| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Right-to-buy council homes lucrative for rich landlords; Thatcher's Housing Minister's family hit jackpot | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 16 2015, 06:30 AM (385 Views) | |
| Heinrich | Aug 16 2015, 06:30 AM Post #1 |
|
Regular Guy
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Almost 40 per cent of council homes sold under Tory "right-to-buy" are now being let by private landlords who are making a killing. Ex-council homes sold at knock-down prices are a boon to entrepreneurial rich landlords. "As an example of how the local authority sell-off has been exploited, Stephen Gow, son of Margaret Thatcher’s housing minister Ian Gow, owns more than 40 former council flats in Westminster alone." Morning Star You have to hand it to the Conservative Working People's Party, they can pull-off a scam without even trying to pretend otherwise. Only the brasen upper middle class in England could get away with such a fiddle. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 16 2015, 09:44 AM Post #2 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tory vermin. There was a bit of a ding dong in my area when the Conservative led council started complaining about the ever increasing bill for housing benefit, the opposing parties pointed out that literally hundreds of the landlords who were receiving the money owned ex council houses that were so generously sold off by the Thatcher government! This country is run by fucking idiots for fucking idiots. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 16 2015, 10:23 AM Post #3 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Some Councils (mainly Tory) do not own any houses for letting ... having sold them all off to housing agencies. From one such council link.
Edited by Affa, Aug 16 2015, 10:24 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nonsense | Aug 16 2015, 01:00 PM Post #4 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The whole 'buy-to-let' system is simply a 'Ponzi' scheme,designed by politicians to benefit the 'middle' class tax avoiding landlords,financed by taxpayers through the Housing Benefit system. If I were Corbyn,on winning the leadership contest,if indeed that turns out to be the case,would formulate a policy to tax these landlords out of their tax free returns,so that houses & prices for them come down for the potential benefit of the tenants who may wish to buy them for more realistic prices. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 01:08 PM Post #5 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I take it that you also then are part of that collective description? |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 01:11 PM Post #6 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My dear chap, a person can only set a price that the market is willing/is able to afford, the reason prices are so high is because there are more bods than there are properties available, so there are two solutions to enable prices to come down............build more homes or cut the numbers of people requiring them............it is a Meerkat solution. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 16 2015, 01:16 PM Post #7 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
AS an observation - A couple of months ago I had occasion to accompany an associate to the head offices of our local Housing Association .. My first impression of the place, new and magnificent as it is, was of the number of high-end cars in the front car park area. Now I can't be certain, but I do doubt that the council car park put on such a show of affluence when they were doing the letting. Edited by Affa, Aug 16 2015, 01:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Oddball | Aug 16 2015, 01:26 PM Post #8 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I did a quick check of the discount here in Sheffield. Firstly the application needs to be made by/through a bona fide tenant and to get the maximum discount to have held the residency for several years. The maximum discount for a house/bungalow is just short of £78,000. I reckon that most tenants, particularly dahn sarf would not be in a position to pay the cash or mortgage difference given present property prices/values. |
![]() |
|
| Alberich | Aug 16 2015, 01:31 PM Post #9 |
|
Alberich
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Even a life-long conservative like me can see that the selling of council owned property was not the best idea they ever came up with. Things were much fairer when councils held large stock of rentable properties at affordable cost. Most couples would start in council housing, then those with some ambition worked hard and saved, moved on and bought their own home, while those that didn't, stayed as council tenants. And of course, when there were these large council estates, one knew which areas to avoid when moving up the property ladder! |
![]() |
|
| Nonsense | Aug 16 2015, 02:31 PM Post #10 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"My dear chap, a person can only set a price that the market is willing/is able to afford, the reason prices are so high is because there are more bods than there are properties available, so there are two solutions to enable prices to come down............build more homes or cut the numbers of people requiring them............it is a Meerkat solution". The 'only' problem with it is Rich, it's that these 'buy-to-let' properties are filled with tenants, not buyers. My idea is to get these landlords to sell by taxing their ill-gotten gains,thus reducing their yields & making 'buy-to-let' an unattractive proposition. That way, prices will tend to fall,creating a buy situation that many of those tenants would take advantage of, thus reducing the Housing Benefit bill that is increasing phenominally each year. These landlords are parasites, make them invest their gains or capital elsewhere, where there is a 'risk' & where they actually have to 'earn' the rewards. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 07:45 PM Post #11 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That, I am afraid is capitalism mate and it makes the world go round, nonetheless, I share your frustration at the situation but see no way out of it until we have a government that controls incoming numbers, and that will not happen until we take control of our own destiny which, in my opinion lies outside of a united states of Europe. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 16 2015, 08:43 PM Post #12 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, I watch in wonder at folks like you who are at risk of being ripped off by housing costs sit back and take it. By doing so you encourage it and incidentally increase your own chances of impoverishment......... |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 08:46 PM Post #13 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I do beg your pardon your highness, I did not realise you were not a "pleb". |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 16 2015, 08:52 PM Post #14 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As you know I'm in the construction industry and I can tell you now the present government has no intention whatsoever of solving the housing crisis by building more houses, the banks would take a hit if prices dropped, boomers who demand as a right house price inflation would stop voting Conservative and thousands of useless property parasites would need to find gainful employment. We could build 400,000 houses a year in the 1950's, yet despite mechanisation and improved construction methods we can barely build half of that number today! That fact is no accident, despite your immigration is the cause of all ills tagline. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 09:00 PM Post #15 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you seriously telling me that if there were a hundred houses for sale and only one buyer that the sellers would not drop the price to suit the buyers pocket? Yes, the sellers may decide to hold onto the properties in the hope of there being more buyers, but that is a gamble (aka capitalism) so now we look at it from the other angle, there is only one house for sale but there are a hundred purchasers wanting it, who holds the cards now? that, my very rude (at times) friend is called market forces. And unless you can be polite and civilised please do not bother (fxxxxxg) replying.
|
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 16 2015, 09:09 PM Post #16 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What? That is NOT the point is it? Try and understand, if you can, there is no intention of solving the housing crisis because the main beneficiaries are predominantly the better off, and I think I'm right in saying that the register of members interests records that just over a third of MP's rent out property. Take some time, think about it, and draw some obvious conclusions......... |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 12:37 AM Post #17 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And you will not change the situation by trying to prove me wrong, there are only two solutions to the problem, unless of course you have a better idea. Whether or not government policies are right or wrong is neither here nor fxxxxxg there, my claim still stands as sound comment. |
![]() |
|
| Heinrich | Aug 17 2015, 12:58 AM Post #18 |
|
Regular Guy
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Profit before people is the Tory way. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 01:20 AM Post #19 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So, you with all your wisdom, please tell us all what the solution is. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 06:02 PM Post #20 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Such indignation when the government you elect is criticised for failure is a sign of resignation. Definition of resignation : the acceptance of something undesirable as inevitable |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 08:06 PM Post #21 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Would one of these solutions involve immigration by any chance...........? We were not building enough houses long before Eastern Europe and the rest decided to move here, planning laws are by far the biggest obstacle to housebuilding, full stop. The regs run to almost 1000 pages and are a nimbies wet dream, this government will do little of worth to alter that. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 09:00 PM Post #22 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Therefore, cut the number of bods requiring a place to live.....oh hold on, we cannot do that can we? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 09:10 PM Post #23 |
|
Deleted User
|
Or better still build more affordable houses. This would increase employment and perhaps stem housing inflation. BUT as Tigger has so patiently tried to explain to you that there is no incentive to either business or government to do so. House inflation is a positive thing for the people who tend to vote Tory...selfish gits. |
|
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 09:14 PM Post #24 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Once again I will repeat for the deaf on here, if more affordable housing is not on the table then reduce the number of bods, allowing ever more people into this small island will not help matters, lets try and cope with the present problem without adding further to it.....oh, and do you recall what happened when an extra lane was added to the M25?.....it very quickly became congested and part of the biggest car park in Europe. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 09:21 PM Post #25 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are very hard work sometimes, sorry most of the time, which part of the bit about chronic housing shortages long before immigrants turned up did you not understand? We have known for thirty five years that there has been a big year on year increase in smaller households, that is to say only one, two or three people living in each dwelling, thus even with a static population we needed more houses due to the social trends I have just pointed out to you. If it makes you feel any better immigration has not helped but is NOT THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF HOUSING SHORTAGES!
|
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 09:23 PM Post #26 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I realise I'm wasting my time here such is your stubborn ignorance but the UK is not especially crowded, housing only occupies 7% of the landmass of the UK............ |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 09:25 PM Post #27 |
|
Deleted User
|
Once again I will repeat for the hard of thinking on here. House building is being slowed down from what it could be because of the politics of greed. As the ever patient Tigger has pointed out to you'We were not building enough houses long before Eastern Europe and the rest decided to move here, planning laws are by far the biggest obstacle to housebuilding'. |
|
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 09:56 PM Post #28 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You'll love this, and this sort of thing will be repeated up and down the country. We have a potential client who has inherited a house, it was not saleable as it was and it needed demolishing because it was one of those shoddy prefabs built after the war, the owner has wasted tens of thousands of pounds trying to get planning permission to build something else on the now vacant plot. Firstly the "locals" objected because of the potential noise of demolition, so it had to be demolished by hand, very expensive. Secondly three sets of plans were rejected by the council and because of objections from local residents, thirdly the lane it is in has unadopted road status, the track is privately owned and the owner who also live down this lane will not allow construction machinery to enter due to "congestion issues" then there was a claim the land was contaminated with asbestos, £800 to have several soil samples tested, followed by that old favourite a spoiled view, then a few months later a complaint about building materials being stored on the site despite a lack of planning permission! So after four and a half years and thousands of pounds there is a weed infested plot between two bungalows! Selfish wankers strike again and the law helps them! Edited by Tigger, Aug 17 2015, 10:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Aug 17 2015, 10:03 PM Post #29 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So what you are saying is that a social change where people now fancy living alone should be responded to by indulging such by building more houses so the market adjusts to make their selected lifestyle not too onerous? Just where are we going to build these houses once you exclude flood plains, areas that already have an excess of people over annual rainfall and areas where there already isn't enough work? Rich is right, we have too many people and we should be encouraging those non UK citizens with inessential skills and no job to sod right off. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 10:19 PM Post #30 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well someone on here keeps telling us about supply and demand and how wonderful the free market is so, perhaps you can explain why despite these unpreventable trends the market is failing so badly? I've been in this trade for thirty odd years Steve and I know exactly why we have the problems we do and it is called a rigged market to ensure housing prices are maintained. And I can assure you there is no shortage of suitable building land in this country, excluding obviously some parts of London and the South East, it's politics and vested interests preventing a supply of affordable and adequate housing, and not geography or geology. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 10:26 PM Post #31 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey; Rich has an open mind, does not discount the opinion of others, and tells it as he sees it ....... and isn't persuaded by dogma. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 10:34 PM Post #32 |
|
Deleted User
|
Oh yeah. It rings a bell
|
|
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 10:41 PM Post #33 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I will not disagree with your view, but as the situation regarding housebuilding is not likely to alter in the foreseeable future, then surely you can see that there is only one option available and that involves the number of bods here, if you have a better solution then please put it forth, this or any other administration is not the be all and end all of solutions, as our hands are tied at present regarding free movement between EU citizens (and that is not wholly a believable statistic) I see no other solution in order to bring market forces back to rationale. And this is why we are where we are. https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=3%20main%20builders%20will%20post%20record%20profits Edited by Rich, Aug 17 2015, 10:44 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Aug 17 2015, 10:48 PM Post #34 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well a huge part of the problem is the demand for housing within 2 hours commuting door to door to London offices. It's bonkers. I don't share your rigged view per se but certainly every major political party knows that the very last thing to do while in power is have a housing price crash. A guaranteed vote loser that so economic policy is always managed to try to prevent such. The biggest aspect of rigging imho is how developers get agricultural land reclassified for housing. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 10:58 PM Post #35 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Quite obviously, this situation does not help matters............or might it be said that it is being done on purpose? http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/14/brickmakers-straining-to-meet-demand |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 11:45 PM Post #36 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why are we still building red brick houses at all? ![]() £69k Houses - social renting. Should read £60k Edited by Affa, Aug 17 2015, 11:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 18 2015, 12:03 AM Post #37 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Where is that particular plot situated at? |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 18 2015, 07:42 AM Post #38 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oxley Woods I believe, near Bracknell .... and Ascot. Edited by Affa, Aug 18 2015, 07:46 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Aug 18 2015, 08:51 AM Post #39 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's Oxley Woods - award winning in 2008 but subject to litigation for poor design leading to water ingress in 2014 The thing is with brick built houses they look right, are robust, don't look bad after 5 years when water staining affects non brick build and they are easy to modify. IIRC they really don't cost much more to build either. |
![]() |
|
| Ewill | Aug 18 2015, 10:53 AM Post #40 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I was struck by how ugly the estate looked so I'm not surprised to learn the nickname >>The brightly clad, angular terraces, which have earned Oxley Woods the nickname LEGOLAND>>> |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2




![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





8:31 AM Jul 11