Gordon Brown to curb second home ownership

[dinny]

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3466783.ece

about bloody time. though will mean exisiting second homes will become incredibly valuable, I suppose...

and of course MPS will be exempt as they need a home in their constituency and one in London

What is to stop people "moving in" for a few months and then "moving out"? When you buy a house the seller needs to know if you are in a chain. If you are a cash buyer are they going to turn you down?

Can't see how this will be policed?

Feels a bit late in the day for this really The damage has already been done where we live.

10 yrs too late but the sentiment is right

what about buying as a propety developer?

can't see how it will be established as they can't stop people legally spending their money as they want?

I agree it will be virtually impossible to enforce.
Also, strongly disagree with the possible restrictions on 'outsiders' moving into an area. Why should people be prevented from moving around for work etc? I moved from the South East because I knew I'd be unlikely to ever afford a decent home there. I think it's often better to have movement - new people can bring new vitality to an area. I never felt I had an automatic 'right ' to remain for life in the area I was brought up.

Well I think it's wrongheaded and unenforceable, which is not to say I lack empathy for communities deadened by part time residency.
But this isn't the way to deal with it. hard cases make bad law and all that.

• how "second home" is it for a working parent for example to buy a flat/house near work while his/her young family stays in the main home near school/friends/other parent's work, when that second home enables, say, the better paid parent to earn a good salary for the family, maybe staying there 3-4 days a week, then travelling home to the family ?
• are homeowners in Cornwall/Lake District/wherever going to be allowed to market their homes only in local newspapers for example rather than nationwide, almost certainly possibly getting a much lower price for it, just because sucked lemon face G Brown says so ? Why can't they have a financial dividend too, if they decide to move out of their scenic area and closer to a city for example ?

Completely agree with alfiesbabe; movement is good. It keeps communities fresh and vibrant. And let's not forget the death knell for a lot of rural communities has sadly alwyas been for economic reasons; let's not pick on second home owners. What about the Beeching Act which closed down lots of rural railways, thus ensuring that lots of small communities were killed off decades ago anyway.

Or the closures of small rural primary schools; still going on. That sort of thing forces families into bigger communities - or forces parents to drive children for miles every day to the next nearest village primary school. This fragmentation and resettlement has nothing to do with second home ownership whatsoever. Rural communities often hang by a slim economic thread for a myriad of reasons. But you go, Gordon. Get that cheap sound bite.

What if you pay a live in housekeeper to live in it? Would that get round it?

Snort at this. I'll believe it when I see it.

Would surely make more sense just to tax them properly.

Unbelievable that second homes are still eligible for council tax discounts.

I would gladly accept a job as a live-in housekeeper to someone's second or third or whatever home.

You'd better believe I'd keep their home so spic and span they could show up at any time and eat of their floors.

And Maggie Gordon Brown could just go and get stuffed.

It's just more of his outward pontificating trying to fool everyone he's all about sorting the housing crisis, when his and his party's policies have demonstrated otherwise for the past 11 years.

what expat said.

off, that would be.

I don't know which I find more insulting, his spin itself or the fact that he truly believes people are too stupid to see through it.

does this Govt make anyone else want to purchase the biggest 4x4 they can find, stuff their children with mcDs and froot shoots evey day, take up smoking , drink a bottle of wine an evening, buy 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes , never recyle, park on double yellows , go on holiday during term time.....and stick 2 fingers up at every CCTV camera you find!

I am fed up with evey single bit of our lives being governed by these pointless rules and dictats!

....or just me?

I'm sick of Government by Target. More like Government by Idiots too brain dead to think creatively, much less take into consideration things like the long-term or see the interconnection between things like increased car use and crap, expensive public transport - or none at all - in many areas where housing is affordable enough for working families.

where I come from, 50% of homes are holiday homes and locals are priced out of the market. thus, businesses find it nigh on impossible over the winter months, the school threatened with closure as not enough children to go there and it is becoming like a ghost town in winter. so, second home owning does have a HUGE effect on schools, Nospringchicken, no children to go to the schools in area in which the parents own a 2nd home!!!!

it isn't meant to stop people moving area, it'll make it EASIER in theory as prices will be kept more in keeping with the locality.

I am desperate to move back home and raise my family there and contibute to the community but am TOTALLY priced out by second-home owners. so, I agree with it in principle, but also think it is going to be very difficult to enforce.

Another knock on effect, dinny, is that employ is severely limited in such areas, mostly to seasonal employment.

So people face long commutes into cities for work if they live there.

And since public transport is very limited and/or expensive in such areas, they are forced to drive their cars in to work.

I am not saying I agree with this policy - I don't. But I disagree that he is doing it for votes, or as a bit of spin. He is hardly going to bother to announce a policy for the purpose of spin when it is the kind of policy that will really anger the marginal, middle England voters that Labour so need to keep on side.

Brown must beleive this will have some impact on poorer families or else he would not bother with it. The sad reality is that he does not need to spin policies that are attractive to poorer families because very few vote, and those that do tend to vote Labour.

oh, yes, Expat, very true...

But he never implements these policies, artichokes.

This is what the government is going to recommend to local councils.

It's a 'call for radical action'.

I have yet to see anyone really answering that call in such a radical fashion, particularly Labour councils.

our council is very likely to implement this - they are delighted

AFAIK they've been doing something similar in the Lake District for a while and it has had an effect. It has actually reduced the value of the existing 2nd homes dinny because they are nigh on impossible to sell as holiday homes so that has caused house prices to reduce to something more affordable to locals.

ah, interesting, SM, wasn't sure if existing second homes could be sold on as 2nd homes...

really really hopes this happens - where I'm from has restrictive covenants on purchasing on ALL new builds (very few granted pp anyway) but this would help people that want to live in and contribute to such a community SOOO much.

The city I liove in is full% of 2nd homes This means normal folk (ie me) can't afford a pot to piss in. Priobably about 40-50% of these homes are occup[ied by those exempt from paying council tax, thereby pushing teven more expense up for everyone.

This policy won;t work though.Tis more bolleux spouted by a government nobody trusts anymore

I hope so too dinny

I think in the LD you have to prove you will be there a certain % of the time and it doesn't matter if it's a new build or an existing house if you live within the designated zone.