To be conflicted by the crackdown on 2nd homes

[chairz]

I complete understand the problems they cause & do agree with a higher levy but thenI have used holiday cottages lots of times in the past & plan to in the future.

Definitely believe it, its well known that the incomers are the ones that have invigorated, revitalised the area and challenged the corruption in the local councils which effectively continued to destroy the place while lining their own pockets.

I think it is wrong that residential properties are taken over as second homes or holiday homes. There was a thread on here recently about a lady who will be made homeless because her landlord is selling up - with hundreds of thousands of empty homes, and then second homes, nobody should be in that position. We DO have enough houses, we just don't manage them properly.

Court paperwork arrived for me this morning. I will be officially homeless in less than a month.

Why

Because my house will be used as an Airbnb from now on.

There is nothing for me to rent within a commutable distance to my business.

I will be living in my car. With cancer

It's an issue, but it's a complicated one, and I've not seen any serious ideas suggested that would fix it. I live in Cornwall so I'm very familiar with the problem.

Most new builds aren't bought by second home owners, because they're not in the 'right place'. Generally the touristy/second home hotspots are in the centre of the quaint little villages (mostly the coastal areas round here). The pressure of second homes won't be alleviated by simply banning new builds from being them.

And there are two types of second homes - those that are bought as investments (and let out), and those that are bought purely for private use by their owners. At least the ones that are let out (on AirBNB etc, who are being wrongly blamed for the issue), at least offer the positive that they are bringing in a regular churn of tourists to the area, with all the consequential spending and trade that they generate. The worst part of the problem is the private second homes, where their owners come and visit for the occasional weekend get away or a week in the summer, but the rest of the year they sit completely vacant. And even when those second home owners do come down and use their places, they don't generally do the touristy things - they're not out spending money like someone who's down here for their annual holiday. They come for the quiet get away and tend to stay in their houses much more.

House next door to me is a holiday home owned by a middle aged couple who live several hours away. They only visit once or twice a month at most, and never stay more than two nights. Sometimes we don't even see them for 6 to 8 weeks. While they're down here they do a bit of gardening, go for walks, and sit in and watch tv. They don't use the local shops down here, not even the supermarkets, as they usually bring a weekend supply of food with them. Their holiday home ownership entitles them to the same 'local passes' that many tourist attractions offer for local residents, so even when they do go out, they're not paying full price for admissions in the way that proper tourists would.

Tourism trade is so very seasonal - there are a couple of months of chaos in the summer, spring and autumn ticks over, and the depths of winter are almost dead. The advantage of houses as holiday lets is that they are usable all year round. So while camp sites, holiday parks, traditional b&b's and small hotels, and most purpose built holiday accommodation are all closed during the winter months, at least holiday let houses are still there providing winter holiday accommodation, which keeps a trickle of tourism flowing through the winter.

You've got to realise that most second home owners are pretty wealthy, so any financial disincentive you put in place (stamp duty, council tax premiums etc) is like water off a duck's back to them. It does set the bar a little higher and might price out the average joe investors who buy to let out as holiday lets, but the worst culprits will still be able to afford their private second homes and won't be deterred at all.

The biggest underlying issue is the same one that causes a lot of the social issues in the UK - central government seems unable to see anything outside of the M25/South East. Politicians are out of touch with reality and they have no appreciation of what life is like beyond that (even in the own constituencies many of them). Never mind the far flung corners of the country that are living in relative (or genuine) poverty.

As an example, all the municipal leisure centre's in Cornwall are managed by a leisure operator that's based in London. They have absolutely no idea about how to run the centres down here, it's all done as though they're aimed at the same inner city/urban market as the up country ones. Their prices are based on London prices, so as you can well expect, that's put most potential users right off. The leisure centres are now massively underused and going into contraction - closing early, or closing down completely. The leisure operator has made them unprofitable and is reneging on their contract to run them, handing them back to the local authority in a terrible state.

And it's because house prices are so inflated in other parts of the country that it allows people to so easily release equity and afford to buy second homes in (what were) the cheaper locations. Devon went through this years ago - probably because it was more accessible whereas Cornwall was a bit too far away for most people to consider for second homes as weekend getaways. Now Devon is fully saturated and transport/roads improved, it's pushed the problem further west.

The biggest underlying issue is the same one that causes a lot of the social issues in the UK - central government seems unable to see anything outside of the M25/South East. Politicians are out of touch with reality and they have no appreciation of what life is like beyond that (even in the own constituencies many of them). Never mind the far flung corners of the country that are living in relative (or genuine) poverty.

Totally agree. This government is never going to do anything to address the issue.

That wasnt what I was saying
I was disagreeing with the post I quoted that said that areas need holiday homes

Holiday homes Destroy communities.

Having a kitchen so that you can arrive with your Ocado order or Fortnums hamper and contribute nothing to the local economy?

It's incredible that some people rank their wants for a specific type of holiday over other people's need to be housed.

You clearly have a chip on your shoulder to write such a weird post.

People go to holiday cottages or houses because they're cheap!

It's not that at all.
It's just that pp have been listing other types of accommodation without regard to the fact that not all are suitable for all types of family...particularly if budget or disability are concerns (as they are in my family).
And telling us it's not hard to think of alternatives. It is hard sometimes.

Of course people need to be housed, don't think we don't know or prioritise that.

As a few people have attested on here, it's sad to see that disabled people are often just brushed away and othered, when told they should seek different types of accommodation which are completely unsuitable for their needs. Should disabled folk be 'punished' for their disabilities by being told that holidays are just not for them, along with all of the other things in life they can't easily do, or do at all?

We always have the same othering mindsets when people scream for car-free city centres, with no private vehicles allowed at all. Proclamations that clearly excluded any other minority group in society would be roundly condemned, but 'ablephobia' seems to be widely acceptable Of course, it's not just the most severely disabled people, but many others also have physical/mobility/neurodiverse/cognitive issues - as well as many elderly folk - but the younger, able-bodied, healthy people often seem not to consider them as actual people who actually matter

I presume that the hatred for holiday lets, taking away a house that local people could have lived in, also extends to people who live in houses that are significantly bigger than they strictly need? Under-occupation has a big impact on many communities - not just touristy ones - but nobody seems to have anything like as much beef about that.

Taken to extremes, we have the situation where a couple living in a tiny house/flat in a city as their main home and owning another tiny house/flat near the coast that they visit when they can are considered evil; but another very wealthy couple who live alone in a massive 8-bedroom house in one location are completely uncriticised - an 8-bed home that could accommodate two or three families if reconfigured or replaced by several modest homes.

Of course, nobody likes it when streets and roads are blocked and it's hard to move around, but this is not just a holiday thing. I live in the Midlands, where we have a number of major motorways, and certain of these are also regularly gridlocked. I'm guessing that many of the users are not based in the Midlands themselves, but if there's a public place that attracts people - whether because of large trunk roads, historical landmarks and museums, beautiful towns and villages, the seaside or whatever - you'd have to be dim not to realise that the crowds will come. As an alternative, you could always live in Jaywick or Rotherham if you don't want floods of incomers. People always complain about congestion, without appreciating that they are just as much a part of the problem!

Something else that strikes me - and I'm playing devil's advocate here, as I don't really believe it myself - but if we go from a standpoint that anybody with enough money who can find a willing seller is able to buy a house, five houses, twenty houses in a beautiful place, maybe that gives them the right to then use it as little or much as they like, just the same as somebody who only has one house there. Maybe their interpretation of what they want the community where they own to be is like a less artificial Disney World - somewhere set aside for holidays and leisure time, where workers commute in to make it function.

As I said, I think it's terribly sad when this happens - but does one stakeholder (houseowner) who wants the place to be one thing automatically trump another who wants it to be something very different?

A rather vague analogy might be something like Stonehenge, which is run on the basis of incoming tourists and their desires, often to the detriment of Druid and Pagan worshipers who then often find themselves shut out and unable to get close to the stones which are holy to them. How do we reconcile that: the overwhelming majority of general sightseers wanting to see a spectacle against the minority of folk who hold the stones as an extremely sacred part of who they are?

I also think it's a bit too simplistic to assume that everybody who lives locally is good for the local economy and all non-locals are bad. Yes, locals will keep the GPs and the schools open, but when it comes to shopping, are we to believe that all locals extensively support local shops - even when out at work all day - instead of buying most of their stuff online, as so many people do nowadays; when compared with people on holiday/leisure time and as such with extra spending money and the freedom to wander around local shops?

No I don't have a chip on my shoulder
I grew up in a village in an area of natural beauty that wasn't a tourist area.
My children were born there. My parents still live there. I live nearby.

Lots of small cottages- then came the second homes, now 75% of the village is holiday homes including airbnb.
there used to be 4 pubs- now there are 2 and 1 is closing
There were 3 shops- now 1
The post office has gone
GP gone- very hard to be old in this village
Hairdresser gone
butcher gone
School closed 4 years ago
bus service went
All gone since 2006.

It is now £275k for a 2 bed cottage- they were £60k in 2002 (much shaper increase than national). Even the larger family homes are being bought as luxury airbnbs now.

When Sainsburys started delivering there was a massive decline in village income. The supermarket vans arrive in fleets on Friday evenings. They come from another county about 25 miles away. Before that the shop/s did packs and some local people had businesses providing food. The cleaners arrive in mini buses from about 40 miles away- young women many originally from Eastern Europe .

In winter midweek you walk down the High street and there is barley a light on. And the tourists complain that it is boring, there are no shops and nothing to do!

They dont pay council tax as they say that they are businesses and claim business rates exemption. The owners of the properties contribute nothing to the local area.

And the creep continues. The large village 4 miles away now has holiday homes (in 1960s housing estates) and even the local town has airbnb creeping in (nothing attractive there )

It's incredible that some people rank their wants for a specific type of holiday over other people's need to be housed.

As we've clearly said, it's not just 'wants' for many people. I'm sure you wouldn't decry the provision of ramps to the entrances to public buildings being provided for those who 'want' to use a wheelchair instead of walking in. If you don't consider the concept of holidays to be reasonable overall, then fair enough; but if you do consider them an important part in the balance of people's lives, you can't just arbitrarily deny them to certain 'othered' minority and vulnerable groups, whilst the 'normal' people get to enjoy them regardless.

You could say the same in global terms about those in rich countries demanding 30 types of bread, 50 different breakfast cereals and countless other excessive food options from all around the world available - so much of which gets thrown away anyway - whilst many don't even have a bowl of rice.

A lot of holiday sites actually have disabled friendly caravans and a lot of have a couple of purpose built bungalows which are only licences for holiday let’s not as proper homes. Both have kitchens. Some static kitchens are better equipped than some homes I’ve been in some with wine fridges, dishwasher, washer dryer, 5 ring hobs, coffee machines etc as the standard for that grade of van. We stayed in a lodge with en-suites, full sized bath, full fridge freezer, wheelchair access with all doors wide enough to use inside. I know at least two of the lodges onsite has the correct fittings on the bathrooms for use and one had a hoist for bed. All on a purpose built site that only had 50 lodges.

you can go to holiday sites that are not brash like haven that have everything a cottage would without taken a residence.

But holidays are wants. And many on here have said they want holiday cottages just because they prefer them.

But no-one needs a holiday (everyone needs rest and relaxation and a break from work, but that is not the same as a holiday away from your home). It's not at all unreasonable to want a holiday or go on a holiday, they're great, but you can't pretend that your pleasure should take precedence over others basic living requirements.

Homes - like access to public buildings - are needs. And whilst there are so many without the security of this essential need I will continue to think that peoples want for a holiday cottage should come second.

Off topic a bit but we often go on holiday in the Midlands, its hugely underated, we love industrial heritage, the mills, factories, canals. We always book accommodation which is directly on a cycle route or near enough we can walk to it and in towns near pubs and shops. I wouldnt book somewhere on a site somewhere.

You are coming across as very unpleasant here. I can see why a few posters don’t end up doing very well in life, no-one wants to work with people so nasty about everyone else.

I also think it's a bit too simplistic to assume that everybody who lives locally is good for the local economy and all non-locals are bad. Yes, locals will keep the GPs and the schools open, but when it comes to shopping, are we to believe that all locals extensively support local shops - even when out at work all day - instead of buying most of their stuff online

You're making the mistake of thinking that local spending is restricted to retail/shops. There are lots of things that locals will usually spend money on locally, and which tourists will not usually spend money on.

Some examples:

• Getting their car serviced, repaired, MOT'd
• Taking their pet to the vet
• Going to the leisure centre/gym
• Personal trainers, physiotherapists, private HCPs of various kinds
• Using public transport and local taxi firms (tourists to this area usually drive)
• Getting their hair cut / nails done
• Going to the cinema
• Kids clubs
• Pharmacies
• Garden centres
• Milkmen / farm veg boxes which enable farms to sell direct to the consumer for a fairer price than they'll get from a supermarket (loads of these round my way)
• Takeaways

Also, those cafes and restaurants that the tourists do use - it's pretty much exclusively the locals which give them business between November and Febraury.

Very interesting that you think that way

When we're on holiday (which is around 4x a year), I always use the time to get a hair cut and do other beauty treatments which I dont get the opportunity to do usually. We get takeaways, visit farm shops (which normally need a second mortgage to use), we use pharmacies, we go out on public transport or use taxis (we're very adept at navigating local transport systems and getting a weeks season ticket to pootle round), I also tend to get my tyres/breaks done or other maintainance on the car (again no time to do this at other times if not on holiday), we have needed local vets a few times but the dog is no longer with us so that wont happen again.

We tend to travel mostly out of season so we give business to places all year round.

We wouldnt go to a garden centre though as a matter of course.

You shouldnt make assumptions about what people do or dont do or how they use their time on holiday. A friend of mine also travels in her camper van although doesnt stay in it, she books places in the Uk quite a lot and again will often have a hair or beauty treatment, always needs to get something fixed on the van, she nearly always goes to garden centres and buys loads of stuff, she does go to the cinema on holiday (I dont go to the cinema at all), she has used public transport but not as much as me, she nearly always needs a vet (she has very elderly and unwell dogs)

Are you seriously saying that you go on holiday to an area which has natural beauty/attractions etc. and then proceed to live life as normal, including getting your car serviced?

Fair enough, but you are a rarity because that is not the norm. People pay good money to go on holiday precisely in order to do different things to what they would do at home. Most people choose to eat out, visit the beach or beauty spots, go for walks, visit historic sites etc. rather than having a cut and blow dry or taking their car for its MOT. Please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that all tourists do what you do, because a quick glance around my area demonstrates that that is not true.

If you'd rather do mundane stuff that you could do in any town in the UK, why pay the extra to go somewhere attractive?

We have family in Cornwall. For a double bedroom in a shared house a couple were being charged £600per month per person... So £1200 per month for 1 room of a share house.

Combine that with the fact there's very little money actually in Cornwall - most of it comes from tourism - and I can totally see the issue they're trying to fix.

Just to be clear - I have no objection to visitors to my area choosing to spend their time and money on 'holiday' activities while they're here! That's what normal holidays involve, and I hope they have a good time. It's also what I do when I visit other areas.

I just think it's bad when an area loses its critical mass of local people, because the spending patterns of local people are very different and sustain a much more diverse and healthy economy than the spending patterns of tourists.

Its not living life as normal, because I dont have time and space to do those things day to day.

I can do all the scenery and attractions as well as attend to things which I need to, which I dont see as mundane actually, its a huge part of my relaxation to be able to have my hair cut

And I dont get my car serviced, I didnt say I did, but we have got new tyres and brakes done and minor things like that while we've been away.

People that I know do do those things as Ive said, I cant comment on your intelligence but its not intelligent to pretend you know how people spend their time and money and what their motivations are, a quick glance around is not going to give you that information

Its made me remember the places weve done these things, York was where I got new tyres, brakes replaced, we also had a weekly travel pass to pootle round and I got my hair cut, same in Poole although didnt need anything doing to the car, Hull I had one of the best hair cuts Ive had and got my nails done and eyebrows threaded, Penzance we needed the air con replaced in the car, Tenby we went to the vet and we also needed the vet in Bakewell.

I know that what you describe is not normal holiday behaviour for the majority of people. I have never heard of anyone who would plan to use a random vet that they've never used before and who doesn't know know their pet's history. It's something people might do in emergency, but that's it.

And the majority of women I know are quite fussy about who cuts their hair. They might get their hair cut before a holiday, most would not choose to visit a random hairdresser they've never used before unless they had a specific reason to do so.

Same for car mechanics - in an emergency people would get a repair done, but why would you plan to use a garage that you don't know and trust, which is miles from your home so you'd be totally stuck if it takes them a while to order in a part for your car?

Are you seriously trying to argue that tourists demonstrate the same spending patterns as the people that live in an area? I mean, really?! 😂

Because if you're not trying to argue that, I'm not sure what the hell you think your point is.