advertisement


Housing market

andyoz said:
FFS, what's the bloody point. Might just go and blow it all on Coke and hookers and plead ignorance when the Debt Jubilee finally comes (which it might!).

Is it true there is no CGT on Crypto? I'll blow the rest on that
Click to expand...

We’re in for a mauling tax wise. Of course those who grumble but ultimately pay up will be targeted. Thinking next summer would be a good time to wind up (a few months in to the new tax year).
 
Mike Reed said:
I've been thinking about this as a way to control one's bank balance. I never did this, and wonder why, but of course, by deducting cheque amounts, you cannot account for income paid directly into one's account. My salary was paid directly in '74 and my student grant money before that. Also, if you popped funds into the myriad branches then around, your cheque stub would be irrelevant.

The only way to keep track of one's finances in those early days was to keep a ledger, with fairly frequent visits to your bank branch. I still keep the former but the latter, fortunately, has become unnecessary. My memory of the seventies/eighties re. banking and personal finance is a bit sketchy but I can't remember any other way of keeping track in those pre-internet days, which weren't THAT long ago.

PS I've just seen Joe Hutch's comment; note-book= ledger=income & expenditure record.
Click to expand...
I managed quite easily using cheque book stubs, bank statements used to drop through the letterbox regularly. I always knew exactly how much money I had in my current account. Always. I guess it was easy for a pauper on paye from age 17.
 
Brian said:
Oh well. It always seemed very straightforward to write a balance on a stub and deduct the next cheque, but perhaps it was difficult for some people.
Click to expand...
I still do it now in a very old chequebook, old habits die hard.Not that I write any cheques but I keep a running total of what’s “available” in my personal accounting scheme.
 
US inflation is edging downwards, which is good news for UK interest rates (assuming you don’t want them to go too high). You just never know, this inflation spike could be running out of steam which would of course be good news for mortgage holders and those who don’t want house prices to fall too much.

ETA. Having said that, it seems the banks aren’t hanging about…

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...essions-landlord-evictions-rent-b2222207.html
 
Last edited:
North Yorkshire county council have voted to impose double council tax on second homes. The local BBC new programme Look North highlighted people in Whitby complaining about not being able too afford to buy in “their” town. I don’t buy that argument at all but I do accept that an excessive proportion of second homes, particularly holiday lets can be a nuisance and have an adverse effect on local services for permanent residents.

The council tax move seems spiteful and ineffective. It appears that most of the second homes are run as holiday let businesses and those owners will not be paying council tax anyway. If you believe a solution is required then surely it needs to be vested in planning. I.e. properties built as residences should not be able to be used as commercial properties without planning permission, which of course could be withheld. There needs to be legislation to make this retrospective.
 
Martin J said:
North Yorkshire county council have voted to impose double council tax on second homes. The local BBC new programme Look North highlighted people in Whitby complaining about not being able too afford to buy in “their” town. I don’t buy that argument at all
Click to expand...
Nor do I. I might just as well object to not being able to afford to buy a house in a desirable part of town and having to live in the outer suburbs because wealthy people have bought there. That's life. If I want to be near Whitby then there are cheaper areas nearby.

but I do accept that an excessive proportion of second homes, particularly holiday lets can be a nuisance and have an adverse effect on local services for permanent residents.
Click to expand...
Holiday lets are part of the economy of Whitby and other tourist towns; they always have been.

It appears that most of the second homes are run as holiday let businesses and those owners will not be paying council tax anyway. If you believe a solution is required then surely it needs to be vested in planning. I.e. properties built as residences should not be able to be used as commercial properties without planning permission, which of course could be withheld. There needs to be legislation to make this retrospective.
Click to expand...
I think this is a non starter because Whitby has always needed B&Bs for the tourists, it's part of the economy. We had someone wanting to ban second homes and saying that they could stay in B&Bs instead. Now we're going to prevent people opening B&Bs?
 
stevec67 said:
I think this is a non starter because Whitby has always needed B&Bs for the tourists, it's part of the economy. We had someone wanting to ban second homes and saying that they could stay in B&Bs instead. Now we're going to prevent people opening B&Bs?
Click to expand...

This is where I think planning could help. It’s uncontrolled (in freehold properties) at the moment. Use planning not tax (which wont work) to exert control and keep a healthy balance between commercial and residential use.
 
Martin J said:
This is where I think planning could help. It’s uncontrolled (in freehold properties) at the moment. Use planning not tax (which wont work) to exert control and keep a healthy balance between commercial and residential use.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that it is currently uncontrolled. A number of houses have caveats on "no commercial use". In fact I think mine does, and I do run my business from it but I don't receive visitors there, so nobody is to know. My parents' house had a caveat on "no livestock". A number of houses in Armley, Leeds, have caveats on "no use of these premises as a tripe shop". So you are right, you could put a caveat on the freehold. 2 questions:
1 - would it actually reduce the number of people buying them to use as second homes?
2 - Would it maintain the supply of B&Bs in a town like Whitby that needs a good number of them?
 
stevec67 said:
I'm not sure that it is currently uncontrolled. A number of houses have caveats on "no commercial use". In fact I think mine does, and I do run my business from it but I don't receive visitors there, so nobody is to know. My parents' house had a caveat on "no livestock". A number of houses in Armley, Leeds, have caveats on "no use of these premises as a tripe shop". So you are right, you could put a caveat on the freehold. 2 questions:
1 - would it actually reduce the number of people buying them to use as second homes?
2 - Would it maintain the supply of B&Bs in a town like Whitby that needs a good number of them?
Click to expand...
Put your house into Google maps and search businesses. I’ll be surprised if it isn’t highlighted.
 
Bob McC said:
Put your house into Google maps and search businesses. I’ll be surprised if it isn’t highlighted.
Click to expand...
It used to be the business address of a fork lift service company, so the caveat clearly isn't enforced if it exists. It's now my business address. It is however just a normal house.
 
I thinking working from home is generally accepted as being in-line with residential rather than commercial use as long as there are no commercial visitors to the property. I think it’s been the case for decades.

As for enforcement if you were breaking the any covenants on your deeds I am not sure who could do that. I assume anyone who believed you were causing them some kind of nuisance (which I fully accept your aren’t BTW). If there is a solicitor in the house who knows the answer to this.
 
The lease on our house forbids ‘business use’, but Mrs H used a spare bedroom as her office for over ten years and nobody cared. I think that you’re OK as long as a) you don’t stick a big sign outside, b) you don’t cause a nuisance to neighbours and c) the owner of the freehold doesn’t come round poking his/her nose in.
 
Martin J said:
I thinking working from home is generally accepted as being in-line with residential rather than commercial use as long as there are no commercial visitors to the property. I think it’s been the case for decades.

As for enforcement if you were breaking the any covenants on your deeds I am not sure who could do that. I assume anyone who believed you were causing them some kind of nuisance (which I fully accept your aren’t BTW). If there is a solicitor in the house who knows the answer to this.
Click to expand...
The owner of the land is the only person who can enforce a covenant.
 
Bob McC said:
The owner of the land is the only person who can enforce a covenant.
Click to expand...

That’s interesting. Does that mean the previous owner of the land who sold the freehold? Otherwise it would suggest to me that covenants are not enforceable on freehold titles in which case why would they even exist?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top