Jeremy Vine - people are morally obliged to downsize and free up property

[JoanThursday1972]

Currently have this on the radio. Suggestion is that people are not entitled to remain in and live in the house that they have bought and paid for. That they should downsize and free this up for more deserving occupants, ie families.

This is surely a personal choice and not an obligation? Anyone is entitled to live in a house they have bought, regardless of size.

Where doe JV live?

My DP's considered this a year ago - but the costs involved were huge.

They were also considering a retirement property - but have been warned off that due to the terrible practises by the companies/resell issues.

They realised a stair lift and a gardener were cheaper options.

I don't think anyone should have to move for 'moral' reasons. I do think older people should move to suitable accommodation for their age though. There's so much emphasis on 'staying in your own home' when a lot of the time your own home doesn't meet your needs.

Both my elderly grandparents refused to downsize or move when they were not physically able to cope with their homes. One lived in a first floor flat and couldn't get up snd down the stairs. It was dangerous and she was a prisoner in her own home. The other one lived in a large home she couldn't deal with but refused a cleaner. Borge were financially solvent snd lucky enough to have the choice of moving. Both had fall after fall and became a burden, there's no other way of putting it. Long hospital stays, blocking beds.

Why is the stamp duty for those downsizing (who likely have lots of equity) more prohibitive than those trying to move up the ladder?

My owned property, my choice.
As far as I know the UK is still a reasonably democratic country.
Nobody has any right to force me to downsize.
Naturally, being a country of free speech also, people are entitled to their own opinions.
My own opinion is that it is not morally wrong. Houses are homes, not investments. I have free will to do what is best for myself & my family. There is no place for state intervention.

Is communism back?

It's not all boomers. I'm in my 30s and we are 2 people in a 3 bed house. We're planning to move to a 4 bed. No plans for children and definitely no plans to downsize. We'll have our bedroom, a spare room for guests/my office, his office and then a dressing room/ place to store things (like his bulky sports equipment). When we don't need offices any more we'll enjoy turning them into hobby rooms instead.

I did find a brilliant old 2 bed house that would have worked just as well but the seller withdrew. It was unusual because the living room, dining room and kitchen were all big enough to add storage without feeling cramped, unlike the majority of British houses with their piddly dining rooms that barely fit a table. Until houses start being built with bigger rooms I'll stick to a 4 bed thank you.

I live on my own with three bedrooms. I’ve raised my family and like having them to visit/ stay and host Christmas and other holidays. I’m enjoying this part of my life immensely and hope it carries on for a long time before old age curtails whatever it does.
I didn’t create the housing shortage, I’ve worked hard since leaving my abusive husband with two suitcases and three children, and £45 in my purse.
I own my house outright. No one is pushing me into a bed sit.
If there was a nice alternative I would probably take it, but I’m not paying a monthly surcharge for the ‘privilege’ of living in an ugly, cramped apartment block that is ‘designed’ for older tenants.

Where I live there are lots of really good 3 bed family houses occupied by pensioners.

A new housing estate is just being built with 3-5 bed detached properties only. There is nowhere for people to downsize to unless you want a flat.

There is a certainly an issue with suitability though, some of our relatives didn't want to downsize but also didn't want to adapt the property. My cousin has run herself ragged dealing with all the falls.

I dont think anyone should have to leave the property they've lived and worked to pay for.

Its not
But most people would spend it for something they want (bigger property) but why would I pay it just to be a considerate person

Houses are homes, not investments. I have free will to do what is best for myself & my family. There is no place for state intervention. But housing is treated as an investment & the government has intervened plenty to prop it up.

I have found many older folk would be happy to downsize but they dont want to go into a flat, they would prefer a bungalow. They don't seem to be built anymore.

Absolutely ridiculous idea.

Does he imagine that if all the people who don't actually need a larger house move to smaller properties then it will enable people with growing families to suddenly be able to afford to buy all those 4/5/6 bedroomed houses?

Many people don't have the financial wherewithal to get onto the property ladder, where is the money going to come from. Maybe he also thinks the parents are morally obliged to move into smaller homes and give the money they've made on the sale of the larger house to their children.

He clearly doesn't live in the real world if he think freeing up large houses is going to provided growing families with nice big houses like the one he lives in, I imagine.

Great. We can start with The Royal Family.

@kitsuneghost I don't think it's anything to do with being considerate. I know a few people who talk about downsizing but then say stamp duty prevents them. I don't get it as there is hundreds or thousands of pounds of equity.

There is an issue with houses that may be suitable eg 2 beds with off street parking not being built though.

By JVs reasoning I should downsize but I have no desire to move to a flat or a small terraced house because so many people are antisocial these days with regards to noise or respecting each other's space. You only have to read some of the threads on MN to know that.

I'll stick to my 4 bed semi that I've worked hard to develop and pay for thank you.

Why should they?

People are generally against flats here, I can understand why. I love having outdoor space myself.

However, my in-laws in europe happily downsized to a 2 bed flat. It’s roomy, light, modern and has a large balcony for MIL to have a table, chairs and her pots etc.

This is a good point.

We need to build desirable, retirement properties which are integrated into the general community. Not everyone over 60 wants to live in a retirement community.

Older people in unsuitable homes are a problem. I have a relative who is currently buying a five bed country house to live in, alone. They are in their 70's. Their kids are already planning how to deal with how difficult it's going to get as their health declines. Utter maddness!

This isn't Jeremy Vine's idea, he's just discussing it on his programme. He didn't say whether he agreed with it or not, so don't have a go at him personally.

The parking is a point
The 2 beds round our way tend to be terraced so 2 working adults would find it difficult to park.

Also kitchens. Kitchens in small houses tend to be totsy - no good if you work long hours so bulk buy shopping rather than having the time to go to the shops frequently.

Then there's the argument that anyone with excess money should give it to the poor. Why should anyone have savings when others are struggling? Where do you draw the line? Not to mention as previous posters have said, the cost of moving.

I'm under-occupying my house approx 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time my friend, who splits her time between the UK and France, stays here.

She's rented out the flat she owns though, so this arrangement has freed up another property.