and a downstairs bathroom as the next best thing. It saved their bacon when one of them lost mobility and the bed had to be moved downstairs. I’d happily move to a bungalow if there were any where we live.[/quote]
I agree with some of this, but we have downstairs bedrooms too.

I didn’t know that about Italy’s inheritance laws, but it certainly explains the many multi-generation households, which they said was one reason for the virus spreading in such a fast and deadly fashion at first.

I have recently heard similar from a senior doctor friend of a dd, re a certain BAME group in the U.K. - a lot of deaths within multi-generational households. Now working on Covid wards, the dr recently had 2 middle aged siblings and one of their parents, all dying within a few days of each other.

Because the dr is herself BAME from a similar ethnic minority, she felt able to add (without being deemed racist) that in her opinion it was also down to a shit diet (her words), lack of vitamin D (covered up and keeping out of the sun anyway), and never opening any windows.

I absolutely disagree with people who suggest that we should all be packed off to a development for people over 55 - we're not all suited to that way of living
Agreed. I can't think of anything more depressing if you had to leave a much loved house for this. Little boxes in a sunset village. Ugh.

@MrsBadcrumble123

I think those in social housing should only have enough rooms for their family size and not be permitted to swap inbetween themselves. See sp many social housing swaps on Facebook - in their houses pictures (yes I'm nosey) are xboxs, massive Tvs, sky boxes and lots are blaming better kitted out than mine! Then I see that the rent is £90 a week for a 3 bed and I think why the hell am I busting my ass working full time to pay for my 1k a month 3 bed?!!!ugh

How does forcing people to stay put cause your high rents? People move because they need to, not to piss you off.

You've got it the wrong way round. £90 a week allows a housing association to cover their costs and build more houses, so their rent is the baseline.
Your question should be ''why are private landlords so expensive compared to HA rents?''

@GreenlandTheMovie

Your parents sound very stubborn indeed

I still don't understand why the government (many of whom are not young parents) would subsidise those with very valuable assets to sell them.
If people want to downsize, they can realise some of the capital. If they don't want to, that is their right. If people want a larger house, they buy one. They might need to move, to sacrifice holidays or meals out, they might need to limit their family size until they've bought a larger house, they might need to do up a less desirable hours or accept what they have.
Bungalows tend to be suburban - like chalet bungalows. Not something we would ever chose. We certainly can't imagine moving to a hideous retirement village. If we move it will likely be to a bigger property. Larger houses come to those who wait....to enjoy as grandchildren appear and there is more time for hobbies. The elderly folk here all garden and definitely wouldn't want to reduce their acreage.
Affluent older people just get more help in - they stay where they are happy and give employment to gardeners, gutter clearers, cleaners, window cleaners and logboys.

still don't understand why the government (many of whom are not young parents) would subsidise those with very valuable assets to sell them.

Votes. Same as right to buy. It would be bare faced bribery.

@VinylDetective

Votes. Same as right to buy

I think rather than bribey they would take it as an insult (asked to move out of the way to make room for 'families')

I think a problem is - as evidenced by any on this thread - is that we just can’t see ourselves getting old. It’s just fine to sneer at bungalows when you’re 40... or even 70. But it’s a fact that so many older people suddenly go downhill health wise, and then it’s too late for them to organise a move themselves or have the will to sort out a large, possession-filled property.

I can never believe those folks on Escape to the Country who want to move to big houses with several acres when they are 70+. I bet their dcs are cursing! I saw a “downsizing” one recently: the couple spent the whole time complaining that the houses weren’t as big as their current one

@IrmaFayLear. People who own houses as Tenants in Common: the house goes to the surviving spouse. Anyone worried should get legal advice.

I live in a 3 bedroom house, and am one of the hated baby boomers. I would love to move to a bungalow but the only 1-2 bedroom ones locally are on retirement complexes. Their prices are comparable to what my house is worth and on top of that there is a service charge which ranges from £200-£750 per month. There is certainly no incentive for me to move, as much as I would like to.

I don't know why people hate bungalows so much (besides the location issue that a PP has mentioned)

If it's aesthetics, this could be easily improved surely (and preferably addressed for new ones before being built)?

So for people that need a bigger house, but can't afford the additional cost of a larger house and stamp duty etc, they should just stay cramped rather than extend?

SortMyLifeOutProperly, it depends on the house — some houses can easily take an extension, and it doesn't really affect it (say part of the house is one storey, extending over the top of that to make an extra bedroom).

Taking a small-medium sized house that has a big plot and extending it hugely, upstairs and downstairs, is moving a house from one category into the next. It just makes another big house that other people won't be able to afford in the future.

If you think of it in terms of rungs on the housing ladder, what happening is that the rung that house is on has just been slid up to the where the next one is, leaving a huge gap below.

@VinylDetective

still don't understand why the government (many of whom are not young parents) would subsidise those with very valuable assets to sell them.

Votes. Same as right to buy. It would be bare faced bribery.

Yes, I suppose you are right.

What confuses me, is I know a lot of families on the council house waiting list, & yet I know other single people or couples (Children have flown the nest) living in 3 bed council houses only using one bedroom. must be a shortage of small council houses

Going years back I know that 2 beds were a big issue to get hold of. My parents wanted one when they moved from a 3 bed so that my ill brother could move in with them to make care easier (he lived in a private flat). They ended up taking a 1 bed as they couldn't afford to keep the 3 up and it wasn't suitable for my brother anyway as it was upstairs. Council reckoned they'd wait years for 2 bed.