Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
Any predictions for what is likely to be included?
We are told that it is to include incentives for long term tenancies - 12 months plus? This would need to also appeal to low leaveraged landlords.
Any additional incentives for FTBs?
Could there be action on pensions?
Doesn't matter what Govt says it cannot require lenders to let LL have longer AST
It is the lenders that control what a LL does
Govt doesn't seem to understand this basic premise
So before Govt keeps banging on about long period tenancies it needs to persuade lenders to remove the restrictions from mortgage conditions.
Most lenders still have such AST length restrictions
Also while they are persuading lenders on this they should also get them to drop the no HB tenants condition.
It is disgraceful that a lender can require a LL to let to only tenants who do not receive Govt HB.
Banning LL from letting to HB tenants is outright discrimination and lenders should be forced to drop such conditions.
A HB tenant is just as good as any other tenant.
They pay with coin of the realm like any other tenant.
Why is HB money deemed to be less worthy than private money?
Whilst they are at it they should require insurers to stop charging higher premiums if tenants are on HB.
Hammond is supposedly going to announce more housing spend.
Small developers will receive incentives
The PRS will get nothing least of all S24 abolishing.
Expect more penal regulations to drive the PRS out of business.
I would like to think that if planning longer AST`s they have done the background work with lenders prior to making any formal announcement
Lenders can then send out an agreed amendment to the lending conditions. As long as its not detrimental to their security they will have agreed this change so government will have put safeguards in place for them so they are not disadvantaged
But longer AST`s do not suit everyone . I give all mine the option at the end of the 1st 6 mths fixed to go to an SPT or renew at 6 or 12 mths.
99% say let it go to an SPT. I sense they fear being trapped just as much as we do
Or maybe its just the £150 fee I say I would charge them for a new AST ( joking )
Jonathan Clarke. http://www.buytoletmk.com
I think after the election and the result The Conservatives will do very little this time around
Give it Three Years and they will be giving sweeteners away
Learn Change and Adapt ?????
I dont know really if I`m honest
Its all so up in the air with Brexit that we are just a sideshow
I tend to agree with DL .
There will be the normal tinkering but any big policy shift to potentially help us / tenants will be in about 3 years
S24 hasnt even bitten in real terms yet . We have to wait till April next year
Even then its just the beginning.
The LL voice will be a lot louder come 2020
The voice of the tenants will be a lot louder come 2020
Homeless figures will be maybe doubled by then with a tsunami of evictions
I can see them announcing a new housing quango to look at UC / AST`s/ S24 / housing tenure etc
Its needs it - as by 2020 if something is not done the build up of resentment by all sides will reach fever pitch
They need to head off that looming disaster or else they may lose the election
So they can debate it further for 18mths seek evidence from all sides ( PT will be a valued source document for them )
Then they produce a report with recommendations and in 2 years a major announcement may bring better news for LL `s
In return we will offer concessions which may be beneficial to us and tenants in the long run anyway
Doesn't matter what the current Govt does
They won't be the next Govt
Labour will be in charge until all the idiot Corbynisatas reaslise the disaster they have elected.
I will have left the PRS just as Labour are being elected
There is speculation that Hammond needs to come up with something to start winning back the young vote so I tend to think he can’t just tinker round the edges but needs to come up with something radical.
If he Hammond stated tax was increasing by a penny in the pound and it was going to be spent on millions of council houses and building new garden cities do you think many would object.
Cos I wouldn't
I resent having to do so.
But I accept this is to pay for Labour allowing mass uncontrolled immigration
The taxpayer must pay.
The population must be housed decently and affordably.
Next to food it is the most important thing to most people.
The private builder and PRS is just not the answer
Only State provision can supply what is required with private builders and the PRS hanging on the State's coat tails!
We do not need millions more homes
We are building roughly the right number for population growth
The average home in the UK only has 2.3 people living in it
Residential floor space per capita is at all time highs
I sort of see where you are coming from
Yes there are millions of unoccupied spare rooms
I don't think tenants and homeowners are prepared to have billeting imposed on them just yet!!
But if all of a sudden 2 million had to be housed them compulsory billeting would bring more than sufficient accommodation!
It would be a socialist response
Socialism only really works during war time.
We aren't at war...........yet!
Though the NK situation is looking decidedly dodgy!!
I am not saying that there are spare rooms in owner homes that can be used, those cant be used
What I am saying is that by any actual evidence we have more housing than at any other time in history.
House prices can be high yet the nation be housed well. In shanty towns the houses are really cheap but people are very poorly housed. In kensington house prices are very high but the people of kensington are housed well.
The problem is people simply think high house prices = housing shortage when that is too simplistic and simply wrong
We have sufficient housing for the nation as we stand.The reason the south is expensive is because the economy of London has been booming for 20 years.The reason the north is cheap is because the economy of the north has been in recession or stagnant for 20 years
The country needs roughly 200,000 homes a year and we build close to that.Anyone who claims there is a housing shortage is just mouthing off on something they haven't thought throughFor a start there is clearly a massive difference between the regions. You cant just say there is a housing shortgage as you need to consider the regions. For instance house prices in Wales Scotland N-Ireland NE NW Y&H are so cheap that buying a FTB property in those regions is cheaper than renting social homes. When buying a house is cheaper than renting social stock then clearly there is no problem or shortage at all in those regions.
I think the closest thing to the truth is to say
Scotland Wales N-Ireland NE NW Y&H have no housing problem at all those areas are not only affordable but CHEAP
The W-Midlands and E-Midlands have no problem and the housing there is affordable.
Only London and some parts of the SE are expensive but they are affordable for the people who want to live there.We could build a lot more homes in London but houses would not get cheaper in London instead the roughly 100,000 people who leave London annually would no longer leave. And the 200,000 gross who arrive will become 300,000 gross who arrive. The result would be that with much more house building in London (say 100,000 units a year) London would go from a growth rate of +100,000 annually to +300,000 annually
What that would do is make London boom even more, and make the rest of the country grow even slower
Overall there is no problem