All old people should sell up family homes for families.

[benigogo]

Not really an AIBU, more a hypothetical question really. This view comes up a lot on MN, and I'm interested in the detail of what people actually imagine when they say it. What type of property should they be giving up? What type of property should they be moving to? How old is old? What about younger people who under occupy a property? For example 2 friend couples, have recently downsized. Both from a 4 bed detached, one to a 4 bed semi, and the other to a 3 bed semi. Their homes were bought, one by a young professional couple, and the other by a couple in their seventies, themselves downsizing. If you hold this view what do you visualise?

People put out that kind of talk because they think it makes them look clever. It doesn’t.

It’s pure ageism, I mean if you wanted to take that idea to its conclusion nobody should be allowed to buy a family home until they actually have a family, so everyone should live in a flat until they fall pregnant and only then should they be allowed to look for a family home.

As for old people, IMO there’s a lot of ageist view in there which likely suggests that not only should they sell the family home but they should do so in order to give the money to their grabby children.

People have a choice with the number of children they have, maybe you would prefer if 'old people' were wheeled off to care homes?

Yes, they should downsize but they should want to. We can’t make them.

How/why would they want to? They will only want to if there is suitable housing stock to move to. There just isn’t that. Right now, it’s the property equivalent of bed blocking.

My DPs will be in their family home until one of them dies, and probably until both die.

An advantage of staying in your larger home, is you have room for hobbies which keeps your mind and body active. Ditto looking after yurself, maintaining your home etc.

Furthermore, should you require live in care there is actually a spare bedroom for the carer (as well as the couple themselves being able to be in separate rooms to allow for differing needs).

The house and neighbourhood is familiar which helps if dementia is setting in too.

There are all kinds of changes we can wish for, but in a democratic society they are not going to happen. (I realise you're not suggesting forcing people to move out, OP!)

This is one of them. You can't force people do move, even if it's the logical thing to do, if they don't want to (for all kinds of intangible reasons) in a free society. I used to do meals-on-wheels (when they were a thing!) and I saw lots of really elderly, infirm people living in huge houses which objectively were unsuitable for them, but which they were clearly deeply attached to and very reluctant to give up. I think we need to be patient - these properties do, of course, become available once the elderly person dies or moves into care and their children (or executors) sell them.

Similarly, some people think private education should be made illegal but again, it's incompatible with a free society. How far should we go in telling people what they can and can't do with their money and their property?

You can incentivise people to do things but not force them.

Wouldn't work though. I currently live in a four bedroomed house alone (other than my dog) because I fell for the property. It had been on the market for a couple of weeks, plenty of families could have bought it if they had wanted to. The problem is not with old people having bigger properties (I am not old by the way), but the expectation that all young people should get things handed to them on a plate because 'its so hard for young people nowadays'. People have lived through wars, recession etc throughout history and been resilient enough to move forward. So sick of the 'poor me' syndrome that seems so prevalent now.

It's an offensive view. Like saying "anyone who has an ancestor from a different country in the last 200 years" shouldn't be allowed to own a large property. Or "anyone who's not heterosexual" can't.

Well there's a continuous stream of people dying and their houses bring sold, so what difference would a continuous stream of (say) 70 year olds sell8ng their homes be?

Maybe we should be restricted to two children max each and we could knock down all the 3+ bed houses and build more houses on those plots?

Or adults with no children could be shipped off into 1 bed flats as they have less of a reason to have a garden.

Not this old chestnut. 🙄

I don't think this should be enforced in any way, obviously it has to be the choice of the individual, but I do think it's a shame more people don't do it!

In answer to your questions, my parents are in their 80s. They live in a 4-bed terraced house in London zone 2. They have three spare bedrooms that are never used. Where would I see them moving to? - I guess an apartment, or anywhere really where they have one spare bedroom rather than three!

As I said above, it's their choice. But it does seem a shame in a housing crisis to have so many rooms not being used.

I can see it now:
“AIBU to think it is selfish for old people to downsize to small starter homes in competition with young families?”

I’ve been told that I was selfish for buying a home that a family could use. They had the same opportunity to do so and indeed it fell through twice with families pulling out, so.

And even if it hadn’t, what, I should be required to live in a tiny flat for my entire life for not being one of the proper naice family households?

That logic can do one, frankly.

It's up to the individual to decide.
Personally I plan to downsize from my 4 bed semi to a 2 bed flat/bungalow once dc leave because I'm a single, disabled parent who can't work so rely on an ill health pension and benefits (which will be minimal once dc leave home). I don't want to be a burden (physically or mentally) to my children and therefore will buy something that is easy to maintain. I currently only live downstairs so when dc leave I'll have 3 bedrooms and a bathroom unused. So financially and physically it makes sense for me to do so but I wouldn't judge others.
When I worked in community care there were many elderly people who struggled to physically and financially look after their large family homes I don't want to end up like that. So will do it in my 50s while I'm still able.

I am of the opinion that barring criminal use the state should butt out of what people chose to spend their own disposable income on. That includes their houses. Or private education. Or private healthcare.

I don’t think anyone thinks this should really happen, hence no details.

It’s just frustration at the market. I don’t think it’s because anyone is trying to be clever.

How old is old though? Should my sister, who is in her 70s, not have a house big enough for her children and grandchildren to stay? Old people have families too!!

I think there should be more houses and flats built/created, with varying numbers of bedrooms, so that when people <want> to move, there’s scope to do so.

I have mobility issues, but I also have children who are likely to be at home for a very long time. I’d love a bungalow or a flat with 3 bedrooms, but they’re non-existent. So I’m stuck in a three bed house, with a massive garden that’s bugger all use to me.

Anyone want my garden? It’s about thirty metres long and would make a cracking allotment. 🤷‍♀️

Don't care how old I am I'm never leaving my family home
As I get older and my children move out I'd always want a place for them to call home and come home to if they ever need to
Also same goes for my grandchildren.

If they want to stay in their home who's right is it to say otherwise
If I worked hard my whole like and purchased my home why would I want to leave because my kids no longer live there?

Sounds ridiculous to me

we (the UK as a whole) need to build a MASSIVE number of new homes. more mansion flats in cities with good sound insulation, more townhouses for families, more large houses and small houses and houses near good public transport. And most importantly, more council houses or shared ownership homes that are affordable.

shuffling the existing stock of houses between old / young or owner / renters is not going to solve the massive shortage of properties.

You can't really expect an elderly person to move, when they've built up friends and a social life where they live. Also with dementia, it's better they stay somewhere they're familiar with. The truth is we're over populated and people are living for longer. its going to get worse. We will end up like China, where most people will live in apartments. Only the super rich will be able to afford an actual house.

My husband and I live in a four bed home ..both children now adults
So we could downsize...but it costs quite a lot to move ...if you'd like to pay my costs and do all the paperwork and take on the stress of the process of buying and selling never mind the sadness of leaving a home we've lived in for over 30 years ...yup I'll downsize !!!

I am of the opinion that barring criminal use the state should butt out of what people chose to spend their own disposable income on. That includes their houses. Or private education. Or private healthcare.

They are butted out of all those things aren't they? Am I missing something?

There should be fewer government incentives for first time buyers, and people who wish to downsize should be helped to do so if they need it. Build more bungalows instead of 4 bed detached executive homes and older people might be encouraged to move out of family homes they’re struggling to manage. Stamp duty and similar costs can be a blocker - not everyone has tons of equity in their houses.

If I were to downsize, I would be competing with young families for the "starter homes" that are in such short supply in my area.

And I'm not ready to give up the steady supply of fruit and vegetables (some of which I can't buy, like mulberries) that I wouldn't be able to grow in the smaller garden that would come with a smaller property.