Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
If not, then whose? You don't think the housing squeeze and gentrification are the results of market forces?
Housing market
- Thread starter matt j
- Start date
If not, then whose? You don't think the housing squeeze and gentrification are the results of market forces?
The govenrment. The fundamental question on housing is: why hasn't government done more?
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
You want government to do more, vote for governments who do more instead of voting for government committed to doing less
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
Isn't that the natural conclusion to my previous statement?
If capitalism has failed the housing needs of the people then...
If you take a binary view, yes - and I wouldn't say the market/capitalism has failed "the people"; quite the contrary: the vast majority of people are quite happy with their housing lot, mainly because they either own their house/flat/whatever or because they are working to pay off their mortgages. The last thing we need is for the State to take over the housing market. What it can do though is put in place the right incentives and regulations to ensure a more balanced (fair?) market. The government, despite various atrempts, has failed on this front, particularly with regards the young.
Enfield boy
pfm Member
I would say the vast majority of your vast majority are getting by in the best they can scrape enough together to buy or rent and that the typical standard of the housing/accomodation stock has been falling for the best part of 50 years.
mandryka
pfm Member
You may be right about that -- but it doesn't sound obvious to me. 50 years ago was 1974 -- that was a time when in Manchester there were still slums waiting to be CPOed or refurbished, and same in the other city I knew at the time, Leicester.
Enfield boy
pfm Member
Probably better than the "homes" many vulnerable people are forced to live with mould and leaks and so on, not forgetting the number of souls being forced to live on the streets. Many new builds are awful and unlikely to last 50 years, the best affordable housing was probably built from the 1930s to the 1970s with the exception of prefabs and some high rise.
Southeastern
She called me baby, like an old romantic
How many HMO's in the 70's?
kensalriser
pfm Member
Hundreds? Tens of thousands more like. Multi bedsit accommodation was very common in London and doubtless other cities, and the general standard was not good. Poor quality housing is nothing new.
Southeastern
She called me baby, like an old romantic
..and now they are standard everywhere not just in large cities, and that's the crux of the problem, because of a decade of feeding the landlord, people now are forced to live out their lives in tiny boxes with randoms, even in their senior years. Poor quality housing is nothing knew, but now it is the common. It pays not to build more housing because it makes some people very rich.
The landlords on this thread often moan about people not caring about their properties (although none have ever provided evidence of anything done to theirs) and not caring about their communities,; when people are forced into no hope lifestyles living out of box rooms, its not surprising that many don't create an affiliation with the area they live. Landlords/Tory doners/etc 1, Communities 0, Humans 0
"the idea that we shouldn't mock then and humiliate them and make them feel ashamed is laughable, Britain's wealth is rooted in Landlordism and that's a dangerous place to be in'
'we've got to make it embarrassing to be a landlord'
Nick Bano, Housing Lawyer/Barrister
Last edited:
mandryka
pfm Member
The bedsits of the 1960s and 1970s were much less regulated. I can't remember when legislation was introduced requiring fire doors but it was quite late - mid 1970s I think, maybe early 1980s. I'm not sure about overcrowding rules. The heating was itself often dangerous - I used to see paraffin heaters, no one was checking on CO emissions or electrical safety. Damp was endemic.
I'm not sure about this but I think today the worst housing is not privately owned bedsits, but social housing. Those vermin infested sink estates run by local authorities and housing associations.
I'm not sure about this but I think today the worst housing is not privately owned bedsits, but social housing. Those vermin infested sink estates run by local authorities and housing associations.
mandryka
pfm Member
Labour commissioned report proposes to stop owners getting vacant possession in order to sell.
Much more according to this information from cortland customer service.
Reading this thread made me realize that i am not going to get a mortgage in the nearest future, cause that sounds more as a slavery to me.
Convince me that I am wrong here.
Last edited:
Southeastern
She called me baby, like an old romantic
mandryka
pfm Member
The total stock of properties for rent is as much as 41% below the number available in 2019, and unlikely to return to that level in the foreseeable future. As a result, rental growth is set to be stubbornly sticky, remaining above the rate of inflation for the rest of 2024. -- according to Hamptons
www.hamptons.co.uk
Market Insight: Spring 2024 - Cooling rental growth
Market Insight: Spring 2024 - Cooling rental growth - Hamptons
www.hamptons.co.uk
mandryka
pfm Member
She does touch on a real problem for me. I have one house where I would love to get rid of the tenant, he's paying a low rent and he doesn't look after the house, he's a hoarder, pensioner, low income, upsets the neighbours etc. It's my house, but he definitely sees it as his home. But he's old and ill and so I keep stopping myself -- but you know, I'm teetering!
It would be good to know in her case some more details, particularly on the grounds for eviction and how she challenged and why she lost. I didn't catch what happened in the end, did the council rehome her?
Southeastern
She called me baby, like an old romantic
Are you actually for real?
"see's at his home"
What would you like him to see it as? Its not your home is it, its merely a property you are holding to ransom, and he lives in there, with his possessions and his life, therefore its his home. Does the bank own more of the property than you? if so, its not even your house.
Just because he does not fit with you 'ideal' of what a person should be like , because everyone has their own story and reason why they become a certain way, and many often need support or help rather than being seen as an inconvenience. It should not give you the right to evict him.
Whats a 'low rent', do mean reasonable rent in line with housing benefit and not 'market rates'? Must be so hard for you to sleep at night knowing you accept such a pittance from a sitting tenant.
This is why many are thankful for these rental reforms, as if they do work, they will stop people like you potentially abusing people like him.