It’s the housing costs, stupid? – politicalbetting.com

System · October 2023

It’s the housing costs, stupid? – politicalbetting.com

% of Britons who are paying more for housing now than they were 12 months agoAll Britons: 34%18-24 year olds: 41%25-49 year olds: 43%50-64 year olds: 31%65+ year olds: 18%https://t.co/n8r40E4AVV pic.twitter.com/5hEdjSVPfw

Read the full story here

MattW · October 2023

First.

MattW · October 2023

And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed sigifnificant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.

Nigelb · October 2023

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed sigifnificant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.

I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

A better critique of the header would be to note that Thatcher herself bears some responsibility for the problem, as she prevented the proceeds being reinvested in housing stock. And fir the next couple of decades, the Treasury continued to use proceeds of council housing sales to finance current spending.

MattW · October 2023

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.

kyf_100 · October 2023

Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.

MattW · October 2023

Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War

MattW · October 2023

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.

I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.

kyf_100 · October 2023

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.

Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.

Sandpit · October 2023

Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.

IanB2 · October 2023

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed sigifnificant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.

The decline in UK home ownership has been about 7%, I believe (71% to 64%, E&W), which is a not insignificant slice of people - and is better seen as a rise in non-ownership from 29% to 36%, since it’s that group that has been affected. And, as HY is often telling us, many of the remainder have made it onto the ladder but only by extreme measures such as major borrowing or loans from the ‘bank of self-identifying male and female parents’. Further, many of those in the South East have been pushed into locations that aren’t ideal, such as being a long way from work where prices are cheaper. So the impact on the generation is more significant than the raw ownership figures might suggest.

Eabhal · October 2023

The missing link here is how come homeownership has remained so high even while housing costs have grown so much?

The answer is the bank of mum and dad, of which I am a beneficiary. Parents with no mortgages and capital to burn. Catastrophic intergenerational inequality as a result.

The critical housing shortages occur in our cities and hurt the young renting there. This means they cannot save up for deposit to buy their their own flat or move out of the city unless they were lucky like me.

A few more low density estates in the middle of nowhere aren't going to help. We don't live in a perfect, UK-wide, frictionless housing market. They won't even scratch inner city rents.

We have some of the lowest rates of flat living anywhere in Europe, despite being so densely populated. Build more, and turf out the BTL and STL landlords who have taken advantage of the constraint on supply.

MattW · October 2023

kyf_100 said:

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.
Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.

I agree startling figures (tldr: UK apartment prices stopped dead rather than increasing the same as house prices from the date of Grenfell). Yes I can see it, but I run the Bypass Paywalls Extension to Chrome so that could be responsible.

Burn-Murdoch (for it is he) admits he cannot tell whether it is an influence of leasehold or the Grenfell Overhang.

I can't tell - but I don't see how making them all condominiums (or equivalent) would make a difference to the Grenfell overhang - the expenses would be far more dependent on the owners themselves.

The numbers we need to discern that are prices of leasehold flats vs prices of freehold (or shared freehold) owned flats.

Do you know - asking a more fundamental question - whether self-management via owning the freehold would actually save any money? Is leasehold abolition still tenable if management costs for the owners increase (did they increase in Scotland)?

(This has been shrunk - rightclick to enlarge)

Fishing · October 2023

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.

I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.

darkage · October 2023

kyf_100 said:

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.
Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.

The issues with flats are not unique to the UK. In Finland it is very similar - they are highly regulated and getting anything fixed is inefficient and expensive. Monthly service charges regularly exceed 500 euros, just for management of the building, and major works happen every few years and run in to tens of thousands of pounds. As a result many flats after a certain period effectively have no value, the maintainance costs exceed the value, this is true even for flats in big cities.

I think the UK will go the same way on large, high rise blocks... compliance costs will make the buildings worthless.

I think that flats can still be ok to live in though, if you stick to low rise buildings with minimal common parts.

MattW · October 2023

Off until later - have a good day, all.

StillWaters · October 2023

Liz Truss did not inspire any increase in interest rates. She caused a very short term blip in the risk premium associated with the UK government. That has now unwound.

Bluntly speaking for the last 15 years debt has been mispriced. It is good and healthy that we are moving back to proper pricing. It may be bumpy and I am sure it will be painful for people who overextended themselves (although bank regulation is likely to have helped with affordability testing)

I am sure that the government will cop some blame for that - they are the people on duty - but it was not Truss’s fault

Foxy · October 2023

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War

And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

DecrepiterJohnL · October 2023

LTNs in Oxford cause ‘chronic’ gridlock and ‘exasperatingly’ slow bus journeys
Report by travel companies reveals that it is often quicker to walk into the city centre than take the bus
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/14/oxford-council-ltn-delay-to-buses-traffic-report/ (£££)

StillWaters · October 2023

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?

ydoethur · October 2023

DecrepiterJohnL said:
LTNs in Oxford cause ‘chronic’ gridlock and ‘exasperatingly’ slow bus journeys
Report by travel companies reveals that it is often quicker to walk into the city centre than take the bus
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/14/oxford-council-ltn-delay-to-buses-traffic-report/ (£££)

TBF, my memories of Oxford suggest that precious few will actually notice any difference.

Which is the point really. In Cardiff or Edinburgh or indeed Oxford or Birmingham 20mph zones and LTNs probably make little change in practice. It's the rural roads with lots of villages strung along them in ribbons where it would cause an issue. These are of course very numerous in Wales.

And here Drakeford has not so much not thought through the implications as not thought about them at all. Cheerily cutting speed limits in residential areas with a load of patronising drivel and refusing to build more new by-passes is absolutely asking for chaos.

It's even worse because he's also defending illegal boy racers on their high speed motorbikes against the police. What a hypocrite.

OldKingCole · October 2023

Good morning everyone!

It’s not just direct housing costs that have gone up; my household and building insurance has increased by about 30% this year. And no, I have not made a claim!

Foxy · October 2023

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?

The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister

Fishing · October 2023

kyf_100 said:

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.
Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.

The other reason for houses increasing in price in the UK is that the planning system means that far more new flats than houses are being built. Flats under construction overtook houses in 2012, a huge change given that the UK housing stock is about 75% houses, though most people would much rather live in a house than a flat. It is also much easier to convert a house into flats rather than the other way around.

Sandpit · October 2023

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.

I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.

darkage · October 2023

On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.

MattW · October 2023

One more.

Very interesting interview with Haras Rafiq (trustee of an organisation called Muslims Against Antisemitism) about Hamas being inspired by an Islamist (rather than Islamic) ideology / theology, and having roots in the Muslim Brotherhood, on the BBC R4 Sunday programme. Also notes that Israeli Muslims were killed in the pogrom.

A different viewpoint.

Starts at 29:15.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001rgr6

Foxy · October 2023

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.

I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

StillWaters · October 2023

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?
The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister

*Indirectly* responsible.

Most people who don’t have an instinctive bias against the Israelis blame Hobeika.

(Sharon resigned as defence minister but remained in the cabinet, IIRC)

maxh · October 2023

MattW said:
One more.

Very interesting interview with Haras Rafiq (trustee of an organisation called Muslims Against Antisemitism) about Hamas being inspired by an Islamist (rather than Islamic) ideology / theology, and having roots in the Muslim Brotherhood, on the BBC R4 Sunday programme. Also notes that Israeli Muslims were killed in the pogrom.

A different viewpoint.

Starts at 29:15.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001rgr6

Matt these links are really valuable - thank you. I’m learning lots.

darkage · October 2023

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.

There are a lot of problems in the modular building sector. One of the biggest companies - Ilke Homes, has gone in to administration. Legal and General have wound up their modular operation after various problems. It works in other parts of the world but it has been difficult to progress in the UK.

https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/buildings/lg-dismantles-bristol-modular-homes-due-to-foundation-problems-28-07-2023/

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/legal--general-to-cease-production-of-new-homes-at-modular-factory-81335#:~:text=L&G blamed its modular business,redundant in its modular business.

StillWaters · October 2023

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang
heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.

The issue is they are deemed to have a finite life (while a house, with appropriate maintenance, can last indefinitely)

Hence - like an expiring leasehold - they have diminishing resale value which means that they aren’t a great security for a loan.

I’ve no idea if that is accurate or not, but it’s that perception which is the issue.

darkage · October 2023

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.

maxh · October 2023

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?
The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister
*Indirectly* responsible.

Most people who don’t have an instinctive bias against the Israelis blame Hobeika.

(Sharon resigned as defence minister but remained in the cabinet, IIRC)

From the article:
The IDF had ordered the militia to clear out the fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Sabra and Shatila as part of a larger Israeli maneuver into western Beirut.
If accurate, Foxy’s description seems balanced, not biased, though I agree it would have been helpful to clarify the Lebanese forces’ role.

Sandpit · October 2023

darkage said:

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.
There are a lot of problems in the modular building sector. One of the biggest companies - Ilke Homes, has gone in to administration. Legal and General have wound up their modular operation after various problems. It works in other parts of the world but it has been difficult to progress in the UK.

https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/buildings/lg-dismantles-bristol-modular-homes-due-to-foundation-problems-28-07-2023/

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/legal--general-to-cease-production-of-new-homes-at-modular-factory-81335#:~:text=L&G blamed its modular business,redundant in its modular business.

Indeed so. Interestingly, from the same site, an annoucement of a new modular housing partnership only a couple of days ago.
https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/northern-housing-association-partners-with-modular-house-builder-83491

This is the sort of innovation we need though, it massively speeds up housebuilding, at least if they do the foundations properly!

Monksfield · October 2023

I think it cuts a lot deeper than housing costs.

It is hard to think of any measure at all where ordinary people are better off now than they were in 2015.
The combination of inflation, with its knock on in fuel and housing costs, difficulty in seeing Doctors and getting medical treatment, the state of the environment, the state of our roads, the removal for many of rights to work abroad that they valued.

I honestly cannot think of a single meaningful measure in ordinary people’s lives that the Conservatives have improved.

That is why they will be reamed at the GE.

Sandpit · October 2023

StillWaters said:

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang
heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.
The issue is they are deemed to have a finite life (while a house, with appropriate maintenance, can last indefinitely)

Hence - like an expiring leasehold - they have diminishing resale value which means that they aren’t a great security for a loan.

I’ve no idea if that is accurate or not, but it’s that perception which is the issue.

That’s my understanding too. However if a house has a 30-year life, a bank should be able to give a 25-year mortgage on it, but that’s not happening.

Tres · October 2023

MattW said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.

Well my reality is that my sister and brother-in-laws monthly mortgage payment increased by £700 last month, and that included increasing the term by 5 years. House prices still got a long way to drop in my opinion.

Foxy · October 2023

Tres said:

MattW said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.
Well my reality is that my sister and brother-in-laws monthly mortgage payment increased by £700 last month, and that included increasing the term by 5 years. House prices still got a long way to drop in my opinion.

About 50% in real terms by my reckoning, as house prices are determined by affordability, which in turn is determined by income multiples and by interest rates.

Probably necessary long term, but will wipe out the paper wealth that a lot of people were planning to retire on, or inherit

Foxy · October 2023

StillWaters said:

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang
heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.
The issue is they are deemed to have a finite life (while a house, with appropriate maintenance, can last indefinitely)

Hence - like an expiring leasehold - they have diminishing resale value which means that they aren’t a great security for a loan.

I’ve no idea if that is accurate or not, but it’s that perception which is the issue.

It's how we wound up with a RAAC crises. 30 year life of a building, but no replacement plan.

Stuartinromford · October 2023

Tres said:

MattW said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.
Well my reality is that my sister and brother-in-laws monthly mortgage payment increased by £700 last month, and that included increasing the term by 5 years. House prices still got a long way to drop in my opinion.

Which won't help the poor buggers left holding the baby when the poonami happens, which appears to be about now.

Two other things to note. One is that fixed rate mortgages mean that the effect is sweeping over the economy gradually, and has a fair way to go yet. The other, going back to the header, is that the older you are, the more likely that it will affect you in a token way, or no way at all.

And once you have a paid off a mortgage, with the massively reduced financial pressure that results, why would you want to downsize or take in a lodger? Empty nesters wasting rooms is reasonably rational for them.

JosiasJessop · October 2023

maxh said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?
The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister
*Indirectly* responsible.

Most people who don’t have an instinctive bias against the Israelis blame Hobeika.

(Sharon resigned as defence minister but remained in the cabinet, IIRC)
From the article:
The IDF had ordered the militia to clear out the fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Sabra and Shatila as part of a larger Israeli maneuver into western Beirut.
If accurate, Foxy’s description seems balanced, not biased, though I agree it would have been helpful to clarify the Lebanese forces’ role.

Also note the tangled web of atrocities that begat further atrocities: the leader of the militia, Elie Hobeika, had had his fiance and some of his family and friends in the 1976 Damour Massacre, perpetrated by the PLO.

The cycle of killing can last decades, or even generations. Hamas have no intent to stop the cycle; even if they were to push Israel into the sea, they will continue after the 'wrong' sort of Muslims. Because it is not about religion; it is about money and power.

That does not excuse Israel, either. Their campaign/policy of settlement gives Hamas and those who hate Israel an excuse (not that many need an excuse for that).

The cycle needs breaking. That is more in Israel's hands than Hamas's, though.

Phil · October 2023

DecrepiterJohnL said:
LTNs in Oxford cause ‘chronic’ gridlock and ‘exasperatingly’ slow bus journeys
Report by travel companies reveals that it is often quicker to walk into the city centre than take the bus
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/14/oxford-council-ltn-delay-to-buses-traffic-report/ (£££)

The LTNs should have been implemented at the same time as the bus gates, as was originally planned. IIRC the bus gates required sign off from central government & were always going to be delayed by six months or so.

Then National Rail decided they were going to close the only road into Oxford from the West for months on end (a closure that has, perhaps inevitably, turned into an /18 month/ closure of a major city road) & the council decided to delay the bus gates so that the road network wouldn’t completely fall apart from the displaced traffic.

The net result has been traffic gridlock.

Then, to make things even worse, the Highways Agency decided that the A34 junction on the west side of Oxford needed emergency repairs, which have been going on for months & have regularly turned the A34 into a car park, displacing even more traffic to other routes into Oxford.

It’s been a complete shitshow & the LTNs are at best a minor part sadly. Oxford needs a complete transport rethink, given the absolute limits on the available road capacity, but the capital just isn’t there to do the things that would make a measurable difference, regardless of whether it’s road, rail, trams or busways.

twistedfirestopper3 · October 2023

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.

As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.

theakes · October 2023

Observer today: Labour omitting Social Care from their manifesto, financial reasons!. An open goal for others.
Scaling down House of Lords reform and so it goes on. Might as well vote Tory or Lib Dem.

DecrepiterJohnL · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.

There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.

ydoethur · October 2023

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang
heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.
The issue is they are deemed to have a finite life (while a house, with appropriate maintenance, can last indefinitely)

Hence - like an expiring leasehold - they have diminishing resale value which means that they aren’t a great security for a loan.

I’ve no idea if that is accurate or not, but it’s that perception which is the issue.
It's how we wound up with a RAAC crises. 30 year life of a building, but no replacement plan.

You were expecting the DfE and DoH to have an actual plan?

Talk about the triumph of hope over experience.

The only planning the DfE ever do is for their boozy parties.

Monksfield · October 2023

theakes said:
Observer today: Labour omitting Social Care from their manifesto, financial reasons!. An open goal for others.
Scaling down House of Lords reform and so it goes on. Might as well vote Tory or Lib Dem.

Starmer is giving me no reason whatsoever to vote Labour. Happily for him, he doesn’t really need my vote. But, based on conversations with friends and family, I think he is seriously misreading what people like me want from a Labour Government.

Another Labour Government that fails to deliver radical change will kill the party. My reading of 2024 is that the state of the country is much closer to 1945 than to 1997, but the best Starmer can offer is a thin gruel version of 1997. It’s a recipe for wipeout in 2029. If the country wants Conservatism it will always vote Tory. When it doesn’t it wants something different. Is this really too hard to compute?

Pagan2 · October 2023

Stuartinromford said:

Tres said:

MattW said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.
Well my reality is that my sister and brother-in-laws monthly mortgage payment increased by £700 last month, and that included increasing the term by 5 years. House prices still got a long way to drop in my opinion.
Which won't help the poor buggers left holding the baby when the poonami happens, which appears to be about now.

Two other things to note. One is that fixed rate mortgages mean that the effect is sweeping over the economy gradually, and has a fair way to go yet. The other, going back to the header, is that the older you are, the more likely that it will affect you in a token way, or no way at all.

And once you have a paid off a mortgage, with the massively reduced financial pressure that results, why would you want to downsize or take in a lodger? Empty nesters wasting rooms is reasonably rational for them.

Precisely, plus I have a spare room where I currently live...yes its empty maybe 2/3 of the year but the other 1/3 its occupied by people visiting me. If it wasn't there the effect would be less friends visiting as they would have to find a nearby hotel instead and that is just piling cost onto them. You can't kick out a lodger for a couple of weeks just because you child/family member/friends want to come visit.

This idea that all spare rooms should be occupied is a no go for most due to both the above reason and also because most people prefer not to share a home and bathroom with a random stranger that answered an advert unless they have no choice because they need the money

ydoethur · October 2023

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.

Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.

MattW · October 2023

Phil said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:
LTNs in Oxford cause ‘chronic’ gridlock and ‘exasperatingly’ slow bus journeys
Report by travel companies reveals that it is often quicker to walk into the city centre than take the bus
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/14/oxford-council-ltn-delay-to-buses-traffic-report/ (£££)
The LTNs should have been implemented at the same time as the bus gates, as was originally planned. IIRC the bus gates required sign off from central government & were always going to be delayed by six months or so.

Then National Rail decided they were going to close the only road into Oxford from the West for months on end (a closure that has, perhaps inevitably, turned into an /18 month/ closure of a major city road) & the council decided to delay the bus gates so that the road network wouldn’t completely fall apart from the displaced traffic.

The net result has been traffic gridlock.

Then, to make things even worse, the Highways Agency decided that the A34 junction on the west side of Oxford needed emergency repairs, which have been going on for months & have regularly turned the A34 into a car park, displacing even more traffic to other routes into Oxford.

It’s been a complete shitshow & the LTNs are at best a minor part sadly. Oxford needs a complete transport rethink, given the absolute limits on the available road capacity, but the capital just isn’t there to do the things that would make a measurable difference, regardless of whether it’s road, rail, trams or busways.

Mr Harper withdrew the Guidance on Network Management for Active Travel 11 days ago !

pm215 · October 2023

Sandpit said:

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

How do you propose to do this without it being perceived as (or actually being) another massive bung to the elderly?

Unclear how many would take it, anyway, if they haven't already been drawn by the cashback inherent in downsizing. I know somebody who now lives alone in what was once the family five bedroom house -- but when the kids and grandkids are back for Christmas or Easter the house is full. I'm not sure they'd be very keen to give that up.

darkage · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.

My friend retired a couple of years ago and had a rental flat. After a decade or so of being the director of the freehold company he decided he couldn't be bothered to deal with it any more. He put it in a 'modern method of auction' but actually accepted a pre auction offer at the starting price. It sold for £135k but there is a new development across the road from his flat where some of the flats are 'sold' for £500k. He believes he has done well out of the situation and I think he is right... because he actually sold the flat, it was causing him a lot of stress, his wife is ill, he is in and ok position financially, and he needs to get on with enjoying his retirement.

There are lots of opportunities like this if you can hunt them out.

BartholomewRoberts · October 2023

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.

Absolutely fantastic news if true, but we need to build, build, build millions more homes both to drive the cost down hard and end any mentality that housing costs are a good thing, and more importantly to ensure people have a better choice available to them.

France which has the same population as us has 13 million extra houses. Even if we built a million houses a year over the next decade (which we won't), we'd still be in a deficit. We need serious reform.

kyf_100 said:
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Help to buy done right does not inflate the market, it is what people demand in "affordable housing".

The original help to buy scheme has been abolished already, what exists now unless I'm mistaken is help to buy shared equity, which is a completely different scheme. The new estates near me the "affordable housing" homes are on this scheme, are built to the same quality and standard as other houses (rather than being shitty flats amidst an estate of houses), or a shitty affordable sink estate, but are sold first directly to either housing associations or pension etc firms like Legal & General. Then under the Help to Buy Shared Equity scheme someone can buy a share (eg 25%) of the home and then rent the rest at defined rates just like with housing associations etc

I have a relative who got on this scheme in a new build in Central London, he's only 25 but now has a home of his own in London, which is remarkable. Not a chance he'd have done that without Help to Buy. He rents the rest of his home, the rent is set in contract indefinitely to go up by CPI not negotiations or whatever a landlord demands. Whenever he's able to afford to do so, he can buy make 'ladder' payments to buy a higher percentage share of the home, eg 1% per annum or buying a block of 5% or even all of it. Once he achieves 100% then its his outright.

Schemes to make quality homes affordable is better than building utter shite to be "affordable".

Benpointer · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.

Agreed. We are still hoping to move next year. We'll probably pitch it 10-15% below what we might have got last year, it'll be interesting to see if we get any takers.

The other issue which we hit when we moved in 2009 is that people hold fire selling in a falling market so the range and quality of what comes on the market shrinks markedly. That said we'll be looking for a plot, re-build or a major 'doer-upper', most likely from a deceased estate and the inheritors do like to get their hands on the dosh so such properties continue to be sold.

Phil · October 2023

MattW said:

Phil said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:
LTNs in Oxford cause ‘chronic’ gridlock and ‘exasperatingly’ slow bus journeys
Report by travel companies reveals that it is often quicker to walk into the city centre than take the bus
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/14/oxford-council-ltn-delay-to-buses-traffic-report/ (£££)
The LTNs should have been implemented at the same time as the bus gates, as was originally planned. IIRC the bus gates required sign off from central government & were always going to be delayed by six months or so.

Then National Rail decided they were going to close the only road into Oxford from the West for months on end (a closure that has, perhaps inevitably, turned into an /18 month/ closure of a major city road) & the council decided to delay the bus gates so that the road network wouldn’t completely fall apart from the displaced traffic.

The net result has been traffic gridlock.

Then, to make things even worse, the Highways Agency decided that the A34 junction on the west side of Oxford needed emergency repairs, which have been going on for months & have regularly turned the A34 into a car park, displacing even more traffic to other routes into Oxford.

It’s been a complete shitshow & the LTNs are at best a minor part sadly. Oxford needs a complete transport rethink, given the absolute limits on the available road capacity, but the capital just isn’t there to do the things that would make a measurable difference, regardless of whether it’s road, rail, trams or busways.
Mr Harper withdrew the Guidance on Network Management for Active Travel 11 days ago !

Yes, this was all effectively central government policy in action, only with the decision making devolved to local councils so that the government could deny responsibility for any schemes that went badly, or even the entire thing if they so chose.

Now we have Rishi’s new plan for drivers & the whipsaw back and forth of uk transport policy continues. It’s not surprising we can never get anything done - our government seems to be unable to commit to any policy for a period longer than about three years.

Heathener · October 2023

Good morning all.

Excellent thread @TSE and you're right. Starmer seems to be onto this one and if they succeed then Labour will be in power for a generation.

MattW · October 2023

Pagan2 said:

Stuartinromford said:

Tres said:

MattW said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:
And second.

Thanks for the header, @TSE , which has half a point - but is not one I find very convincing, other than that electors may find it comforting to tell themselves fairy stories.

"A generation of none home owners" is a wild exaggeration - a home ownership rate over 70% only existed for a handful of years (depending on whose numbers you take) in the noughties afaics.

It is now at 65% plus, which is hardly a collapse.

Is there an element of yet another mainly London problem being imagined as applying to the whole country?

Similarly interest rises as purely an artefact if Liz Truss. They are far more nearly a UK version of a pan-European trend as interest rates increase a little to closer to a normal figure.

But, as we know on PB, many people vote on the basis of fictional information.

So there may well be a political effect, not helped by the current Government's tendency to be a) incompetent, b) desperate, c) thinking that doing random knee jerks whilst burning down their achievements will help.

If the Govt had addressed significant questions more directly, I think their chance would be better - but as it is imo they are toast.
I think you're missing TSE's point.
The salient effect of immediate political impact is the rise in housing costs.

When TSE talks of a 'generation of non home owners' he's looking to the future.

I think my comment holds.

Home ownership rate has increased every year since 2015, when it was 63%, except for a recent downtick. Also in 2022 afaics house sales fell by about 200k from 1.2M to 1M.

That followed affordability becoming more difficult in 2021 - average price to average earnings price (note that does not necessarily apply to FTBs who do not usually buy an "average" house). But in 2022 affordability improved again, and snapped back.

New builds are at their highest numbers for at least 15 years, usually with "home owners only" selling policies. Note that recent abolition of housing targets will not help here.

Also in mid-2023 house prices are down by about 6-7% in real terms over 12 months.

So I'd say the previous trend will reassert itself by 2024, or at latest 2025-6, and home ownership will continue gradually to increase year by year. Unfortunate timing for Mr Sunak, but that's what he does.

The results in the header? I'm not convinced it is that close to reality, or perhaps reflects energy costs more than is in the question.

Subject to "Events, Dear Boy", of course.
Well my reality is that my sister and brother-in-laws monthly mortgage payment increased by £700 last month, and that included increasing the term by 5 years. House prices still got a long way to drop in my opinion.
Which won't help the poor buggers left holding the baby when the poonami happens, which appears to be about now.

Two other things to note. One is that fixed rate mortgages mean that the effect is sweeping over the economy gradually, and has a fair way to go yet. The other, going back to the header, is that the older you are, the more likely that it will affect you in a token way, or no way at all.

And once you have a paid off a mortgage, with the massively reduced financial pressure that results, why would you want to downsize or take in a lodger? Empty nesters wasting rooms is reasonably rational for them.
Precisely, plus I have a spare room where I currently live...yes its empty maybe 2/3 of the year but the other 1/3 its occupied by people visiting me. If it wasn't there the effect would be less friends visiting as they would have to find a nearby hotel instead and that is just piling cost onto them. You can't kick out a lodger for a couple of weeks just because you child/family member/friends want to come visit.

This idea that all spare rooms should be occupied is a no go for most due to both the above reason and also because most people prefer not to share a home and bathroom with a random stranger that answered an advert unless they have no choice because they need the money

Indeed - it's not all spare rooms. And your lodger does not have to be a random stranger.

There are (I quoted the text in another post) 9.3 million dwellings with 2 or more spare bedrooms.

5-10% of dwellings with 2 or more spare bedrooms having one lodger each is 465k to 930k new living spaces for singles.

That is enough to make quite a difference. Personally I have 3 spare bedrooms, and I'll be looking at a lodger as soon as my parent's estate is finally resolved.

How to encourage? Well - the rent a room tax income threshold before tax is applied has been frozen since 2015, for one.

"But but but that helps old home owners". Yes, however it helps deal with housing pressure, and especially the decades long trend to smaller households.

Similar comments could apply to excessive regulation applied small HMOs (think "Friends" and 2-4 people), which are little different to family homes. Again - an option for reducing demand pressure.

Mr Starmer will need to apply all kinds of measures, many of which are imo obvious and have not been applied by the current Govt.

There's also a large potential increase in windfall and small development sites, which are currently stuck, which might only make a 5-10% difference. But 5-10% extra is 11-23k dwellings per annum.

twistedfirestopper3 · October 2023

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.

Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse before it settles.

nico679 · October 2023

Starmers obsession with “ bomb proofing “ their manifesto is therefore clearly relying on the Tory toxicity to get elected .

Bomb proofing should have extended to his stupid comments on planning .

One can hope that Labour will have a few surprises in their manifesto and we know parties always like to pull out something closer to the time .

My enthusiasm for the current Labour Party is flatlining . I will however be willing to walk over broken glass to get to the polling station to vote to remove the Tories .

Benpointer · October 2023

On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.

BartholomewRoberts · October 2023

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.

More utterly fantastic news.

And its funny, I've been saying for many years we need a house price correction, now we have a minor one and more people able to afford their own homes. Remarkable that, isn't it.

The problem for years is that those who are renting could afford mortgage repayments, but they were their landlords mortgage repayments rather than their own. Not being able to afford a deposit was the biggest barrier. As house prices come down and wages go up, then the deposit becomes a smaller problem even if the mortgage repayments goes up it only goes up to what rent was anyway.

OldKingCole · October 2023

pm215 said:

Sandpit said:

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.
How do you propose to do this without it being perceived as (or actually being) another massive bung to the elderly?

Unclear how many would take it, anyway, if they haven't already been drawn by the cashback inherent in downsizing. I know somebody who now lives alone in what was once the family five bedroom house -- but when the kids and grandkids are back for Christmas or Easter the house is full. I'm not sure they'd be very keen to give that up.

We did something like that on retirement; sold a four bedroomed house and moved into a smaller bungalow. At the time we had one married ‘child’ and two teenage grandchildren, so seemed like a good idea.
Five or six years later our other children, both in their thirties, had married and both had become fathers! Hosting everyone is impossible!
Fortunately one of our children had a similar house to that which we sold!
Of course things have moved on further now!

BartholomewRoberts · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.
Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse better before it settles.

I liked your post but fixed that last sentence for you.

Costs going down is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Costs going up is a bad thing, not a good thing.

Benpointer · October 2023

nico679 said:
Starmers obsession with “ bomb proofing “ their manifesto is therefore clearly relying on the Tory toxicity to get elected .

Bomb proofing should have extended to his stupid comments on planning .

One can hope that Labour will have a few surprises in their manifesto and we know parties always like to pull out something closer to the time .

My enthusiasm for the current Labour Party is flatlining . I will however be willing to walk over broken glass to get to the polling station to vote to remove the Tories .

Yes similar, I hope Labour can be a lot more inspiring when it gets to the manifesto.

Regarding voting, since I live in the 13th safest Tory seat I fear my vote will once again be a wasted one.

StaffordKnot · October 2023

There is a scenario where the Tories, having lost the younger (under 60!) vote due to rising housing costs, then lose the over 60s vote as the measures to control prices push down the value of their house. That would then be very interesting in the polls.

twistedfirestopper3 · October 2023

.

BartholomewRoberts said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.
Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse better before it settles.
I liked your post but fixed that last sentence for you.

Costs going down is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Costs going up is a bad thing, not a good thing.

I agree.
Lots of people who are wedded to fantasy house prices won't, though, and the poor feckers who have massively increased mortgage payments and who have to sell won't agree either.

EPG · October 2023

In broad terms, people who were 25-35 used to be more likely to be married, have an extra five years' work under their belts, and maybe even got handed a council house by the government at a significant discount. That's not replicable. More single under-35s equals more renters, it really is that simple, but they will eventually buy once they settle.

eek · October 2023

EPG said:
In broad terms, people who were 25-35 used to be more likely to be married, have an extra five years' work under their belts, and maybe even got handed a council house by the government at a significant discount. That's not replicable. More single under-35s equals more renters, it really is that simple, but they will eventually buy once they settle.

Not if prices are at 5-7 times anverage earnings they won’t.

Carnyx · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.

Was one of the family executors for an elderly relative this spring/summer. We made it clear to the EA we wanted to sell his house in good time at a moderate price rather than end up in the slide trying to screw the last 10K out of buyers - in the event it went to the first non-comedian non-cowboy for survey valuation, keys handed over n less than 7 weeks from going on the market. Mercifully I'd had all the paperwork and info ready, and possible problems with the legalities checked over by the solicitor in advance rather than wait for the opposition's to raise queries. Could have got more, as prices in the area hadn't quite started downhill then, but could have been an utter shite storm if we'd ended up with one of the comedian buyers and fallen through, so we were very relieved!

I must say that the discussions in PB had a considerable effect on my thinking and were very helpful.

darkage · October 2023

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.

The lack of self awareness exhibited by many older people on the issue of housing is rather spectacular.

nico679 · October 2023

Benpointer said:

nico679 said:
Starmers obsession with “ bomb proofing “ their manifesto is therefore clearly relying on the Tory toxicity to get elected .

Bomb proofing should have extended to his stupid comments on planning .

One can hope that Labour will have a few surprises in their manifesto and we know parties always like to pull out something closer to the time .

My enthusiasm for the current Labour Party is flatlining . I will however be willing to walk over broken glass to get to the polling station to vote to remove the Tories .
Yes similar, I hope Labour can be a lot more inspiring when it gets to the manifesto.

Regarding voting, since I live in the 13th safest Tory seat I fear my vote will once again be a wasted one.

I’m currently living in Eastbourne so will be voting Lib Dem . Strangely even though I’m a Labour supporter I’ve ended up living mostly in places where I’ve had to vote Lib Dem !

BartholomewRoberts · October 2023

darkage said:

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.
The lack of self awareness exhibited by many older people on the issue of housing is rather spectacular.

The problem is too many have an attitude that housing costs are "assets" rather than costs to have a roof over your head.

And that mentality has been encouraged by the Bank of England, even though the Treasury doesn't levy CGT on primary homes quite rightly as it recognises that housing is a cost not an asset there.

We need to smash the mentality of houses being an asset and the first step of that reform needs to be with the Bank of England which should include house prices directly into the basket of goods for inflation.

Stuartinromford · October 2023

darkage said:

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.
The lack of self awareness exhibited by many older people on the issue of housing is rather spectacular.

Not so much a lack of self awareness, as a massive Somebody Else's Problem field.

Unless you are, or you know, someone who is paying 21st Century house prices, it must be hard to comprehend how bonkers things are.

MattW · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.
Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse before it settles.

In your place I'd be ready to move, and watching carefully, around November onwards and having multiple prospects in my mind - at that point some people may *have* to move, facing being stuck until at least March, and so may take an offer from a qualified buyer at minus 10 to 15%.

I can give you a slightly interesting story around current unpredictably.

My parent had a very nice 2 bed bungalow in their estate, which was a conversion of my dad's former architectural studio which we were left with in 1975 when the person who bought the family house did not want the studio (converted cattle shed) at the end of the garden.

So they just put up a fence across the garden and kept it. An advantage of living in a corner property. It has had a couple of grandparents living in it as their final dwelling, and was there for my parent for a similar reason, or to rent out to pay care costs.

Probate valuation several years ago was X. Since then the recommended price has gone up by about 13% and back down again, buyers offering, pulling out, and back in again.

We completed last month within 1k of the probate value with a seller who first expressed interest 18 months ago.

Theuniondivvie · October 2023

Big swinger vibe. She’s wearing the necklace..

twistedfirestopper3 · October 2023

.

Carnyx said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
Was one of the family executors for an elderly relative this spring/summer. We made it clear to the EA we wanted to sell his house in good time at a moderate price rather than end up in the slide trying to screw the last 10K out of buyers - in the event it went to the first non-comedian non-cowboy for survey valuation, keys handed over n less than 7 weeks from going on the market. Mercifully I'd had all the paperwork and info ready, and possible problems with the legalities checked over by the solicitor in advance rather than wait for the opposition's to raise queries. Could have got more, as prices in the area hadn't quite started downhill then, but could have been an utter shite storm if we'd ended up with one of the comedian buyers and fallen through, so we were very relieved!

I must say that the discussions in PB had a considerable effect on my thinking and were very helpful.

We're looking ahead and want a bungalow. That means that most of the ones we view are probate/estate sales. They all want modernising and money spending on them. Realistically, it's free money for the beneficiaries of the will but you'd be surprised how many of them want to screw 15 or 20k out of you. I've walked away from 2 negotiations over 20 grand reductions. Both of those places are still on the market.

Heathener · October 2023

darkage said:

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.
The lack of self awareness exhibited by many older people on the issue of housing is rather spectacular.

Absolutely.

I have another tory friend, male this time, 40. He's a card carrying party member, lives down here. He's deeply critical of his parents' generation on precisely this point. His argument is that by sheer good fortune they oversaw the greatest rise in housing value that this country has ever known, and will ever know. When they berate the (woke) younger generations, and claim that by contrast they earned their asset fortunes through hard work, it's largely bollocks. They got it mainly by luck and now have what he calls an appalling sense of entitlement.

That's all from my tory friend and I can't disagree with him. He's actually rather embittered about it.

EPG · October 2023

eek said:

EPG said:
In broad terms, people who were 25-35 used to be more likely to be married, have an extra five years' work under their belts, and maybe even got handed a council house by the government at a significant discount. That's not replicable. More single under-35s equals more renters, it really is that simple, but they will eventually buy once they settle.
Not if prices are at 5-7 times anverage earnings they won’t.

They will. It is a plain demographic fact. Some owner-occupier will pass on, and in broad historical terms they get replaced by a different owner-occcupier, and in some eras like today even BTLs get replaced by owner occupiers. Then the price is simply determined by the negotiating power of each side (if I know you can get a cheap mortgage, I hold out for 5-7x, otherwise not so much).

Carnyx · October 2023

MattW said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.
Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse before it settles.
In your place I'd be ready to move, and watching carefully, around November onwards and having multiple prospects in my mind - at that point some people may *have* to move, facing being stuck until at least March, and so may take an offer from a qualified buyer at minus 10 to 15%.

I can give you an interesting story.

My parent had a very nice 2 bed bungalow in their estate, which was a conversion of my dad's former architectural studio which we were left with in 1975 when the person who bought the family house did not want the studio (converted cattle shed) at the end of the garden.

So they just put up a fence across the garden and kept it. An advantage of living in a corner property. It has had a couple of grandparents living in it as their final dwelling, and was there for my parent for a similar reason.

Probate valuation several years ago was X. Since then the recommended price has gone up by about 13% and back down again, buyers offering, pulling out, and back in again.

We completed last month within 1k of the probate value with a seller who first expressed interest 18 months ago.

Is\n't TFS in a caravan? So no need to check through the legalities for his/her house, but it is not a bad idea in general. Re the sale I mentioned a few posts ago, the house in question had last been sold ca 1970 pre the abolition of feus, so we had to check if the details were OK (eg to check if the map in the deeds was regarded as adequate for the land registry purposes, and whether some conditions in the deed had to be dealt with or would be regarded as obsolete). It cost a few hundred extra in legal fees but speeded up things and made sure there weren't any traps.

MattW · October 2023

OldKingCole said:

pm215 said:

Sandpit said:

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.
How do you propose to do this without it being perceived as (or actually being) another massive bung to the elderly?

Unclear how many would take it, anyway, if they haven't already been drawn by the cashback inherent in downsizing. I know somebody who now lives alone in what was once the family five bedroom house -- but when the kids and grandkids are back for Christmas or Easter the house is full. I'm not sure they'd be very keen to give that up.
We did something like that on retirement; sold a four bedroomed house and moved into a smaller bungalow. At the time we had one married ‘child’ and two teenage grandchildren, so seemed like a good idea.
Five or six years later our other children, both in their thirties, had married and both had become fathers! Hosting everyone is impossible!
Fortunately one of our children had a similar house to that which we sold!
Of course things have moved on further now!

You need to downsize when they are at university, to remove the "Right of Return".

StillWaters · October 2023

maxh said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?
The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister
*Indirectly* responsible.

Most people who don’t have an instinctive bias against the Israelis blame Hobeika.

(Sharon resigned as defence minister but remained in the cabinet, IIRC)
From the article:
The IDF had ordered the militia to clear out the fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Sabra and Shatila as part of a larger Israeli maneuver into western Beirut.
If accurate, Foxy’s description seems balanced, not biased, though I agree it would have been helpful to clarify the
Lebanese forces’ role.

No - guilt by omission

The IDF told the Lebanese Forces to clear out the PLO. They did not order them to massacre civilians.

Foxy chose to state the Israelis were responsible (he only clarified the “indirectly” when challenged).

They should have intervened when they heard the rumours. I haven’t seen the original intelligence reports, so can’t assess whether that was deliberate vs the intelligence being poor quality (“fog of war”). But the Israeli government commission held they bore part of the blame and Sharon was forced (unwillingly) to resign as Defence Secretary.

Foxy has a bit of a blind spot when it comes to apportioning blame between the Israelis and their enemies.

londonpubman · October 2023

theakes said:
Observer today: Labour omitting Social Care from their manifesto, financial reasons!. An open goal for others.
Scaling down House of Lords reform and so it goes on. Might as well vote Tory or Lib Dem.

Only the very brave will properly address social care! You're not going to get that from the current CON or LAB.

Tip: sorting out social care properly required substantial taxation of unearned wealth.

Heathener · October 2023

Few years ago I was lucky enough to come into possession of a field on the edge of a village. It was being used as a paddock but right next door was another field where people had managed to get permission to erect a large private dwelling. Further down the lane there were more houses i.e. even more out of the village.

I put in a planning proposal to build 1 x family home for us and 2 x affordable homes (because I believe in such things). All on the lane. As I say, edge of village so not wild green field.

It was turned down 8-5 or something like that. I probably could have fought on. But this is the kind of NIMBYism that is blighting everything. Ridiculous short-sightedness.

twistedfirestopper3 · October 2023

.

Carnyx said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
Was one of the family executors for an elderly relative this spring/summer. We made it clear to the EA we wanted to sell his house in good time at a moderate price rather than end up in the slide trying to screw the last 10K out of buyers - in the event it went to the first non-comedian non-cowboy for survey valuation, keys handed over n less than 7 weeks from going on the market. Mercifully I'd had all the paperwork and info ready, and possible problems with the legalities checked over by the solicitor in advance rather than wait for the opposition's to raise queries. Could have got more, as prices in the area hadn't quite started downhill then, but could have been an utter shite storm if we'd ended up with one of the comedian buyers and fallen through, so we were very relieved!

I must say that the discussions in PB had a considerable effect on my thinking and were very helpful.

We're looking ahead and want a bungalow. That means that most of the ones we view are probate/ estate sales. Realistically, it's free money for the beneficiaries of the willl, but you'd be s

MattW said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
There have also been reports that top end would-be sellers are letting because no-one will buy at the asking price. It may well be that, as you suggest, it is not just lack of finance for some that makes houses unaffordable but that those who do have money are waiting till the market bottoms out.
Interestingly, in my street no fewer than five houses have been put up for sale in the last three months (buy to let landlords pulling out) and they have all sold very fast at the asking price.

I think we should remember this is different in different areas.
Houses that are realistically priced will sell. Maybe BTL landlords are more savvy and just needed to liquidate? No property that I have looked at has sold at the original asking price.
The major problem is sellers coming on to the market with unrealistic expectations and estate agents desperate to sign them up. There's something like 7 houses for sale to every one that sells and the median price is around 260k, I think. The top end houses skew the figures so the average asking price is well over 300k. You can't trust the industry house price index thingies, because they all lag by at least 6 months, and all have inaccurate quirks like only including newly listed asking prices or only sales completed with a mortgage.
Mortgage valuation surveys are downgrading house prices so buyers are getting mortgage offers revised or revoked. Mortgage arrears are on the rise. The RICS expect prices to fall for at least the next year. It's carnage out there, and going to get a lot worse before it settles.
In your place I'd be ready to move, and watching carefully, around November onwards and having multiple prospects in my mind - at that point some people may *have* to move, facing being stuck until at least March, and so may take an offer from a qualified buyer at minus 10 to 15%.

I can give you a slightly interesting story around current unpredictably.

My parent had a very nice 2 bed bungalow in their estate, which was a conversion of my dad's former architectural studio which we were left with in 1975 when the person who bought the family house did not want the studio (converted cattle shed) at the end of the garden.

So they just put up a fence across the garden and kept it. An advantage of living in a corner property. It has had a couple of grandparents living in it as their final dwelling, and was there for my parent for a similar reason, or to rent out to pay care costs.

Probate valuation several years ago was X. Since then the recommended price has gone up by about 13% and back down again, buyers offering, pulling out, and back in again.

We completed last month within 1k of the probate value with a seller who first expressed interest 18 months ago.

We're locked and loaded! Proof of funds lodged with our solicitors, we'll buy the search packs as soon as we agree a deal, belongs all boxed up and in storage. I think November to February will be the window for us. We want to move, and want to be in a new place by spring.

StillWaters · October 2023

Sandpit said:

StillWaters said:

Sandpit said:

Fishing said:

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.
I agree with most of that. I'm not sure about finding "innovative" ways to construct houses. Look at any British city to see the horrors that "innovation" in architecture has given us since the Second World War. Compare any "new" and "innovative" sixties tower block to a stunning fifteenth century terrace near me and see how novelty and innovative are, amazingly, the enemies of decent construction and aesthetics. When you see what today's architects and builders do, NIMBY opposition to new homes starts to make sense.
I was thinking of innovation such as modular offsite construction. Several companies have tried to get this off the ground, but have all struggled because banks refuse to finance them. At a reasonable scale, a 3-bed house can be built in a factory for around £100k, plus the cost of land and installation. It needs government to bang
heads together among banks and insurance companies, to agree 30-year or 50-year warranties on them.
The issue is they are deemed to have a finite life (while a house, with appropriate maintenance, can last indefinitely)

Hence - like an expiring leasehold - they have diminishing resale value which means that they aren’t a great security for a loan.

I’ve no idea if that is accurate or not, but it’s that perception which is the issue.
That’s my understanding too. However if a house has a 30-year life, a bank should be able to give a 25-year mortgage on it, but that’s not happening.

The problem is one of maths

Typically in a mortgage product you pay off the interest in the early years and only pay down the principal at the end of the life of the mortgage.

However the value of the security declines every year (to zero in year 30 - possibly to 10% of original value in year 25) with the result that the LTV metrics and the risk to the bank increase rather than decrease during the term.

Hence mortgages become very expensive

The equivalent is asking them to lend against as short term leasehold without a right to enfranchise. Effectively they deem it as being asked to pre-fund someone’s rent without adequate security

Carnyx · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:
.
Carnyx said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still further to fall, so probably won't make any firm offers until the new year.
Was one of the family executors for an elderly relative this spring/summer. We made it clear to the EA we wanted to sell his house in good time at a moderate price rather than end up in the slide trying to screw the last 10K out of buyers - in the event it went to the first non-comedian non-cowboy for survey valuation, keys handed over n less than 7 weeks from going on the market. Mercifully I'd had all the paperwork and info ready, and possible problems with the legalities checked over by the solicitor in advance rather than wait for the opposition's to raise queries. Could have got more, as prices in the area hadn't quite started downhill then, but could have been an utter shite storm if we'd ended up with one of the comedian buyers and fallen through, so we were very relieved!

I must say that the discussions in PB had a considerable effect on my thinking and were very helpful.
We're looking ahead and want a bungalow. That means that most of the ones we view are probate/estate sales. They all want modernising and money spending on them. Realistically, it's free money for the beneficiaries of the will but you'd be surprised how many of them want to screw 15 or 20k out of you. I've walked away from 2 negotiations over 20 grand reductions. Both of those places are still on the market.

Quite so. I suspect we could have got 20-30K for more buyers to come out of the jungle - the house in question was the kind where you either love or hate it. But at the cost of a great deal more hassle and time and the risk of it all going down the toilet. One high offerer hadn't even put her house on the market. A competitor wanted uis to take it off the market till he raised mortgages on his half dozen other properties! And another kept raising his offer bit by bit in the most offputting way that made me sure he would try on the reverse once the offer was provisionally accepted but while his legal eagle worked through the bumf before the contract was signed.

RochdalePioneers · October 2023

kyf_100 said:

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.
Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.

Can we please drop this myth than you can "own" an apartment? Do you own the land? Or the building? No, you are buying a yale key.

Buy houses, rent apartments.

theProle · October 2023

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.

Does the under-occupation count include bedrooms used for other things, e.g WFH offices? My wife and I are currently in a 3 bed, but which is configured as a 2 bed plus office because my wife is full time WFH. If that's under-occupation, no wonder there is apparently a lot of it - it's actually the right size of house for us, and a 2 bed would be too small.

StillWaters · October 2023

JosiasJessop said:

maxh said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

StillWaters said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:
Reflecting on the Israel / Gaza situation, I think the closest (and not necessarily *very* close) analogue I can find is the 1982 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in the PLO Armed Forces being expelled from Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War
And also the killing of 2000 civilians in the Sabra and Shatila camps by forces under the supervision of the Israelis

We have to go back 4 decades to this atrocity to find one on a bigger scale than the Hamas atrocities of last weekend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre

Interesting that you highlight the role of the Israelis (“under the supervision”) but choose not to mention the Lebanese perpetrators of the massacre.

Why is that?
The massacre was by Christian militias but the camps were surrounded by IDF troops who knew what was going on and indirectly responsible.

That is what the Israeli government found in its enquiry, and why Ariel Sharon resigned as Defence Minister
*Indirectly* responsible.

Most people who don’t have an instinctive bias against the Israelis blame Hobeika.

(Sharon resigned as defence minister but remained in the cabinet, IIRC)
From the article:
The IDF had ordered the militia to clear out the fighters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) from Sabra and Shatila as part of a larger Israeli maneuver into western Beirut.
If accurate, Foxy’s description seems balanced, not biased, though I agree it would have been helpful to clarify the Lebanese forces’ role.
Also note the tangled web of atrocities that begat further atrocities: the leader of the militia, Elie Hobeika, had had his fiance and some of his family and friends in the 1976 Damour Massacre, perpetrated by the PLO.

The cycle of killing can last decades, or even generations. Hamas have no intent to stop the cycle; even if they were to push Israel into the sea, they will continue after the 'wrong' sort of Muslims. Because it is not about religion; it is about money and power.

That does not excuse Israel, either. Their campaign/policy of settlement gives Hamas and those who hate Israel an excuse (not that many need an excuse for that).

The cycle needs breaking. That is more in Israel's hands than Hamas's, though.

Just saw a deeply traumatic advert by the state of Israel. It’s just a segment from CNN. An American father (presumably Jewish although they don’t say) celebrating the fact that the army found his daughter dead in her kibbutz - because it meant that she wasn’t alive and suffering in Gaza. He expressed it as the best possible outcome in the circumstances

Carnyx · October 2023

RochdalePioneers said:

kyf_100 said:

MattW said:

kyf_100 said:
Build more houses.
Abolish leasehold - you'll never get people to buy flats until you do.
Stop propping up the market with stamp duty holidays, "help to buy" etc which only inflates the market.

Servicing the cost of putting a roof over your head destroys disposable income, destroys investment, sucks all the money out of the economy and gives it over to rent-seeking parasites, instead of being invested in productive capital.

It really is that simple.
I'd basically agree with those (though leasehold flats do seem to sell), and add some more to reform the market further, plus generate greater availability in places to build and places to live.

I think Mr Starmer has quite a lot of that about right, but it will take longer than he hopes. It always does. His goals seem reasonably modest, which will help. I predict that little will seem to be achieved in 1-2 years, but more than expected in 5-7 years. He needs 2 terms.

I also note from the 2021-22 English Housing Survey:

1.83 The overall rate of under-occupation in England in 2021-22 was 39% with around 9.3 million households living in under-occupied homes (i.e. with two or more spare bedrooms), Annex Table 1.25.

1.84 Under-occupation was much more prevalent among owner occupiers than in the rented sectors. Over half (53%) of owner occupied households (8.3 million households) were under-occupied in 2021-22 compared with 15% of private rented (684,000) and 10% of social rented (408,000) households.

1.85 The overall proportion of under-occupied households among owner occupiers in England increased between 2011-12 and 2021-22 from 49% (7.0 million households) to 53% (8.3 million households). No change was seen among renters over the same time period,
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report/english-housing-survey-2021-to-2022-headline-report

So I'd seek to promote lodgers more, and eg encourage people with Pieds a Terre flats to take a weekday lodging rather than taking up a whole flat, for example.
Dunno if you have FT access, but the figures here are startling:

https://www.ft.com/content/df25ccc7-5dcf-446e-8a07-332ad5612f09

Everywhere else in the world, the value of flats has broadly kept up with the value of housing. Except the UK. Grenfell exposed the flaws in the leasehold system, left tons of people with unmanageable bills, "waking watch" (i.e. pay nine grand a year for someone to sit in reception on their phone "just in case" of a fire) etc.
Can we please drop this myth than you can "own" an apartment? Do you own the land? Or the building? No, you are buying a yale key.

Buy houses, rent apartments.

England. Other countries may differ.

MattW · October 2023

eek said:

EPG said:
In broad terms, people who were 25-35 used to be more likely to be married, have an extra five years' work under their belts, and maybe even got handed a council house by the government at a significant discount. That's not replicable. More single under-35s equals more renters, it really is that simple, but they will eventually buy once they settle.
Not if prices are at 5-7 times anverage earnings they won’t.

In 2022 only 22% of purchases with a mortgage involved a single adult (ie single man, single woman or lone parent with dependent children).

I'm surprised it's that low. Though that arguably itself says things about pressure on those demographic groups.

Even if adults with independent children are included, it is still under 40%.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/286481/england-buying-with-mortgage-ownership-by-household-type/

carnforth · October 2023

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.

But isn't that building where there are already houses? Your neighbours seem consistent...

Nigelb · October 2023

Sandpit said:
Build more houses. Build lots more houses, and stop people objecting to more houses being built. Tax landbanking at increasing rates every year.

Build new towns, not just expand existing towns, and don’t let the developer run rings around the council with regard to the infrostructure aspects.

Find innovative ways to construct houses, and make sure they’re mortgageable, just as we did after WWII. While they’re there, sort out leasehold.

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.

Plan for the future by looking at household population changes, such as the increase in single living and divorce, as well as managing immigration rates to the availability of housing.

Finally, limit short-term letting to actual short-term letting, one month a year maximum. It’s fine for people to rent out their house when they’re on holiday, or to get out of town and make some money when there’s a sporting event on - but not to run an unlicensed B&B bringing antisocial behaviour while pricing locals out of their own town.

Are you helping Labour develop their housing policy ?

Leon · October 2023

Deeply disturbing thread about the London Palestine march yesterday. If he’s right - maybe he’s a crank? - we are in big trouble

“I attended today’s protest as an observer. It was 15% white leftists. 15% normalish looking Muslims. The remaining 70% were a mixture of Islamists and diaspora youth with Turkish, Pakistan etc flags - a bit like a Palestine themed identity forming event. Thread follows”

https://x.com/hardtimeshere11/status/1713305689529999695?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

StillWaters · October 2023

twistedfirestopper3 said:

darkage said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:
On this issue of housing - some level of correction is already happening because house prices are a) not rising with inflation but also b) falling in actual terms, which I think is a direct consequence of higher financing costs. There are as many winners from this as there are losers.

This is borne out by the poll highlighted. Whilst inflation is going up at 10% this is only reflected in higher housing costs for half of the respondents.

It may not be a case that the narrative of 'skyrocketing house prices and rents' is universally accurate.

My own view is that the era of house price inflation driving the economy is largely over, we are a year or so in to a long period of deflation, people just haven't realised it yet.
I expect a long bear market in real terms house prices for the next few years.

That is also my expectation. There are definitely opportunities with this situation though, for instance, prices in London are attractive.
As I've been boringly saying for the last few months-we're looking to cash buy a new home. House prices are going south, and the slide is getting ever more slippery. Houses that were out of our budget 4 months ago are now well within our reach and we're in the bewildering place of having too much choice.
There are houses in my RightMove/Zoopla saved lists that have been to auction 3 times and not sold. Houses that have been reduced month after month and still for sale. Estate agents are phoning me every day with houses that have just come on to market or been reduced. I think there is still
further to fall, so probably won't make any
firm offers until the new year.

Don’t miss out on the right home because you think the price might fall further.

And there’s nothing to stop you making offers below asking that anticipate future price erosion

Carnyx · October 2023

carnforth said:

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.
But isn't that building where there are already houses? Your neighbours seem consistent...

Re Benpointer, I did wonder if there is any mileage in renting out half the garden to a local for an allotment. I'd snap one up if a nrighbour did that.

BartholomewRoberts · October 2023

.

EPG said:

eek said:

EPG said:
In broad terms, people who were 25-35 used to be more likely to be married, have an extra five years' work under their belts, and maybe even got handed a council house by the government at a significant discount. That's not replicable. More single under-35s equals more renters, it really is that simple, but they will eventually buy once they settle.
Not if prices are at 5-7 times anverage earnings they won’t.
They will. It is a plain demographic fact. Some owner-occupier will pass on, and in broad historical terms they get replaced by a different owner-occcupier, and in some eras like today even BTLs get replaced by owner occupiers. Then the price is simply determined by the negotiating power of each side (if I know you can get a cheap mortgage, I hold out for 5-7x, otherwise not so much).

Sorry but this is a disgraceful attitude normally only shown by HYUFD. Waiting until people pass on doesn't address the housing crisis. If people are dying in their 80s or 90s then should we expect people to be their children in their 60s or 70s before they are able to get a house of their own?

People should be able to afford a home at the start of their career, and before they have children, not the end of their lives only.

As for BTLs getting replaced by owner occupiers currently - good! - but its little and late for people who have been paying their BTL landlords mortgage for years as they couldn't get a deposit for one of their own due to insanely price rises.

Finally your "holding out" for more is precisely the problem. There needs to be excess supply all the time, so those who "hold out" simply find nobody is interested. Buyers should be in a position to say yes I could afford 7x, but why should I pay it if someone else is only asking for 3x as a healthy market rate.

StillWaters · October 2023

pm215 said:

Sandpit said:

Incentivise people to trade down once their kids have flown the nest, to leave larger houses for growing families.
How do you propose to do this without it being perceived as (or actually being) another massive bung to the elderly?

Unclear how many would take it, anyway, if they haven't already been drawn by the cashback inherent in downsizing. I know somebody who now lives alone in what was once the family five bedroom house -- but when the kids and grandkids are back for Christmas or Easter the house is full. I'm not sure they'd be very keen to give that up.

It’s more about removing the disincentive of stamp duty.

Perhaps remove the PPR relief from main residences but allow a rollover for new main residence purchase within, say, 36 months.

Use the funds to reduce stamp duty (and perhaps focus it on those downsizing)

Benpointer · October 2023

carnforth said:

Benpointer said:
On housing, bizarre conversation the other evening with similarly retired neighbours along the lines of:
"Labour seem to be going to allow building anywhere - it's crazy."
"We'll we do need more houses."
"Yes but they should put them where there are already houses, not new sites."

Then later, when we mentioned we are looking to downsize because our garden is far too big for us now:
"Can't you sell of half your garden for a couple of houses?"
Er no, building in our village is absolutely verboten by our wonderful Local NIMBY Plan.
But isn't that building where there are already houses? Your neighbours seem consistent...

I didn't summarise the conversation very well - they basically a) don't want any new building in our village and b) don't understand why we shouldn't be allowed to put a couple of houses on our garden.

Eabhal · October 2023

Leon said:
Deeply disturbing thread about the London Palestine march yesterday. If he’s right - maybe he’s a crank? - we are in big trouble

“I attended today’s protest as an observer. It was 15% white leftists. 15% normalish looking Muslims. The remaining 70% were a mixture of Islamists and diaspora youth with Turkish, Pakistan etc flags - a bit like a Palestine themed identity forming event. Thread follows”

https://x.com/hardtimeshere11/status/1713305689529999695?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

I still find it remarkable that there was a protest against Charlie Hebdo shortly after that particular massacre.

You have to admire the chutzpah, if nothing else.

(Starmer's purge of the Corbynites is looking more and more like a masterstroke)

It’s the housing costs, stupid? – politicalbetting.com

Comments