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.

Here they demolished a whole row of bungalows. The only thing they needed was new bathrooms and kitchens. But no..........demolished and replaced with flats.

What someone else might deem ‘adequate’ for a family might not be the same what I feel is necessary. Our house is big but was bought before we had our unexpected last child so we will be moving. Others could have more children in the house we are in now. Not my problem.

Getting a bit tired of the same old tired attack on the 'boomers' to be honest. Not EVERY boomer had it 'easy' and had everything handed to them on a plate, but even if some of them did, so what? There are so many bitter, jealous people on here who are begrudging people having what they have worked all their lives for. It's pathetic, and tragic, at the same time. (I am NOT a boomer by the way!)

Saw a tweet on Twitter earlier from a guy called Alex Groundwater, that speaks volumes. Everyone and anyone who has any chances or opportunities will take them. If someone said to you now 'you can get a £200,000 house for £40,000,' or 'a £300,000 house for £60,000,' would you think even for a second 'no I'll give it a miss, coz it it may affect future generations down the line?' Would you fuck! You would take the opportunity. Do not lie, you WOULD.

And would you give up a lovely roomy home that is in a lovely area, and that you have spent 1000s of pounds on, that is near your friends/family/workplace etc, so another family with an extra member or two can have it? LOL, NO YOU WOULD NOT. Whether you were an owner OR someone renting a social housing home.

So much ludicrous hypocrisy from (some) millennials (and a few Gen Z.) They always bang on about 'the boomers...' taking sooo much from them (allegedly!) but in reality, the vast majority of 'boomers' have never done a thing wrong.

The bitterness and jealousy is so real on here (and on other platforms.) So much nastiness aimed at a generation who did nothing wrong, just made the best of the opportunities given to them. As I said, don't tell me you wouldn't all do the same, because you bastard well WOULD! Shame on some people for the way they talk about their parents and grandparents. Disgusting. As I said, THIS (on Twitter) speaks volumes...

Alex Groundwater on Twitter: "I have yet to meet a member of my parents’ generation (boomers) who deliberately set out to ‘screw the kids’. Likewise any members of GenX. Every generation takes advantage of all available opportunities to secure their family’s future! That’s human nature 🤷🏼‍♂️" / Twitter

It's not so much the term but that it is used as an insult - and by people who don't have the intelligence to realise that just because someone is of a particular age group it doesn't mean they have been in the fortunate economic position to have made financial gains due to previous housing markets - and nor does everyone of that age have a 'gold plated pension'.

There really isn’t an abundance of the kind of housing downsizers would be looking for in this country.

my parents decided not to downsize because what they were looking for - fewer bedrooms but with a spacious living room and large kitchen/diner - is not that easy to find. Especially when you factor in that they would have to completely redecorate something and their furniture may not fit the smaller space. Added to that is the loss of the garden they’ve been tending for 35 years and the location and community they’ve been a part of for 45 years.

Small houses in the uk tend to be small in every way. People who’ve lived in houses for 45 years (or 75 even) don’t necessarily want to live in a block of flats with all that comes with that. The thought of moving to an old person specific development does not appeal to a lot of people in any way.

There have to be much better options to make all the upheaval of moving and setting up a new home worthwhile. Demonising a generation of people because they haven’t conveniently vacated the homes you want to have instead is unfair.

my parents decided not to downsize because what they were looking for - fewer bedrooms but with a spacious living room and large kitchen/diner - is not that easy to find.

One set of DGP lived in a house like that - huge downstairs space but two upstairs bedrooms not that large either- they did the layout planning in 60s when they still had two teens at home and it was their forever house.

It was sold after their deaths - I think with a view of doing up and selling on in a few years which did happen- first thing done was roof reconfiguration/layout to squeeze another bedroom in.

We do seem to sell on bedroom numbers not total square footage like I think the USA does and I agree it why IL and DP didn't end up moving because they didn't want less living space downstairs.

@SquidwardBound Yep my FIL has exactly the same issue -apart from the fact he doesn't like where it is- it was very much chosen by his partner to be bear get family, who has since died.

He isn't keen on the idea of buying a flat- due to leaseholds- I think he would sell up and rent one though 'if' he could get the security- but rentals through the specialists like McCarthy stone are extortionate! And standard private rentals - well you don't wont to be doing multiple moves in your 80s!!

I think some retired complexes but built to rent , low rise and with no service charges to tenants would actually do really well. Slightly higher rents to reflect getting windows cleaned, gardens tended, lifts maintained etc reflected in price but no need for 'care' etc or vast lounges and all the stuff that create £800 a month service charges in many if these owner occupied complexes

Small Bungalows are really not easy to find in good order in some areas- and hence are often very overpriced

I have checked with our feline over-lord, aka CatBastard, who is currently in his bedroom, and he says it definitely counts as occupied, @Londre.

We do seem to sell on bedroom numbers not total square footage like I think the USA does and I agree it why IL and DP didn't end up moving because they didn't want less living space downstairs
We found that when house hunting.
Lots of properties were awkwardly extended to get an extra bedroom that wasn't usable, or a second reception room was added downstairs and the house was marketed as a 5/6 bedroomed house with the mark up

Really they were badly extended houses by people with limited budgets who focused more on the £££ they thought would come their way by being able to argue it's a 5 bedroom house.

Square footage would be a much better way of selling in my opinion and it would lend itself more to people making sensible renovations for their space/budget too.

@LolaSmiles Yep you are so right- we nearly didn't look at our current very lovely rental house as I had my Rightmove set to4 beds, as although only 2 of us now at home my H uses a ton of space for work which usually means we need 2 smaller bedrooms , plus a guest room, plus 1 for us- whereas our house now is 3 proper doubles (1 of which we use as a store room as has all built in wardrobes plus room for luggage, Xmas tree, cost tracks etc, plus a big lounge, big kitchen , conservatory and a totally converted garage joined to house, with power, proper central heating, light, patio doors etc- that he uses for work - and they correctly marketed it as a 3 bedder- luckily the agent knew what we were after and called me - I advise anyone not to just go on bedrooms , but look at floor plans or square footage etc- most agents oversell, but in our case the agent could easily have sold it as a 4 bedder

If you put a minimum price on the filters you tend to find the houses with more square footage regardless of bedrooms. When we started house hunting we found a perfect 2-bed house with loads of living space downstairs and a massive garden. Sadly the seller took it off the market and we haven't found anything like it. Our search is still set to a price bracket without a limit on bedrooms.

God this thread is so depressing. Of course people are under no obligation to move from their homes that they bought with their own money, but the attitude that they are horrified at even the thought of living with a bedroom plus a spare and a slightly smaller lounge plus maybe a smaller garden. And that they could not possibly entertain the indignity of living like that, but thinking it's totally fine for a couple and their 2 kids to live in the exact same property (but with twice the people) and that's totally fine, is something else.

@Swiftbushome it's not that I think it's fine for a couple and 2 kids to live in an overcrowded house, more that I think it's not my responsibility to make sure they're adequately housed.

What's the point of spacious living room, unless you hugely entertain. It's just empty space to heat, otherwise.

Nice view, cute garden, natural light, I understand merits of those. But ... big living room? Why.

Well if you have a family then there's space for the kids to play while one parent is for example doing the ironing and the other is watching the TV? Makes sense to me. If love a big loving room

Thread is about downsizing after the (now adult) children have moved out, so why need a large living room after adult children moved out.

What's the point of spacious living room, unless you hugely entertain.

Proven* *very useful to fit the hospital bed downstairs and the hoist currently needed and the walking frame that and downstairs loo meant my parent has managed to leave hospital and stay in their own home.

My DGP I think made the space because they did enjoy entertaining well into their late 80s.

Our current house has a two rooms that could be knocked though - and many on estate have - but with five of us having two smaller downstairs rooms works very well for us. IL have similar with with wall removed and draw curtains across in winter but like the space rest of the year especially now retired and in the house much more.

I will be totally honest- I think plenty of older couples still want space and gardens etc because in all honesty they don't want to be trapped with a grumpy bugger for long periods of time in a small space and with few rooms- !

The point is that your furniture will fit in a spacious living room. And it’s nicer than a pokey little room you can’t swing a cat in. If you have a nice, spacious living room (in a house you now own outright) and have had one for several decades, why would you want the kind of tiny room you get in many one or two bedroom houses?

We are talking about people who own and live in large houses. Many of them don’t want to feel like they’re downsizing to a shoebox.

And lots of people in this category do have their friends round all the bloody time. My mum regularly hosts the knit and natter group she’s in, for example.

Just because you’re a couple living in a large house on your own, it doesn’t mean you’re isolated or can’t socialise. Often these aren’t people on the verge of care homes. They’re retired people in their 60s.

Because you don’t just settle down and wait to die once your kids grow up. Many of these people have very active social lives.

Downsizing IMO will mean moving to a two bedroom house, from a four bedroom. And from a half acre of hillside garden to an easily moved lawn. But I also want a decent kitchen, and utility room, and enough dining space for eight people, to ea at a table indoors or outside. I am downsizing but not planning to stop my social life just because I am 66.

That's an "easily mowed lawn" for clarification. I don't plan on moving lawns in my dotage.

Parties and gatherings. Obviously.

We like entertaining and parties, especially if it's not a child's birthday party. We did enough kid's parties back when.

A few older relatives have said they would prefer to downsize, but there are a lack of suitable properties on the market.

The issue is, many modern properties focus on number of rooms not the size of rooms. People who are retired/ children have flown the nest need fewer rooms... Not smaller rooms. In fact, they likely need bigger rooms to ensure that they can be adapted appropriately if they have mobility needs later on in life.

There are also virtually no bungalows available nowadays.