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?

If people own their home then they can do what they like with it - and if that means one person living in a mansion, then so be it. What gives anyone the right to tell others what they should do with their own house?

Grandparents have a three bed house. Started disturbing each other when sleeping so are now using two of the bedrooms to each get some rest. Third now taken as my aunt has moved in to provide care.

So... no?

I didn't say with strangers did I? It could be with friends, siblings, friends of friends.

I didn't say it should be enforced on everyone just that more people should do it.

It's definitely something I will be exploring once I get to retirement (some time away yet). If it's the choice of living alone in my own home, in a house with another elderly person so we can support each other or living in a care home I'd definitely choose living with someone else. Just because it's not the norm, doesn't make it wrong. I'm not saying everyone should do it but it's a practical solution to social isolation, practical support and a lack of housing. Nothing wrong with doing things a bit differently.

I'd rather live in a tent than put my family in what was an elderly couples family home where they've created all of their memories, invested all their money and time. People aren't just entitled to what other people have because they have kids & deciding the elderly should have to justify their need for their own homes is a new level of appalling. Hate the lack mindset that's so prominent in our society that it's assumed elderly people having a large and spacious home is a luxury they must be stripped of. The country's fucked.

Agree with this so much even as a young person myself. Me and my fiancée love our flat. It's affordable, small and our lovely space together. My grandparents have a house on Eastbourne Seafront. It's stunning. My friend has remarked before about it being left behind in the will. I'd rather have my tiny flat and my grandparents here, alive, well and living in it. The same friend is always desperate for handouts, has no work ethic and dismisses every opportunity that comes her way as it's too much effort when it comes to earning things yourself.

The only circumstances this should apply should be council houses in my opinion. The property isn't theirs and should be provided to meet their needs. If families with children need to pay extra for any bedroom over occupied, or can only bid on properties with X number of bedrooms because the government have declared they only need X then the same should apply for older people.
The problem is there aren't enough 1 and 2 bed council properties and the criteria is daft. So the family in a 2 bed that needs 4 can't have the 3 bed property that an older widow is in.

If I stay on my street in my terraced house and grow old here, and all my neighbours do the same - I know them all pretty well - then that would answer the social isolation problem, wouldn’t it?

The problem we all have is the stairs. I’d maybe like to do something like a two-flat conversion (and live downstairs) but wouldn’t know where to start. Too much crap, too much red tape, too few available and affordable tradespeople …

There are those "villages" for older people with assisted living but then they rip them off with high charges and the properties are hard to sell on so this May put others off doing the same

Much better idea than paying IHT!

People take issue with IHT - but in effect it's a tax on hoarding. So spend (most of) your money before you die, and your heirs won't pay it. I know sometimes it's locked away in the value of properties but that's the more reason to find something smaller and enjoy life. If you can find something smaller.

Yes, my father had a retirement flat and we were lucky to sell it as easily as we did when he died. They can be impossible to sell, and often lose value. And have clauses against sub-letting as well.

If someone odes buy a retirement flat, it is better to find a second hand one to avoid depreciation and preferably with the right to sub-let so if you can't sell, you can rent.

All this could easily be dealt with by legislation though, and the Competition and Markets Authority has had some success in making leases fairer and removing some of the high charges, but not completely and some changes need legislation.

Yup. And don't go into a care home, just leave your kids everything.

I was diagnosed with significant fertility issues, we sold our flat and bought a house when we got married in the hope we could have DC, if we hadn't would we have also needed to sell our home?

Do you really, honestly, think that young adults today have had it easy?

I don't agree with the idea of expecting people to sell the house they live in, but I thought there was a common understanding that quality of life peaked with baby boomers and is now declining.

It is irritating that people are trotting out variations of 'you've never had it so good' when the last 15 years have been a shitshow and the impacts have hit young people hardest.

Very noble. And if you had more than one child, not practicable. Plus when you can't travel anymore, what then? Oh, DS will take you in. Sure.

It's a ridiculous idea based on inability to think.

The problem ISN'T a lack of housing stock of larger properties. The problem is a lack of affordable housing stock.

What happens if older people try and downsize? It just puts pressure on the mid to bottom of the housing market. The value of the larger housing stock can not drop below a certain value either because of land value - ultimately these larger properties could in theory be split into two (if they can get planning) and thats why they retain value.

You therefore get a 'pancake' effect where the first and second tier of the market are inflated in price and a tier above that which is out of reach still for families but still retains most of its value. The pressure on these properties due to increased demand also disadvantages families because they can only buy with a mortgage whereas downsizers are much more likely to be cash buyers and therefore able to get first choice on what properties are available because they are more attractive buyers as it's a less risky process for sellers.

And it doesn't solve the inherent problem which is families can only afford a certain maximum square meterage.

Families might not want stairs either. There are lots of younger people with disabilities. We always lived in bungalows when I was a child because we lived in Devon and they are plentiful and because my father was scared of heights

I do think there should be strict rules on converting bungalows to houses though - or knocking them down altogether to build a house. Not so much if it's a single bungalow out in the countryside somewhere, but if bungalows are in towns they should remain bungalows. I don't have so much issue with Velux/dormer windows and extra rooms upstairs, because the layout downstairs is still practical and it's still a bungalow. But not taking the roof off and changing the whole thing. We don't have nearly enough bungalows so we should not be converting those we have.

And on the same lines, I don't think you should be able to buy a two bed house and turn it into a four bed. There need to be much stricter planning constraints on turning smaller houses into bigger ones.

We need family houses but we also need smaller homes as starter homes and as retirement homes. And not poorly built flats with no noise insulation.

thewhole thread is about older people downsizing out of public spirited duty to free up their homes for supposedly needier people. The entitlement is breathtaking.

Nope, if you actually read the OP the question is for the people who think this what does it look like in reality.

It's equally fucking irritating when the ' you all had free uni education ( er 5% in my generation had tertiary education) and bought a four bed house at 30 specifically to fuck the next generation over' crowd start but it never stops them

The problem ISN'T a lack of housing stock of larger properties. The problem is a lack of affordable housing stock

Yes, most new estates have large "executive" homes which people can't afford.

There are plenty of affordable homes though, but a huge number of them are owned as second homes and holiday homes. About a million of them. Some will have planning constraints that don't allow them to be used for residential use, but most can be. That's an issue to resolve.

Ah I see, so at what age should I move in with my brother and sister in law who I can spend about an hour or two with before they drive me mad? With friends who I love dearly, like going on holiday with for a few days but then need my own space, friends who live their lives with different priorities, different tastes in food, decor etc. maybe I should really get on with people they happen to have picked as friends better!

Why can’t young families do all of these things, live communally. Live with siblings? Parents of their kids friends. The entire year group buy a mansion together and live in it?

You either hate old people or you struggle to think of anyone apart from yourself or most likely both. I despair at times

I don't agree with the idea of expecting people to sell the house they live in, but I thought there was a common understanding that quality of life peaked with baby boomers and is now declining.

I think people get really confused & think that saying it's harder now means it wasn't hard back then & they struggle to ignore their anecdotal experiences eg my neighbours are 25 & paid 600k for their house so that must be extrapolated to all 25 yr olds. Definitely makes debating difficult!

Yes - nightmare leaseholds. Not a chance in hell I’d go down this route.

I absolutely don’t agree with this and don’t think anyone should be forced to feel uncomfortable about where they live. Older people tend to spend more time at home as a whole so they need more space within the home than a family which is out from 7-7. They can also visit each other more as they may not be tied down by kids- my late gran always had guests, sometimes many. Some may need a space for a career and many may need a downstairs bedroom
and/ or bathroom. There are many ways in which a single older person may need a large house, as well as want one.