Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Calls for Help Freeing Up Family Homes

444 replies

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/10/2011 07:35

Free Up Family Homes The charity 'The Intergenerational Foundation' is recommending tax breaks to encourage older people to leave oversized homes. They estimate that there are 25 million unused bedrooms in England. Half of over 65's have 2 or more spare rooms in their home. Housing minister Grant Shapps doesn't sound keen on the idea. But what do you think? Should home-owners and tenants be encouraged to trade down for public-spirited reasons? Or should they be able to rattle around in their multiple spare bedrooms and left alone?

OP posts:
Xenia · 22/10/2011 15:21

It doesn't matter who is ideologically right actually because the funds aren't there so the gravy train is over, whether you regret it or think it's a jolly good thing. However none of the political parties has really instituted real change or proper cuts. It looks like we will have to wait until the economic situation gets even worse before they go ahead to do so.

What we can do on an individual basis is work a lot harder and pay a lot more tax and seek to generate more business at home and abroad (as I do and I am sure lots of working mothers and fathers do). We can also ensure we inculcate a work ethic into our children of the traditional English kind. We are not really at heart a nation of slackers. We have considerable abilities in the UK to put up with difficult circumstances and a national psyche which enables us to do so. We keep calm and carry on and I'm sure we will continue to do so.

There are lots of changes the Government can make to seek to make it less pleasant to be on benefits. It might however take a change in the national view as to what is a basic level of state provision of the poor.

As for work fare well 25% of those on some benefits are supposedly depressed. Some of those are probably trying it on. Some could work from home stuffing envelopes. if I can do that sort of task when it's necessary and indeed my children can I don't see why people can't from home and a host of other tasks. Every day I clear litter from our road for no pay as I walk by. Plenty of others do and I am sure those claiming benefits those who can walk etc would not mind spending 2 or 3 hours a day doing the same on roads in their areas.

Solopower · 22/10/2011 15:21

Anyway, this thread is about old people downsizing. We shouldn't hijack it.

crazycatlady · 22/10/2011 16:01

Solopower Wed 19-Oct-11 23:07:22
Actually, a more logical solution would be for young families to move back in with Mum/Grandma. I wonder if that will start happening again any time soon ...

Solo just to go back to your earlier post, we are doing exactly this. On Monday! DH, me, 2yr old DD and 7 month old DS, plus 2 cats, moving in with my mum and her partner. We have been living a very expensive life in London for the last ten years and have reached a sort of 'ceiling' where we can't afford to upgrade to the next size property or pay for school fees and I haven't been able to go back to work as planned as DS has a whole host of special needs, so we have sold our 3 bed house in SW London and moving in with family in Surrey.

It makes financial sense for all of us at this point in time, especially while property prices are stagnant/falling. We lose the mortgage, my mum gains some rent, and we can all help each other out with bills and the rising cost of living. Also frees me up to work more as DH and I will get more help with the kids.

The grand plan is to move to the south west as a big family unit in the next couple of years to live and work together running a portfolio of businesses. I can't think of a way I'd rather live!

LaWeasel · 22/10/2011 16:05

It does rather depend on families living close together anyway though doesn't it?

If we moved to either set of grandparents houses DH would have a 2hr+ commute to work... and the reason we live where we live is that it was the only place he could get a decent job!!

Xenia · 22/10/2011 16:35

What about your job though? Just as important a family isnear the mother's decent job as the man's surely unless you have a very sexist set up?

Solopower · 22/10/2011 16:49

Crazycatlady, that sounds like a lovely set up! It's great that you all get on well enough to even consider this. All the very best of luck.

It's a good idea to live together if you can stand it, IMO. If not, nearby. Grandparents can make great baby/dog/house/sitters, too.

The reason I wouldn't want to live with my offspring and their families is because I think I would get too involved in their lives and become a pain. Also, although I could probably have put up with my parents, I would have hated to live with my in-laws ...

Xenia · 22/10/2011 16:52

There are pros and cons to multi generational living. If a state can afford nothing else then we might indeed have to return to that and that can benefit chidlren. If there are a lot of adults around they gain. I suspect the adults in a relationship find it harder. My younger children live with 3 adults - me and their two of their adult siblings and they benefit in a vast number of ways.

Many cultures around me here in London will as a matter of course have care of their own parents in later life and plenty of Indian girls are obliged to move in with their husband's family whether they like it or not. Plenty do find it a bit of a strain as often those sets ups are incredibly sexist and rarely is it a man having to make the sacrifice of living with his awful mother in law.

LaWeasel · 22/10/2011 17:13

Xenia - if you want to pay my childcare I will very happily go to work. He earns more than me, so he works, such is life. I'm not going to force us to struggle financially to make a political point. That would be bloody stupid.

Majestic12 · 22/10/2011 17:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Solopower · 22/10/2011 17:33

Xenia, children often do benefit from living with lots of different adults - as long as no-one is eating their own or anyone else's eyeballs ...

Bonsoir · 22/10/2011 17:50

My parents have a large house in part to accommodate their children and grandchildren coming to stay. Is the government proposing to veto GPs having their grandchildren to stay during school holidays, which is valuable childcare for parents?

Tortington · 22/10/2011 17:55

maybe i dont want my adult kids moving back in with me. there should be other options fgs. it is ridiculous

Xenia · 22/10/2011 18:04

There's nothing really that is being planned except a vague idea that they might remove stamp duty from old people moving to smaller homes when they buy the smaller home.

If we move into a double dip recession etc then no one will have the money to buy any houses and prices of those who have to sell will reduce.

It is not impossible to buy. My older children are looking at it. YOu do need to work very hard however and save up and make wise career choices.

LostInTheWoods · 22/10/2011 18:56

The biggest chunk of the benefits bill goes on pensions. Sort of makes a joke of trying to cut it.

Xenia · 22/10/2011 19:08

Perhaps we should give them free cigarettes and cream buns then to kill them off early.

jjkm · 22/10/2011 19:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

iggly2 · 22/10/2011 19:54

I think that we need to look at other things not just how to assess and minimize government payments (whether in welfare, education, civil service, NHS, government and public sector size?..). Spending in these areas does need to be tightly regulated. Job seekers, income support, etc do need increasing checks to make sure they are deserved (maybe recipients need to check in more frequently to receive the benefit and have people doing jobs in return for their benefit for which they could get references).

Taxes probably will still have to rise despite this regulation (public sector is too large in the United Kingdom the costs are growing). The structural deficit (I believe circa £155 billion) needs to be reduced ?though there are thoughts on whether a temporary dip in taxation to encourage business (e.g. corporation tax) maybe a good thing, look into tax havens (if profit is made in the UK tax it here). All of this still leads to the problem that the debt is there and will get worse and the middle aged and young are going to have to deal with it (and their children?) there will need to be tax increases as population ages (currently the generation approaching retirement is predicted to receive 118% of what they paid in) especially due to increased longevity and health care. So a bit of burden spreading is needed.

Problems: housing prices (lack of space for families)
Consequences: couples later to start families (under reproduce/fertility issues ) may lead to further decrease in number of working population later on (i.e. taxpayers), stops ?investment? going into other businesses. Cost to young and welfare state (housing benefit rises as housing costs rise).
Solutions/aids: increase stamp duty on second homes, increase capital gains taxes on second homes/BTL, Cap housing benefit, sensible bank lending (e.g. their underwriters do not insure borrowing of greater than 3-4X salary), encourage new builds (relax planning regulations), council tax for second homes at 125% (done already in some areas), maybe a version of mansion tax (but price bands are unique for the area and vary). These should all stop house price inflation being so great. MORE SOCIAL HOUSING. Check who gets social housing (do they need it, is it appropriate).

Problem: Aging population leading to rising healthcare and pension liabilities
Consequences: It has been reported that those retiring will get out of the welfare system 118% of what they put in (adjusted for taxes and a conservative estimate). Half NHS costs are for pensioners this will rise. Residential care for elderly should be seen as something you save for (it seems fashionable almost to say I will spend all my money so the state cannot make me pay for my careHmm). Pension liabilities (£2.2 trillion conservative estimate).
Solutions: Increase taxation, check reasons for benefits are genuine, increase NHS productivity (eg no expensive repeats of the GP contract allowing for out of hours opt out). Increase pension contributions, public sector pensions assessed (cap?alter for incomers), work longer. Thorough investigation into assets for caring homes (board and lodging and maybe personal care should be paid by person, the health component by the NHS). Encourage families to look after each other.

Problem: Education tuition fees
Consequences: debt on the young delays families etc, less money for their own pensions and investments especially as they are likely to be taxed a lot to fund the rising care bills.
Solutions: work longer, look at the decrease in funding are all the courses really needed?????????

iggly2 · 22/10/2011 19:56

One story in the Daily Mail really exemplifies a lot that is wrong:

?In Surrey, 41-year-old Andrew Sewell is an area sales manager in the construction industry. His wife, Melanie, is an occupational therapist, and together they have a combined income of £50,000..??.
The Sewells ? mum, dad and two children ? live in a four-bedroom detached house worth an estimated £600,000, with two cars on the drive.
A few years ago, £50,000 was a nice sum to live off ? now we just about manage. It takes a tremendous amount of careful financial juggling every month just to keep the wolves from the door. There is nothing left to save or top up our pension pots.?
But despite everything, I don?t want to have to move. We have a big mortgage, but I see our home as an investment: a house in Surrey will always be in demand, and anyway I think house prices will rise in future.
?We may not be able to rely on a pension when the time comes, but at least we should have the option of downsizing with some money to spare that we can then live on.??
The mother is not advocating saving for her own retirement but using money released from property price rises at her children?s generation expense. The house is already worth vastly more than their £50,000 earnings should be able to afford.

iggly2 · 22/10/2011 20:05

Sorry, better punctuatedBlush:

One story in the Daily Mail really exemplifies a lot that is wrong:

?In Surrey, 41-year-old Andrew Sewell is an area sales manager in the construction industry. His wife, Melanie, is an occupational therapist, and together they have a combined income of £50,000..??.

The Sewells ? mum, dad and two children ? live in a four-bedroom detached house worth an estimated £600,000, with two cars on the drive. ......

'A few years ago, £50,000 was a nice sum to live off ? now we just about manage. It takes a tremendous amount of careful financial juggling every month just to keep the wolves from the door. There is nothing left to save or top up our pension pots.?

'But despite everything, I don?t want to have to move. We have a big mortgage, but I see our home as an investment: a house in Surrey will always be in demand, and anyway I think house prices will rise in future.'

?We may not be able to rely on a pension when the time comes, but at least we should have the option of downsizing with some money to spare that we can then live on.? ?

The mother is not advocating saving for her own retirement but using money released from property price rises at her children?s generation expense. The house is already worth vastly more than their £50,000 earnings should be able to afford.

jjkm · 22/10/2011 20:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

iggly2 · 22/10/2011 21:47

To be fair it is the "Daily Mail" so it is what is to be expected.

But the point is housing does not keep par with inflationHmm(or since 1975 where reliable figures could easily be found).

Nationwide inflation adjusted figures for 1975 compared to 2010: (averaged the 4 quarters for the year, used 2010 as full year data available)

Year:1975
actually paid: £10, 845.50
infation adjusted average: £ 64, 168

Year: 2010
actually paid:£165482.75
inflation adjusted average: £173,383

How can she not see that she is asking her children to fund everything by relying on house price increase..........how can people be so stupid.

iggly2 · 22/10/2011 21:59

I removed the "They have had to resign their gym (£75/month) membership because they can no longer afford the subscription and last year, for the first time, they went without their traditional family holiday abroad so they could buy a new living room carpet instead........." and how they could not afford to replace their daughter's horse when it died.

Though I do feel bad now as I try not to look at specifics but group trends. This was just too easy , so I couldn't resist [hgrin].

jjkm · 22/10/2011 23:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

abendbrot · 23/10/2011 00:15

jj thanks for that video, cheered me up even.

iggly2 · 23/10/2011 00:17

jjkm that jp graph equates it to rental expense (If it is the one for the U.S.) Rental pricing is very likely to follow housing price Hmm, also at the end of rental you have no assets. It supports home ownership (pay in mortage is approx what you pay in rent).

Swipe left for the next trending thread