To be sick of hearing about 'the housing crisis'?

[GoldfinchFeather]

This is related to the thread about Angela Rayner wanting to build 1.5 million new homes. Is anyone else sick to the back teeth of hearing about the supposed housing crisis in this country?

I live in a semi-rural area, and the amount of house building around here over the last few years has been crazy. Hundreds of houses appearing on pretty much any vacant piece of land, turning what was once a small village into something that feels closer to a town in size. Roads getting busier and busier, and and all the while nothing has been done to provide any new facilities like doctors or schools.

I understand people's frustration of not being able to buy a home. But surely just concreting over more and more of the countryside is completely unsustainable?

If the housing crisis is really so bad, why isn't the Government taking more of an innovative approach? How many town centres/high streets have empty shops that could be converted to residential use? Or properties that have stood empty for years and haven't been brought back to market? Surely just through that, there would be an enormous surplus of homes available, and less need to concrete over more and more of the countryside?

I live in a small village when they built the new builds it brought in new life. I am a fan of housing.

In our village 'locals' sold their old, cold, damp and drafty sea front cottages to 'óutsiders' wearing rose tinted glasses about living next to the sea, aand all the constant maintenance and hard work it involved. The rose tinted outsiders though these houses were worth a fortune, and the locals were only too happy that the outsiders bid up the value among themselves.

The locals move to the near by town, where all the jobs are and where prices were normal for the area, but there were many many new cars and holidays at the same time. Old cold money pits were swapped for cost efficient new builds, close to the amenities that the village never had. In the end the old Victorian primary school had to close, but with outsiders buying it for a small fortune, the council built a brand new school in the new town, with all brand new classrooms, sports facilities etc. The same happened to the doctors. All those who used to drive to an old doctors in the next village now walk to a brand new health centre in town.

The outsiders soon found out what it's like in these old houses and set about renovating them. The local builder has never had it so good and now employs more trades than ever before.

The old shop got replaced by a posh boutique for the outsiders and the pub became a 1* restaurant. The old village really busy in summer, but there no shortage of summer jobs for the DDs and their friends. Out of season it's nice to go to those places. Places that never existed before the outsiders came. Don't tell anyone, but they all have 'locals' discounts out of season.

Overall everyone seems to be a winner, but if you listened to one of two 'hard of thinking' types, this is now how it's all reported/seen, I saw crisis? What crisis?

I'd go the other way and say we need more social housing. Provide plentiful well built secure housing for people and they can put their energy into making their lives better. Arse falls out of the rental market which makes it more affordable too. I just think the right to buy is an issue - if there's enough social housing you don't need it.

Our birthrate in the uk is 1.4 far below replacement rate. I am 32 years old and my peers are all professionals- lawyers (including one on 6 figures and on her way to earning 180k) , software developers, civil servants (we work in financial services), academics. I had a gender reveal party yesterday and everyone was excited about something so naff because it was the first baby in my peer group.

Most of my peers own their home and we live in London, I even know someone whose home was gifted (also a solicitor). We are all in our 30s, i am actually one of the younger ones and probably the lowest earning (my dh also earns below average for our peers group at 75k). They are not having kids because they lack money. Ironically they don't have kids or marry cos there is too much to lose and there is less time to date. Dh and I are lower earners but we married in early 20s and bought our london flat in our 20s (plus our lower earnings meant we had lower expectations re housing, just having a mortgage on 2 bed flat was enough) hence we could start trying earlier and therefore could conceive. Took us 9 years to get pregnant. We are having one child due to our fertility and health problems (gestational diabetes)

So given the middle and professional classes aren't producing, we need the poor to produce as many kids as they can so I hopefully still have a pension. I think the rich will have more children as they are status symbols but there aren't too many of them.

This is so important. People get social housing at times in their lives when they are struggling, and as a country it's right that we support people at their most vunerable.

However, because it so hard to get, some people hang onto it once they are back on their feet, and then it's not available to those in highest need. We made the mistake of 'right to buy' which reduced housing stock, but maybe we need to get rid of 'lifetime tenancies' in social housing?

My mum grew up in a council house, with 4 bedrooms as she had 5 siblings. My Grandma lived in that house until she died at 96, all the children moved out by the time she was about 45, she lived in a 4 bed house on her own (my grandad died young). She was never asked to move, which I'm glad about on a personal level, but on a society level, that house should be used by a family, and once children are grown and moved out, should be passed onto another family.
She was offered the option to buy it for about 40k, when it's market value was at least 400k, and she declined, saying it needed to go to another family in need.

I don't dispute there is a housing crisis, but it's not one that will simply be solved by relying on the private sector to build lots of expensive houses - that's not going to help people stuck in mouldy temporary accommodation.
George Monbiot's recent summary of the whole mess is very good, as is this one-page summary from JustSpace, an alliance of 80 community groups and grassroots campaigns in London.

The problem is that if it's only for people in need, it is politically difficult to ensure that there is always adequate funding to maintain the properties or build new social housing.

No one thinks they will be in need. Many people assume they will all be living in 4 bed detached houses they own..the reality is that most people in the uk don't live in 4 bed detached houses. In fact only 63% of households own their home and a big chunk of that are older people.

You need a real mix of people living in social housing. Young people who maybe can't afford private rent and have a life, essential workers living in expensive areas

A government think tank are looking at all properties. Eg. A couple retired hanging on to four bedroom house. The thinking is to increase council tax because of those wasted rooms. Remove 25% rebates for those living alone. In other words nudge them out by penalising them.

You're right op.
I went to a presentation of an academic study about the housing situation in England. Apparently we have enough housing in the UK to meet needs (although not all in the right place). We have enough bedrooms, it's just massively under occupied with single people in three or four bed houses and families in hotel rooms. Even within council owned accommodation, just under 50% of properties are being under occupied.

This is what I'm struggling with. I also live in a fairly expensive part of the SE and while there are some 1 and 2 bedroom flats mixed in, so many of the new build housing estates are huge and very expensive executive homes.

In the press and from local politicians there is so much touted about the building of affordable housing, but the numbers on housing registers, and homeless households, are ever increasing.

In fact to the contrary, surely all of these lovely 4 bed detached new builds and swanky by to let central flats are just pushing the average housing prices up, with local landlords increasing their own prices on regular houses accordingly.

It's a really unfair situation. People shouldn't have to leave their local areas with family and work ties just to be able to make a start in life and have a secure home. And also, people literally can't just do that, it's obvs not as simple as just moving, you need employment and that's often a reason for areas being cheap to move to - there's less opportunity.

Fuck sake im going to have to post the Elephant and Castle example yet a fucking gain,

The Elephant and Castle neighbourhood is being physically, socially and ethnically transformed. This started with the demolition of the Heygate estate, a classic for stigmatised perceptions of council housing and the people who live in it. As the local 35% Campaign has meticulously documented, a succession of promises to Heygate residents were broken to arrive at a situation where 1,214 council homes were demolished, to be replaced with 2,704 new homes, of which only 82 (3%) are for social rent. The HA partner was London and Quadrant. To be eligible for the cheapest one-bedroom home built by them on the Heygate site, people needed a minimum household income of £57,500. The average household income in that part of Southwark is £24,324

1,214 council homes replaced with 82. its not ppl hogging social housing FFS!

I’m pretty sure it’s less than 10% of the uk that is actually built on. So YABU, massively

Yet certain MPs and society always used to bang on about ppl not having kids that they couldnt afford....lol

No government is nudging me out? Where to? I might need my spare rooms for visitors. I’m not going anywhere. If the state houses people there’s a conversation to be had. Should well off people keep their council housing? A family member has. That deprives far more needy people than me keeping my paid for house. My relative could have bought several houses 25 years ago but didn’t move out. Maybe means testing is needed?

What % of Britain is built on?

Well if you're happy to pay the extra tax for empty rooms they'll not actually throw you out just tax you on it.

Cannot see that being popular. Nearly everyone we know has spare rooms! Me downsizing won’t really help anyone but I’m sure taking aim at the better off is what makes this country tick. It’s why we cannot get the economy moving. The politics of envy. It’s a big vote loser and won’t happen.

It would be a bigger vote loser than winter fuel payment removal.

This is one example (although im sure there are other similar ones), there are thousands of under occupied council homes

Both are issues, along with lots of others.

Land costs alot, building costs a lot. There should be no profit in social housing construction and rental, but it needs to cover its costs long term for the system to be sustainable, which is really difficult, especially in high cost areas.

I work with disabled and life limited children, with parents carrying teenagers up several flights of stairs on their backs to cramped flats where no one gets any sleep because this child's cries and has seizures through the night, and mould on the walls outside them in hospital at least 3 times each winter. As a country we need to do better for our most vunerable.

I should add this think tank was formed under a conservative government to tax people living in homes with empty rooms.

Ah I'm glad you said that. It's certainly logical that they've been considering it. Like second home 200% council tax in parts of Wales now.

We do.... my town has changed more in the past 18 months that it did in 15 years before that

The trouble with downsizing are the costs. The stamp duty is onerous. Add in estate agent, solicitors, removals. Any windfall is eaten away.

Retirement homes in the UK are in the main shocking. Long corridors with front doors. service charges for what. 50 flats £4k per annum. It's highway robbery.

Other countries have villages, with gyms, swimming pool, a shop, restaurant. A manager on site, GP/nurse available. A social life if you want one.

In one of the local towns to me we have had a significant amount of new 'affordable' homes built. There has been no new doctors or schools or other essential infrastructure put in place. The affordable homes are all over £250K and/or shared housing. This doesn't help any of the local new adult children who are probably in min wage jobs in this particular area.

The new homes need to be social housing homes which will then be truly affordable for those on normal, full time incomes in the UK.

I'm also in a rural area and it is shocking how many housing developments have gone up but none of the housing is actually affordable for the local youngsters.

How to say you're privileged without saying you're privileged.