Housing Crisis solutions

[Aslockton]

I watched the Tonight programme last night which seemed to suggest the rise of 2nd home owners and airbnb is causing the lack of housing.

What's the solution? If I were in change...

1. Prevent Landlords increasing rents by more that 2% a year (straight away)
2. Tax all rental profits at 40% (starting next year)
3. Rise stamp duty on non-primary residence purchases to 20% (straight away)
4. Double council tax on 2nd homes and airbnb (straight away)
5. Waive capital gains tax on all second property sales for 2 years. (This will encourage 2nd home owners and landlords to sell up)
6. Make it law that tenants have to be offered the home first (if landlords sell) and the price will be determined by an independent adjudicator (like lease sales are).

Are these ideas unreasonable/ bonkers or both!!
If I had a second home, I would be tempted to sell up.

It's hard not to suggest that the Greenbelt was designed to specifically prevent housebuilding and keep property prices (and therefore rents) artificially high.

We have developers trying to build on greenbelt land this is land used to provide food that we need to eat in my area we don't have much of a homeless problem around 15 total there are houses available they choose not to be accommodated but still developers want to build over our food supply we have a lot of brownfield sites they all have planning permission have had for years but nothing is being done with it they will rather use the greenbelt

Damm right we object brownfield first infrastructure first building houses for houses sake is pointless

We have developers trying to build on greenbelt land this is land used to provide food

So it's not greenbelt land, but agricultural. Which has it's own planning regime.

I think new housing being built should only be available for those who are going to occupy it rather than landlords/second home owners for a minimum period before it is offered on the open market. Where I am there are several new estates being built, as soon as they go up for sale (reasonably priced small family homes) they are snapped up, shortly after they are up for rent at extortionate prices. The rich get richer and the poor are struggling for basic housing.

Both times we have rented to someone on UC they left the property dilapidated - £6k repairs the first time and £27k the second, plus in both cases they were getting rent money from UC and did not pass it on to us, latterly because it was the pandemic and our tenant knew evictions were impossible. It is bitterly unfair to UC tenants who do behave properly, but landlords have to cover their own costs and are not there to provide a social welfare system - the Government could have chosen to fix this and prioritise social housing but it’s effectively privatised most of the rental sector.

BTW I would start by taxing empty properties - if nobody is living there, or it’s a second home with no commercial holiday rentals above a certain level (40 weeks a year?), I would charge the owner say 25% of the market rent every year, more in places where the housing situation is critical, like the SW.

Another good policy would be to charge less tax if landlords charged locally agreed rents per square metre, on long lets (eg 5 years minimum).

The greenbelt can include agricultural land.

Other option is people with larger houses (say four beds and above) should split them in two, three, four etc depending on the size of their house or pay capital gains on everything apart from the value of the rooms they need. Tongue in cheek but I live in a small house (2 beds and a loft, one tiny bathroom, straight into the lounge) and rent out a flat through a Crisis scheme paying 40% tax on the income and having had to deal with arrears, tenant damage etc. Many of my friends live in large houses with big gardens ripe for conversion and have decided the housing crisis is entirely my fault. They likely have pensions with funds investing in property too.

Yes totally agree with that

The rich get richer and the poor are struggling for basic housing

Remember: not everyone thinks that's a bad thing. So you're pushing a stone uphill there.

It’s sad that not everyone agrees basic human needs (food/water/shelter) should be addressed before lining pockets of the rich - I’m acutely aware of the number of people who don’t agree though, and I think recent times are just serving to widen this gap. However, governments either want to address the housing crisis/increasing poverty levels and level things up, or they want to continue to line their own pockets. Can’t have it both ways.

Immigrants help run the social care system, nhs and building trades. They also help with agricultural work. We need the brownfield sites developed. In Singapore there is a government company that builds council housing. We need something like that. And they can build hospitals too - so we won’t have v costly PFI bills.

However, governments either want to address the housing crisis/increasing poverty levels and level things up, or they want to continue to line their own pockets. Can’t have it both ways.

Of course they can. They can say they are addressing the housing crisis while continuing to line their pockets. It's worked these past 30 years, why stop now.

Stop the right to buy scheme on council Properties...

There's thousands of new houses built in my area recently, new estates with big houses worth 250k plus. We need affordable terraced houses maybe that people can afford to live in even with a few kids. The new build estates are unsuitable and unaffordable

@SerendipityJane that’s my point though, saying it isn’t doing it. It’s not possible to have greater equality and the rich getting richer, so they are choosing the latter option. There are plenty of ways things can be improved (look at all the ideas on this thread) it’s just it doesn’t benefit the government to do so.

@Namenic yes but they all have to live somewhere

So what do we do ? What happens when the ballot box fails ?

What always happens when the ballot box fails ?

I'm at the other end of the housing crisis - looking for something smaller. We're in our 60's and looking to downsize and free up our family sized home. However all the new-builds around here are huge - often 3 storey on small plots (greater profit for builders per sq ft of land obviously). dh and I have hereditary conditions which means eventually we will require to live all on one level. There is nothing for us. Nothing. Money isn't the issue. We'd pay the price of a 5 bed 3 storey townhouse for a single level house with 2 bedrooms. The only options are miniscule retirement flats, and with plenty of life in us still we want space where we can cook and entertain, a garage for our bikes etc.

My PILs are in their 90s and also need a smaller house (and one nearer to family so we can support their care needs). There is no point in buying something - they are very frail and their needs are likely to change rapidly. There's nothing for them to rent.

With the demographic profile in the UK we need to also be building for the older generation. I know in some areas there are 'exclusive' retirement villages - none anywhere where I live, and they're not really the answer - we need integrated communities.

@venusandmars agree there are issues with downsizing, especially from larger family homes - often means giving up outside space, space to entertain and if willing to sacrifice those, much of the difference in cost of a bedroom is eaten up by stamp duty, moving costs, redecorating etc.

So what if they lose 25 grand perhaps that the difference between a bedroom or not costs. they’re not taking that money with them so they’re either go into live how they want to live here and now in the moment or they gotta put up with whatever it is that’s bothering them about having the bigger house with the bigger bedrooms keep the 25 grand and give it to the kids either way, they have nothing to gain

@lollipoprainbow - there are lots of places more densely populated than uk

Not no. 6. That's ridiculous!

Why should the landlord be forced to sell to a tenant at below market price? It might be an investment for pension, for example. The landlord may well have been paying a mortgage and invested lots of time, money and effort into the property - they're not the local authority!!

It means that for some who may be happy with a smaller place, it's easier for them to just not use a bedroom, rather than effectively swap to something with little room for entertaining and no garden. It means some might not bother with the intermediary step of moving to something smaller before moving into a retirement home.