To think this is a ticking time bomb (people priced out of housing)

[Batmanisreal]

It’s becoming clear that there is a problem with people not being able to afford housing like they used to be able to. This has been made worse by the introduction of right to buy by Thatcher in the 80s which reduced the numbers of council houses. The price of housing is going up and up, so more people are having to rent on the private market.

So what happens to these people who are privately renting homes, when they get to retirement age? If they can’t afford their rent?

I was lucky enough to be able to buy my house. I have young children who, by the time they get to the age I was when I bought my house, will probably not be able to afford to buy like I was. There’s a very big chance they will have to rent, possibly for the rest of their lives.

People who rent on the private market are at the mercy of whatever rents the landlords want to charge for those properties. And with more properties being rent out as short-term lets this is only going to make the situation worse.

I worry that we are heading for a situation where elderly people will end up on the streets, because there won’t be enough affordable or social housing to supply them with housing if they become homeless in the event of them not being able to afford their private rent anymore.

As a parent, I just find the whole situation so depressing.

I would genuinely think it a good idea if the government incentivised 65+ home owners to rent out rooms to other 65+s. Perhaps via increased tax exempt limits for over 65s renting rooms to other over 65s via the Rent a Room Scheme.

Social isolation and loneliness in the elderly is a genuine issue, and I don't think 2 or 3 65+s living together in a shared private house is the horror that people are making it out to be. It would have lots of benefits, and would fill up under occupied housing.

But as an owner you will have to pay buildings insurance & will be responsible for all maintenance and repairs. You'll probably have to pay a fee to the mortgage lender when you take out the loan, as well as stamp duty & legal fees to buy. Have you worked out how much that will cost you?

Yes, incentivised.. but not pressured. Plenty of 65+ year olds are happy with seeing people out their home. They don't want to live with someone else.
My mum is nearly 70 and was widowed this year. She would not want to live with anyone ever again. She is not lonely or isolated, as she still works and also does a lot of things outside of her home. Her home is her safe space to relax in at the end of the day.

Why only to other 65+? I actually think incentivising them to rent to younger people could be just as positive. Segregation of generations doesn’t help social cohesion.

I wouldn’t say those examples are grim per se but worlds agree they’re not what most would desire.

I lived in Central Asia for a while. That was grim. Yet surprisingly most people happy and ”happy with their lot”.

Whereas most in the UK have got used to too comfortable a life compared to what they can afford as individuals or we can afford as a society, and are very much not happy with their lot (I mean, some of your examples are very much “top end 1st world problems). It needs recalibrated, by people living within their means, as it’s not sustainable.

It is not that simple. Again I’m not pro flat- sharing for any age. I’ve stated multiple times that I didn’t even like it in my 20s and felt I was unsafe sometimes, but one thing that kept me going was knowing that over a certain age I wouldn’t have to do it again. It would be an infinitely worse for reluctant flatshares like me to do it in their 60s until their death than it was in my 20s.

Also again as I’ve said -if no one likes it let’s make things better for everyone. Not say well it’s shit for the 23 year old let’s make things shit for the 73 year old too.

It wouldn’t have helped 25 year old me stuck in a nasty house share to know older people had to do it too. If anything seeing older people do it in large numbers would have depressed me as I’d have considered that was my future too - as opposed to a temporary transitory stage of life thing.

This. @ExcitableCatcomparing mortgages with rents is folly. They’re nowhere near to being like for like.

Rent is literally an all in price. Mortgage doesn’t come close not withstanding ownership risks also.

If you can’t see that this is all grim- the decline of living standards especially amidst a backdrop of increasing super rich and shareholders taking record profits I don’t know what else to say except that people like you are part of the problem. So I’ll just leave it there.

E mail IDS and ask him Universal Credit was his idea

I think the general rule of thumb should be, would I be willing to live like that? E.g. in a HMO as a 70 year old with multiple health conditions. If the answer is no, you cannot seriously expect others to live that way either.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of people will have spent their lives working hard. It simply isn’t possible for every single person to earn a high salary; many occupations are of vital importance yet they pay a pittance. But we need those roles for society to function. Oftentimes, one’s salary in no way reflects how hard they worked. I believe everyone deserves safe, secure, dignified & affordable housing, all the way through until death. This isn’t an outlandish ideal & it is definitely achievable.

Many people in this life are only financially secure because of luck & being born into more fortunate circumstances. IMO those people are no more deserving than those who haven’t benefitted from good luck & being born into more fortunate circumstances. We need to stop measuring people’s contribution to society purely in economic terms/monetary value. There are many valuable ways to contribute to society & society would break down without those contributions. For the most part, people seem to forget that they’re only one relationship breakdown, job loss, death of a spouse, illness or accident away from destitution.

The fact that successive government’s have allowed a human right such as adequate shelter, to become unobtainable through unaffordability is an absolute disgrace. None of us should accept this because no one knows what their future, or the future of their loved ones, truly holds.

Honestly, because I was answering this thread about housing in retirement.

I don't think mixed age HMOs with 20 yr olds living with 65 year olds would work well due to different life stages. But I think 2 or 3 65+ living together could work fine. So incentivising 65+ people with big empty homes to rent to similarly aged people who need a home seems like a plan. And likely these ex family homes will have gardens etc too, that one pensioner might find too much, but 2 or 3 could keep on top of and enjoy together. It genuinely seems like a nice, dignified solution that would have a lot of benefits.

That poster is right though. It is entirely unsustainable. Financially and environmentally.
More time alone and more space to put more stuff doesn't make society happier.

I have heard this theory but it’s been proven not to be true. Because unlike goods or services, people can’t choose an alternative or skip it altogether - they have to live somewhere. And property is the one thing that we can’t import cheaply from abroad.

So prices rise. And if eg ordinary Londoners can’t afford eg London, they can’t choose a different London. They will move out and be replaced by wealthier renters or buyers from China or Russia. So someone can choose, sure, but it’s not the tenant.

then yes, incentivise it, but not penalise people for not doing it.
Like I said, my newly widowed mum would not want anyone living with her. I stay in the spare room anyway when I visit.

My Nan had an outside bog well into the 1980s. Not everyone was living in a mansion back then.

I would be willing to live in a nice ex family home as a house share with 1 or 2 other similarly aged, like minded people should I find myself alone in retirement. I'd prefer that to a self contained bedsit or studio flat in a tower block.

I think my mother (who is 68) would rather rent a room to someone in their 30s or 40s than someone a similar age to her. But then I suppose her friends all have their own homes. Perhaps that won’t be the case for people 15-20 years younger than her.

That is you though. Plenty of people would not want to do the same.

What do you mean penalize people? People make choices about where they live based on their circumstances and budget. This could be a good, affordable option for pensioners who need it, and would come with a host of social benefits.

They can choose to do it if they want to then. People who don't should not be worse off.

My elderly FIL (mid-80s) in a very fancy (expensive) care home. It’s arranged in flats, with 6 people per flat. It’s exactly like a house share, but with carers. He has an en-suite but shared kitchen and living area. It’s deliberately designed that way so that the residents are less socially isolated.

Anyone who wants to and can afford to can live anywhere they like. But as this thread points out, some people may struggle paying rent, paricularly if they are single and only on state pension/pension credit. This is a good solution for those people and likely far more pleasant than the other low cost options out there.

I don't think forcing low income older people into house shares is good or dignified.

No one is forcing them. But it's a likely nicer, more dignified solution than the other accommodation options that will be available to them as low income pensioners.

It won't stop there. Next it will be older social housing tenants, being forced to give up their tenancy and then on to owner occupiers, ending the single person discount on council tax to nudge them into downsizing. Also, take in a lodger and you lose the single person discount.