Demographic timebomb and housing

[Salisburyspire]

When do we think babyboomers will begin to sell? This is not a generational bashing thread by the way, am asking from a strategic point of view.

Any economists or demographers out there? I have only seen one UK article on this and it predicted they wouldn’t sell until 2034 onwards. Surely that’s too late? Is there a particular five year period during which we expect there to be a huge downsizing?

When they do sell up, will it leave a glut of large homes on the market? I’m Gen X but very much want to trade up (one last large house). We own our house outright but the next step up in the area near DC schools has exponentially shot up over the last three years. (Leafy London but not too far out). One issue is a massive shortage of decent housing stock in that area. Our plan was always to move there, see the DC through school and then downsize as there doesn’t seem any point to living in a big house without the kids there when we could by then be enjoying a more comfortable retirement and liberating some property cash while not worrying as much about inheritance tax or costs of maintaining a large house and garden.

It seems though that the generation before is not budging. There are widowed people living in enormous five bedrooms homes with huge gardens. They don’t all look to be super wealthy judging by some of the slightly overgrown gardens etc. Yes it’s a wealthy area and yes it’s their right to live wherever they want. However unless all these homes are in a family trust or already signed over, the inheritance tax bill will be enormous.
These are homes in the £2million plus bracket.

If we are lucky enough to buy one of these homes (and stretch ourselves massively) do the demographics work against us if we have to sell in 10-15 years? Won’t that coincide with a glut of large houses so we will have bought at the top of the market and possibly be selling in a downturn?

Will Generation X actually be the riskiest generation to lend to as they don’t have enough working years ahead of them to properly pay down massive mortgages whilst some (not all!!) millennials will inherit property wealth from babyboomer parents?

Should the government reform stamp duty to provide an incentive to downsize? (Yes I know there are not enough quality smaller homes for people used to huge ones in nice areas). Will there ever be a great downsizing shift or is our country not built for it?

I don't disagree with your message content, but i don't think it will work. In my case, we bought a shabby bungalow almost 25 years ago. We have spent over £100k in 25 years improving it. And now it is "worth" about £800k. It's just as we want it, but actually we want it to be north of the M4, because that's where our social life is.

@XingMing- I understand that you will only move if you find the right house for you as you have been fortunate enough to make huge gains in the market and now have options.
I agree that things have been left too late to solve problems effectively. Whole communities have been decimated in popular tourist areas in Cornwall, for example, and it wouldn't work to remove the second home owners as the locals rely so much on tourism now and they don't have many other options anymore. Some changes could be introduced though such as properties only being sold to locals in certain areas (I think this is being trialled in some places), heavier taxes for second homes (some AirBnB owners don't pay council tax), more social housing and actually affordable housing where needed even in pretty parts of Cornwall. Steps can be made in a better direction. It isn't just the frailer elderly who are vulnerable; disabled people and chronically ill, those who have children with SN, those on low incomes, etc are also vulnerable but have been deprioritised.

You will discourage landlords with draconian measures for long term rentals. Small landlords will pull out of the market.

It’s been said very clearly older folk should jog on snd sell their homes. I’ve merely said why I don’t want to do that. A price cap never works. The only solution is more social homes.

This obsession with baby boomers downsizing is really odd. I hate this generation war nonsense!

Poor millenniums - the boomers are tying their lives. I really don’t get it.

I am early forties and have never had this obsession. My grandparents didn’t downsize. They either died in their home or had to go to a gone. There was no nice to a bungalow in Their seventies.

It isn’t baby boomers responsibility to solve housing issues for younger generations. I certainly will not be moving out of my four bedroom house because someone who happens to have children thinks their need is greater.

Nonsense

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding too. Hardly anyone I knew bought a house on their own. Most of us were married or living together and had two incomes. Many of us were married by 24/35. We had careers with progressive incomes such as teaching. Plenty of my contemporaries had financial help from parents. We didn’t but many of our friends did.

We did benefit from mortgage tax relief. We didn’t expect to get social housing so had to save up for a deposit. But we didn’t have expensive holidays of eat out much. No one did. Our first mortgage was 15% interest on 3x DH salary plus x1 of mine. Other friends got 100% mortgages in the 80s and never saved anything.

It was easier to buy where we live but if you have two salaries, there are cheap enough areas now. Nurses, teachers and quite a few professions can work anywhere. We don’t all have to live in expensive areas.
@Mellowyellow222
Isn’t it really all about control and making people feel bad? Divisive rhetoric is what this country descends to again and again. It’s older peoples’ fault house prices are high. It’s their fault some people cannot afford them. Usually prices are high because of under supply. So build more for rent long term and to buy. It’s always the only solution.

[quote Brownlongearedbat]@Nothappyatwork '...I can't honestly believe that people would consider housing their furniture more important than housing future generations'. Why can't you believe that? Do you think that, having worked my entire adult life (I don't have children) I would then say to myself, 'oh, I know, I'll sell my house cheaply on the open market, so someone I don't know, more worthy than me because they have pumped out loads of kids, can move in. I'll take all my posessions, collected over a lifetime, and try and squeeze them into a poky little house or flat somewhere (disposing of half of them) so that I can take care of future generations housing needs? If you think that, you are living in cloud cuckoo land. What responsibility do I have to future generations I haven't been part of producing? When I/we die, younger members of my extended family will benefit from a share in the estate, and the money may or may not help them with housing. That is the extent of my altruism.[/quote]
Couldn’t have said better myself.

@Salisburyspire

No I never pretended it was the premise *@WellNotReally*. I don't even pretend I am young. We are solidly middle aged (well maybe even a bit older for my DH). I want to move closer to my DCs' schools. The area is full of big houses but many much older people live there decades after their DC have moved on and out. If I am lucky enough to live that long, I will be one of those people in the next two decades. We have probably left it too late. It is clearly from the post that I am asking for any strategic info on when might we see more family homes on the market from a demographic point of view. I also worry that if we trade up, when the time comes to sell (because I do not harbour ambitions to rattle around in a suburban house after my DC have fled the nest), we may lose money as we would be buying at what seems to be a massive peak. Basically, will the market drop a little due to more houses coming on?

But you have no idea how you will feel then. You might not want to move.

@Mellowyellow222

This obsession with baby boomers downsizing is really odd. I hate this generation war nonsense!

Poor millenniums - the boomers are tying their lives. I really don’t get it.

I am early forties and have never had this obsession. My grandparents didn’t downsize. They either died in their home or had to go to a gone. There was no nice to a bungalow in Their seventies.

It isn’t baby boomers responsibility to solve housing issues for younger generations. I certainly will not be moving out of my four bedroom house because someone who happens to have children thinks their need is greater.

Nonsense

I agree

Having read all of this, I feel like upsizing! Am I allowed to do that and draw my state pension? Or is it against the law?

@TizerorFizz having read all your comments i hope Elon Musks space program is successful and everyone under 50 gets on his ship and leaves ypu oldies to reap what you’ve sown on earth.

I am interested in how you think the housing market should work - for those talking about boomers and over 50s.

So only people within a an age bracket (assume it’s under fifty) and with children should be allowed to buy larger houses? They should also be given a discount?

I hit the under 50, but no kids. Therefore I should sell up. But I won’t get market value because a worthy family with two children deserve my house because it is large and close to schools.

I then move to a house or flat that a family wouldn’t want. I don’t get a discount.

This family who buy my house sign a contract to say they will sell up as soon as the youngest child leaves secondary school. There is no longer freedom of choice in the private housing market.

@Nothappyatwork
I suggest you find a communist state to live in. You would be happier and less jealous.

[quote TizerorFizz]@Nothappyatwork
I suggest you find a communist state to live in. You would be happier and less jealous.[/quote]
You need to stop, it is embarrassing.

All you’ve done on this thread is exemplify why some people hold some opinions about boomers.

@Mellowyellow222
Well that describes how housing worked in East Germany. Allegiance to the communist party gave you better housing for your family. Maybe even a plumbed in toilet if you were lucky I understand from relatives. No one here would ever agree to rules which determine the homes they live in. We have a housing market and it’s not state controlled at individual level.

Where there are state levers and policy it is via planning, development of new towns, social housing targets and minimum wage etc. It’s not about control of individual homes.

@Stevie77
And all some of you have done is talk communist XXXX. You just cannot make up policy to suit your views so, as many of us are saying, sort yourselves out. Stop being jealous. Stop being ageist. I’m not apologising. Over the years DH and me have paid whacking tax bills. No issue with that but in return I want to live in my house for as long as I wish. I’ve contributed to society in many ways. But no, you and others are not taking my house.

I wonder if actually we need to accept that most people just like big houses full of junk and build accordingly.

Living in a small home as a single or couple is more sensible on every level, it's even better for the environment, but we're just not going to do it.

And as for pensions being politically powerful, they are, why do you think there triple lock pensions have been protected through austerity and they were exempt from the bedroom tax. Speaking of bedroom tax, a person near my mum lives in a three bed council house and due to mobility issues hasn't been upstairs for twenty years, and no, he doesn't have carers or anyone else staying, no bedroom tax for him. In fairness to him, even if he did have to pay it he wouldn't move.

I also think working from gone changes housing needs.

I am single but need a bigger space now because I need a hone office. I also spend a lot more time in my home than I did three years ago. I used to really just sleep, shower and dress in my old house - and watch tv!

Bee builds need to change to take account of this. Tiny two bedroom homes really don’t work for most people. Families aren’t the only people who need space and choice.

New builds not been builds!

Even where there is an element of state control (social housing) there is appalling inefficiency. I volunteer with Citizens Advice. I had a client who sadly lost her mum whilst she was a young adult. Under Housing regs, she was entitled to suceed to her mums tenancy. (This provision can only be used once in a family so the clients children couldn't later use the same method to get a tenancy). The council wouldn't let her take over a 3 bed family home as it would be under occupied. The sensible thing to do would be to say, "here's a selection of 1 bed flats; you can move into the one that suits you best". Not a chance; the client had to bid on flats along with everyone else on the housing list, despite the fact that she was entitled to a tenancy.

The result was a client stuck in a 3 bed house she was struggling to afford, and likely a family stuck in temporary B&B accomodation because the council wouldn't apply common sense.

@KenDodd, the person your mum knows is a prime candidate for relocation so that three bedroom council tax could be reallocated, and presented sensibly would probably not be much of a problem for the occupant. But that is social housing, to which all tax and council tax payers contribute, so it's reasonable to expect a degree of rationality in who and how it's used.

It's different to contemplating how best to regulate private housing markets.

...three bedroom council HOUSE...! duh!

I think the whole issue that’s overlooked is the attachment people have to their homes and neighbourhoods. Often smaller social housing accommodation will not be where they went to live. People have friends and support mechanisms.

There might also be questions asked where local authorities have housed teachers and similar professionals in social housing and they stay there. I know someone who inherited enough to buy two houses but stayed in council accommodation so they didn’t have to pay for maintenance. Is that a fair allocation of resources? The state is subsidising folk who are pretty well off in this case.

[quote TizerorFizz]@Stevie77
And all some of you have done is talk communist XXXX. You just cannot make up policy to suit your views so, as many of us are saying, sort yourselves out. Stop being jealous. Stop being ageist. I’m not apologising. Over the years DH and me have paid whacking tax bills. No issue with that but in return I want to live in my house for as long as I wish. I’ve contributed to society in many ways. But no, you and others are not taking my house.[/quote]
Totally agree with @Stevie77 below.

You are truly embarrassing yourself and just don't know when to stop. The only person ranting about communism is you. Try reading other people's posts instead of ranting. You seem to have a habit of spouting nonsense loudly on threads on topics that you don't know much about and then getting told off by other posters.

With age does not always come wisdom or any emotional intelligence.

@rainingsnoring One thing I would agree with you about (I think it was you that mentioned it?) is about holiday homes. I live in a popular holiday destination area in the South West, and there are hamlets and villages where nearly all (the pretty) houses are second homes. These places are just dead for large amounts of the year. Some houses are sold with the caveat that they must be bought by a local person, but these are generally ex local authority, so are not so attractive to the London crowd. Similarly, I have friends who live in Cornwall who actually moved to get away from the rental next door as they were fed up with the noise of pissed up holidaymakers partying every
weekend nextdoor. I do strongly believe in local homes for local people. The trouble is, there is no will in government to do anything about it. Planning has just gone in for 80 houses locally. The area is crying out for starter homes. People were surveyed a few years ago locally and the demand was for one and two bed houses, not four or five bed ones, which is what is mostly planned for this site. Nearly all of these homes are for private purchase, with a nod towards the fact they have to, by law, provide some smaller affordable homes. (I might add I think pp is unlikely for reasons too boring to go into). Property developers/builders have shareholders to think of - there's no profit in having a social conscience.

@rainingsnoring
You seem to be totally unaware of how older people might feel about their homes. I find your lack of empathy terrifying and rude.