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 I get to the point that I'm an elderly widow living on my own, I'll be happy with a one bedroom. Who wants to maintain larger properties if old and infirm? I'll move out and downsize when I'm good and ready. I've built a life in this neighbourhood, maintained the home, made it my own. It's my home, not just a house.

You have literally just taken what I said .... 'why don't the young families get private let like they expect the older people to do?' and turned it around! 😆

You have no argument. You're literally repeating what I am saying! 😂

Go to bed. You need sleep.

Ha ha ha Nora was once a "young family who chose to have kids with no secure housing in place". She gets a council house when all her kids are young but when her kids are gone and she has a big gaff to herself that she doesn't need except for "holiday memorabilia, "ornaments" and "CD's" and yet you villify a family who are in the same situation as Nora only it's 50 years later?

How hypocritical. Sleep well on that particular cactus. Night!

Are you on crack? If Nora wanted to KEEP her big house she should have BOUGHT one or RENTED one...JUST like how you suggested the younger people do...except she didn't because she had a young family and could not afford it, much like the young families nowadays. Nora owns nothing, least of all a huge gaff owned by the council.

I don't know who Nora is but if she wanted to have a larger house just for her in her older years, she should have bought one.

One thing I vehemently disagreed with the thatcher government over was their policy on the sale of council houses. It was a retrograde step.

I was a housing worker in 1997 when Labour returned to government, and expected it to be greatly reduced if not withdrawn. Scotland and Wales have withdrawn the Right to Buy, but its still available in England. Perhaps Sir Kier will have the bottle when he takes over next year.

@PurpleButterflyWings certainly in our area, if Nora wished to downsize from a large council house, she’d get priority to move into appropriate older people’s housing. I recently visited a new complex for independent living built by our local authority. It’s mainly two bedroom balconied flats, totally accessible for anyone with mobility issues. Lovely, well kept gardens, a cafe, and 24/7 security. If I was on my own, I’d love one. But as a homeowner, its unlikely I’d qualify. Perhaps someone should tell Nora about her options? No more garden to maintain, a walk in shower, her heating costs reduced, and company if she wants it.

@Seymour5 I'm approaching my mid 60s. Living in a "retirement village" would be my 7th circle of hell, on a par with an AI holiday in a tourist resort.

My knowledge of retirement housing locally is that it hasn't really worked. When the elderly die, the properties don't sell, the charges are set against the value of the flat and the estate dissolves away.

Perhaps the answer is for local authorities to buy them up for their tenant s who need a smaller place/a little more oversight. Something for Kier to think about.

@RosesAndHellebores we all want different things at different stages of life too. I wouldn’t buy a McCarthy and Stone type of retirement property, however I’d happily sell up and rent securely, at a reasonable cost. More of the right kind of housing for older people could free up larger homes, hopefully before they fall into disrepair.

The problem with the McCarthy and stone type gaffs are the clauses that prevent them being rented if the elderly go into care. DH looked at them for MIL and once the elderly person was in care or died, they turn into money pits which are hard to get rid of.

Many are empty and there's a significant argument that they could be used to temporarily house people on waiting lists, fleeing abuse, etc., but the elderly who have purchased there would be rightly upset and feel betrayed.

It was a good idea but it hasn't worked.

What we actually need is an expansion of the old "almshouses" type arrangements. Once Local Authorities get involved however it all becomes a race to the bottom.

ginger mentioned people being emotionally attached to their home. I feel like that. I think lost of people do. The people who came to visit last weekend and I let them look around this house one lived in 25 years ago still had an emotional attachment to it.
Wehn we cleared our parents' house of 50 years where we siblings grew up it was very emotional - as where you spend your childhood is important. In my current house where I hope to die one of my children was born upstairs and still lives here.

For a lot of people an "Englishman's home is his castle" still holds true.

Social / council housing on the other hand is certainly a very difficult topic. In North Korea the long standing older female newsreader fairly recently was allocated (you never own them) a luxury flat in the capital by the state for her services to newsreading. I think our current UK system is better.

ginger mentioned people being emotionally attached to their home. I feel like that. I think lost of people do. The people who came to visit last weekend and I let them look around this house one lived in 25 years ago still had an emotional attachment to it.
Wehn we cleared our parents' house of 50 years where we siblings grew up it was very emotional - as where you spend your childhood is important. In my current house where I hope to die one of my children was born upstairs and still lives here.

I still feel a huge emotional attachment to my childhood home even though it was sold nearly 10 years ago when Mum had to go into a home. I still very occasionally go to have a look at it. I feel a great emotional attachment to my current home too, the first DH and I bought together.

Well I 'spout this shitty mantra' and believe social housing should be appropriate for the stage of life you are currently in, so young families should be in three bed properties with gardens and older single people should be in one bed properties as they need less space. If this means moving them out then so be it.
Any rental situation is at the discretion of the landlord, if you rent privately no one expects a lifetime tenancy.
And as for being jealous, think again! I work hard and have done for a lifetime deliberately so I didn't end up in the shitty social housing my local area has to offer. Trust me, the social housing local to me is not something most people aspire to live in, even with low rent. Most people that live there are trapped in a cycle of low aspirations, low wages (if they work) and a low standard of living. It's generational, most people that live there are related in some way and have been on the estate their whole lives, as were their parents and grandparents.
Not something I would be jealous of thanks.

DH and I bought our three bed home with a view to starting a family but it never happened for us. Should we be forced to leave it because of that?

No one should be forced to leave a home they own, and this isn't really an issue in my opinion.

There are plenty of people who would be happy to downsize but there simply aren't suitable properties for them to move to. Bungalows are scarce and often cost a lot more than 4 beds.

The only housing that is built for older people are leasehold retirement flats and they are generally a very poor financial choice. I certainly wouldn't buy one.

The issue faced by young and old (who want to move) is that there is a lack of suitable housing being built.

The only people I think should be penalised to the point of selling up are second home owners and people who leave investment properties sitting empty for extended periods.

What's a "family home" anyway? I get a bit fed up of "family" being used to denote some sort of specialness.

Especially the overused "hard working families". That irritates me. As if hard working individuals don't matter. Couldn't they just say "hard working people"?

Very judgemental to say it's all down to low aspirations I guess people get sick, disabled or made redundant etc. because they didn't aim high enough. I'm sure you know all the residents personally though so must be right.

This really is the best way to get it across.
Well done Sidewonder 👏

In the late 80s I had a penfriend in the GDR. Her father died, and the authorities there decided that she and her mother and sister no longer needed the flat they were in. She and her mother were moved into one flat, and her older sister had to make do with a studio flat.

I remember thinking how awful that was.

But I think there's a happy medium where we encourage people to live in properties appropriate to their needs.

It's not just about someone rattling around a house, a "family" could buy - it's also often the fact that the burden falls on the family of the rattling person - they can't cope with their four bedroom house, so they start eg demanding that family members mow the lawn, whereas if they moved to somewhere more suitable they'd cope better for longer and wouldn't eg need the lawn mowing if they didn't have one.

The only housing that is built for older people are leasehold retirement flats and they are generally a very poor financial choice. I certainly wouldn't buy one

No I wouldn't either. Definitely not a new one, anyway. They are like cars and depreciate. I think it would be a good choice for SIL as she has no kids so who cares if the estate is diminished, but they are unwise for many people and as I mentioned, I was incredibly lucky to sell my dad's as easily as I did (though got fleeced for various charges by the developer and it was about 15% less than he paid for it).

the only housing that is built for older people is leasehold retirement flats

Whoever stated that is patently incorrect. There are some properties where purchase is restricted to the over 55s. However the over 55's have no obligation to buy them. The restricted market for resale is what keeps down the price together with the inflated service charge. Having said that many flats round here have a service charge of at least £3500, if not more. That buys secure parking and a gym mostly.

And look what happens when elderly people DO move into flats

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/calls-people-evicted-bristol-tower-8613991

But aren't they leasehold retirement properties?

DH grandmother moved into a retirement flat near Windsor in 2016 when she was 85 years old. Still young and sprightly, her only health issue was pernicious anaemia and until she moved to the retirement flat she kept her driving licence. DG decided that at 85 years old she didn’t want to be bothered with the up keep of her own property anymore. The block was for over 55s and the only stipulation was that you couldn’t own a property. You had a year after moving in to sell your property or you had to leave. The flat was never yours as you always rented it but you could come and go as please as long as you told them when you were going away overnight so nobody panicked. For those that want and can afford it I think it’s a good solution but ultimately the choice of moving is entirely up to individual. People should be allowed to choose if they move and not because others expect them to.

There are loads of things that could be done to ease the housing shortage.

Landlords stopping refusing to let 3 bed houses to families might help.

If you own a 3 bed house, who do you actually think is going to want to live there? Yes a professional couple might want it. But by the law of averages, unless they are say 45+ they are quite likely to have kids in the future. Will you evict them?

If not, why would you refuse to let to a family at all? Saw this on a local FB group today - landlord selling up so family being made homeless and all the landlords are saying no because they have two girls aged 9 and 3.