To think housing in this country is fundamentally broken?

[BrokenHousingLogic]

Whether you rent privately, rent socially or own, it feels like the system isn’t really working for anyone.

• Rents are high and insecure
• Buying is out of reach for many
• Social housing is under strain
• Landlords and tenants feel pitted against each other
• Local authorities seem overwhelmed

It often feels like people are arguing with each other instead of addressing the fact that the whole structure is failing.

AIBU to think this goes beyond individual choices and points to a system-wide problem?

Or stop importing so many millions of people as the increase in population is now driven entirely by immigration. The native population - and yes we do exist - have not been reproducing at replacement rates for a while

Margaret Thatcher introduced right to buy
and restricted the ability of councils to replace the sold houses.

Undo those changes and there is a clear solution.

It's economic inequality that will only get worse
More kids will go to school hungry
More families will turn to food banks

More people need to be talking about this instead of boats

Too many people and not enough homes being built. Just like the roads being crowded, NHS waiting lists, problems accessing GPs, full buses and trains, etc etc. All comes down to too many people and successive governments not putting the infrastructure in place for them.

Blair/Brown had 13 years to change that. Starmer has had 18 months to announce changes to it, but he's not said a word. So Labour clearly don't want to correct the mistake.

Not to mention that most of the housing is barely fit for purpose. Is hardly attractive, or even practical, and isn't that greatly situated.

Nail on the head. Too many people. Simples. Same cause for the public sector finance deficit ever growing - too many people costing in terms of public services, benefits, pensions, etc etc.

We need good quality housing built instead of the rubbish that is built on green field sites. Solar panels as standard, good insulation, quality windows, decent fittings. Not some Barratt built crap that won't be there in 100 years' time (I lived in one for a bit - it was nice new but I wouldn't like to see it in another couple of decades).

And we need to nudge people to sell or rent out their second homes. There's over a million second homes, even if only half those people put them back into residential use, that's a lot of new homes.

And we need better quality housing for single people - not retirement flats, in fact not flats at all. More bungalows and stop people turning bungalow into houses. Also have limits on development so a 2 bed house doesn't turn into a 5 bed house nobody can afford. Move house instead if you want the extra space. 2 to 3 is fine, or 3-4. Or add a study, that sort of thing. But not a fundamental rebuild unless it's some grotty ramshackle place in the countryside which you only want for the plot anyway.

Circumstances change and many people are in homes that are no longer suitable for them. They don't move because of stamp duty and other expensive moving costs.

Many people don't choose a home suitable for their needs. Not enough bedrooms for their children, multiple cars but no garage or driveway, commute but a long distance from the station. People need to prioritise their needs not their wants when moving.

I'm in my 60s and will be on my own when ds moves to uni next summer. I'd love to downsize but that will cost at least £30k in taxes and fees, plus the inevitable moving costs and fixing of issues in any new house.

For that money, I might as well stay where I am with a 4 bed house all to myself. It's too risky to take in a lodger so I guess that's how things must be.

The tax regime needs to change to make downsizing less expensive.

It would be nice if we who bring houses up to a habitable standard got some credit, perhaps a VAT reduction for insulation or safety improvements.

My current house, I took on after it had been on the market for years. I've replaced the roof and loft insulation. I've replaced the dangerous wiring. I've replaced all the single glazed windows with double glazed units. I've replaced rotten doors with secure new ones. Replaced leaking water main and dodgy DIY pipework. Installed a kitchen and new boiler. My house is now a warm, dry safe family unit, a habitable part of the UK's housing stock, rather than a cold, damp, dangerous mess.

Thankfully it's nowhere near £2m in value or I'd be penalised financially for my efforts.

Reliable reports suggest the government is planning to build thousands of houses, having made deals with major players across various industries, including foreign partners. New measures now make it legally possible, giving councils more power to acquire land through compulsory purchase orders (CPO) and requiring farmers to sell land for housing projects.

Now it’s a matter of young people having the money to buy the newly built houses that will appear in the next few years. They seem convinced they can afford to purchase the homes previously owned by the boomers they dislike so much. In fact, young people often prefer boomer houses over new builds—apparently, no home is better than one lived in by a boomer. Of course, I’m basing my comment on what I’ve seen on Mumsnet and online.

@ThisTicklishFatball I think most of that is rhetoric. We don’t have the workforce, the planning permissions in place or companies who can build at the speed required. CPO isn’t going to help if there’s no pp! They are calling in all larger schemes for determination taking away local democracy but it moves at a snails pace. You are truly being very hopeful if you think the government will get anywhere near its target. No one in the building industry does!

You’ve missed one out OP . The leasehold problem

Christ, we've just let go of an old 'boomer' family home. Sure it has a little charm. But the reality is that it's an overpriced piece of shit, sitting alongside other overpriced properties, in a very ugly part of town, that is slightly more upmarket than the ones down the road. Desirable none-the-less, probably because the alternatives are just as bad.

@FilterBubble Why do you live here if you hate the housing and the locations? Would you prefer to live in another country?

I took over a dilapidated rural Victorian house and have dragged it into the 21st century. Sometimes you have to rebuild what you need.

@Meadowfinch rebuilding and retrofits can be incredibly disruptive. I'd rather see housing estates torn down and repurposed. Considering lots of stock isn't designed to last even a century - implies many Victorian houses have outstayed their welcome. And much of the Victorian housing stock is the better stuff. I see 50's estates disintegrating near me before my eyes. I personally think housing fundamentally is tackled and designed badly in this country. It's a difficult problem that doesn't get the attention it deserves. New builds can be low carbon, efficient and attractive in most locales. Grind the old stock into a paste to make new housing. There are some eco-friendly techniques employed, but currently we don't even have places to recycle double glazing (not near me at least). People are polluting with plastics, and daubing properties with fixtures and fittings that have no end-of-life consideration. Think plastic paints and lawns. I live in an old leaky property. It's fine in the summer. I'd rather be in the shed in the winter.

The best quality new builds are those built for the housing associations.
Why ?
Because the landlord (Vivid or whoever) knows they will have to maintain them
so they keep a VERY close eye on snagging during construction.

In mixed private / social developments, the social ones are much better built
BUT
The key in the UK is that there will always be a pool of people who will never be able to afford to buy.
Their rent should go directly back to the Local Authority (who are paying out the housing benefit)
WITHOUT a profit share going to external landlords.

Stamp duty penalises house sales and thus restricts moving for work.
An annual land value tax would raise the same without the brake on the market

and
a vibrant private rental sector allows the young to move for work and study
without the commitment of buying

finally
empty homes should be taxed very very heavily to force them back into use
(see Bishops Avenue in North London as the most egregious example)

Undo those changes and there is a clear solution

@Talkinpeace I agree, but in our village a council house became vacant and the council have sold it.
I do t know if this is common practice but it seems a daft idea given the shortage of local authority housing.

Build flats with laundry rooms and rubbish chutes instead of expecting tenants to dry clothes by osmosis or the power of prayer or to go naked

Well I don't think my landlord will be selling up anytime soon. He has 6 Hmos. 6 bedrooms each. Average rent is £600 per month per tenant.
We get absolutely nothing as well. Minimum heating and a cleaner for the communal areas for 10 minutes every 2 weeks.
He will be a millionaire shortly meanwhile his tenants will still have nothing

...and destroy what is left of the countryside. My local woods have been hacked down to make way for two new housing estates. Then they built a massive housing estate at the other end of the village. Now we've been told the fields in the centre of the village are going to be built on as well – and that includes blocks of flats.

The real reason we have a housing crisis is that there are too many people jammed onto this little island. And that is partly down to immigration. Judging by the languages spoken on those new estates, I'd say the majority of the people who have moved there are from Africa and the Middle East.

Scotland and Wales stopped it, England could do the same. There was an overload of council housing in some parts of the UK a few decades ago, but now there are shortages, it would make sense.

DH and I lived in a brand new high rise block in the late 60s. Laundry in the basement, plus a heated drying cupboard (electric warm air heating) in the kitchen. They are all gone now, demolished 20+ years ago.

They are all gone now, demolished 20+ years ago

@Seymour5 were they demolished because they were in poor condition and refurbishing would’ve been too expensive or because 20 years ago the council found it hard to fill them?