General Discussion
Planning
Just heard on news that the Gov is relaxing the planning laws. Developers will no longer be compelled to build a certain amount of affordable housing and homeowners will be able to extend 26ft without planning consent, or thats the way I understand it
From Inside Housing:
"Developers would also be able to refer schemes to the Planning Inspectorate if they feel section 106 agreements governing the number of affordable homes they should provide are making schemes unviable. The inspectorate will have the power to reduce the number of affordable homes that are required, or remove them altogether.
To compensate for the reduction in section 106 homes the government is putting £300 million into building more affordable housing."
It will be interesting to see how this pans out in Dawlish.
How many affordable rabbit hutches does 300million build And how much countryside goes under concrete, somebody ask the Irish about housing development.
Why should a developer be forced to include 'affordable housing' in a development.
If the development is to provide top quality housing then how does affordable housing fit?
No one wants to live next to a bunch of doleys.
Also, if they just built enough houses, prices would go back to normal and working people would be able to afford to buy houses again.
Quite right @burneside. @Paul's ignorance is quite staggering (though of course he might just be trolling)!!!
as a Social Tenant myself I take deep offence by Pauls remark, the vast majority WORK!!!!!!!!!!
@Paul why does affordable housing equate to doleys? are you trying to wind people up or are you really that ignorant?
I think you all miss my point. No one is going to spend £000s on a brand new home to live next to people who do not work and live of benefits - fact.
On the other points raised, if you are working then you should NOT be on benefits. We've discussed this before on here. Why should someone working full time at Tesco be subsidised by tax payers to pay their rent? If the government is willing to subsidise in this way then we will all end up on benefits except for the few rich CEOs and shareholders of these corporations.
The only way around this is for house prices to fall back to normal prices or for wages to increase. Sorry if I offend people, but I am just being realistic.
@Paul, you clearly have no understanding of what affordable housing is about, so please shut the door behind you!!!
@Paul: When you talk about house prices falling back to 'normal' you don't say what you mean by that. I wonder if you could let us know? I'm just curious because as everything seems up in the air (again!) at the moment with regard to planning legislation and housing policy I think it an appropriate time for all and every idea to be put in the pot. Which isn't to say that I would necessarily agree with what might be suggested but which, to continue with the pot analogy, might give some food for thought with regard to how to meet the housing needs of those who are not in a position to buy on the open market.
@Paul i dont think you have much idea of what you have to earn to qualify for help towards rent. someone working at tescos full time would have to have a large family to qualify for help but lets be fair they are working. a few years back my partner was off sick for 9months after an operation with ssp and my earnings it amounted to £180 per week we could get no help towards rent or council tax, in fact the benefits office told me to give up work as we would be better off!!!!!! i just cannot believe your bigoted assumptions on social tenants i hold down 3jobs and get up at 4.30am everyday( yes everyday) to clean up lazy peoples crap but hey ho its a job and the taxman gets his share from me, and even tho im nearly 65 i shall most probably be doing this until im in my box as theres no way i can afford to retire i have to keep the economics of this country running as ive been doing for the last 50yrs.
There are many people who rely on benefits for various reasons many through no fault of there own and if everybody looked at it like you do where would we be (I dread to think)
@Nelson, I thought 'affordable housing' was aimed at social tennents. If I am wrong then I stand corrected.
@Lynne, House prices are being propped up by 0.5% BOE interest rates, inflation and other government initiatives aimed at bailing out banks.
@Brazilnut, I still do not agree it is right that someone working should get benefits. I agree with benefits as a social safety net and last resort, but not as a lifestyle thing. If you can't afford a large family don't have one.
To me affordable is houses that young people on lower earnings that cannot afford a mortgage on a £250000 house. People who need affordable housing are not all doleys they are hard working people that cannot get on the property ladder with house prices as they are. just off to the pirates cabin to congratulate a hard working man on his achievment.
Affordable housing comes in a variety of options. When I was young this was how I got onto the housing ladder. Social housing is often lived in by people who do work and do not claim anything. If some people do claim a top up to help with rents its very often not because they they are 'doleys' (what a spiteful term) but because their occupation does not pay enough to be able to afford a house/private rent - these are very often the more hardworking people in our society who work long hard hours. Have you any idea how much you actually get on minimum wage working a 40 hour week - work it out, its not difficult. Not everyone has hoards of childen, some are on their own and struggle too.
Build £350,000 houses in Dawlish and see how many hard working local people can afford them. Or is that the point? Drive them out and get better quality locals. Once upon a time there were things like nurses houses round here and police houses - giving a cheaper option of houses to those people critical to our society but perhaps bankers, lawyers etc are far more needed.
@Paul - given that interest rates are so low at the moment i would have thought that would increase the numbers being able to afford to buy a property. so, if people cannot afford to get on the property ladder when interest rates are so low what options are left open to them?
For more info on possible other options take a look at this link. It should take you to a thread on this website that was running about a week or so ago.
https://www.dawlish.com/thread/details/22556
And I'm still not sure what you mean by 'normal' house prices.
These are the minimum wage rates wef October 2012
New rates from October
The new rates will come into force on 1 October 2012, as follows:
- £6.19 per hour for workers aged 21 and over - a rise of 11p
- £4.98 per hour for 18-20 year olds - no change
- £3.68 per hour for workers above school leaving age but under 18 - no change
- £2.65 per hour for apprentices - a rise of 5p
£6.19 per hour x 40 = £247.60 per week
£247.60 per week x 52 = £12,875 and 20p (let's not forget the 20p!) per annum
Don't know how mortgages are worked out these days but let's say it's 3x gross annual salary that would = £38, 625.60. And then let's say we are talking about a couple wishing to raise a mortgage who both work a 40 hour week and who are both on the minimum wage. That would be, say, £38,625.60p (3 x gross annual salary of one of them) plus 1x the gross annual salary of the other of £12,875.20p. this would give a mortgage figure of £51,500 (and 80p). Then of course they might need a deposit............
And their housing options are?
@Lynne, the BOE rate was set low to bail out the banks and over-stretched buy-to-let landlords and homeowners who racked up huge debts on residential properties before the financial collapse. Keeping rates low reduces the number of repossessions which would otherwise drive prices back down. People aren't buying, especially first timers, because prices are ridiculously high and no bank is going to lend someone £200k who earns £25k a year unless they have a very large deposit which most people do not.
When I say 'normal', I mean average house prices being 3.5 x average earnings which has been the trend for decades (except London). Eventually prices will resort back to this level whether people and governments like it or not and is already happening because RPI inflation now outweighs house price inflation, but it would happen quicker if it wasn't for government interference by low a BOE rate, £20bn pumped into housing benefit each year, crappy schemes to con low-paid people into paying extortionate prices for over-priced crappy housing, etc.
Some questions come to mind.
If the interest rates were higher, causing more people to default on their mortgages, where would all those people live who had lost their homes? For even if huge numbers of repossessions meant that property prices fell, those who had lost their homes would not be in a position to buy again would they? So where, and how, would they be re-housed?
When you use the expression "average earnings", by definition there will be those who earn less than the average. So, even if house prices were 3.5 of average earnings how would those earning less than the average, access housing?
And an observation
We have a Conservative led government. They are pro the private sector (developers and private sector landlords.) It is in this direction that they are looking in terms of housing policy. Indeed, as I understand it, amongst the announcements of the past few days is that instead of developers being asked to provide a proportion of affordable housing they will now be asked to provide a % of housing dedicated to be rented out at the full market rate (and that rate of course will vary around the country).
Politically, this government has a lot of votes tied up with owner occupiers. The government would commit political suicide if by its actions it alienated many of its supporters by taking action that would reduce the value of those Conservative voters' homes.
Cynical I know. But nonetheless true.
People that default have to find rental accommodation.
Of course people do not earn exactly the average earnings, that is why you have different types of properties to suit different earnings. If you are on a low income you buy a flat or terraced house, if you are on a higher income you buy a semi or detached house. The long term average house price had always been around 3.5 x average earnings, until the recent house price bubble. This is just a statistical fact.
There is a large and growing number of people now without any hope of buying a house. In fact I would have thought there are more non home-owner voters than home-owners.
so people are repossessed and in your words have to rent in the private sector, that rent is most probably higher than what their mortgage was that they couldnt afford, so where do they get the help towards their rent...................oh thats right benefits, so we come back to your original post regarding social housing tenants!!!!!!!!!! and affordable housing and why should people get help towards their rent subsidised by the tax payer, goes around in a circle Paul. I always think if a house is repossessed the mortgage company would be better off letting them stay and pay rent, the same way as when an ex local authority house comes on the open market they should buy it back to increase their stock not let an investor buy it like so often happens
jools read the posts slowly, the hyperthetical couple shall we say are working but with rising prices are finding it hard to meet the repayments so they get repossessed, private rents can be as high if not higher than their mortgage was so they need a top up benefit to help ie HB/LHA, get with it
In relation to Lynnes last post Maggie Thatcher brought in the right to buy to stop the strikes, she knew once people had a mortgage they couldnt afford to strike!!!!
@Brazilnut, families that have had their house repossessed have to move into smaller rented accommodation that they can afford or go share with relatives or move into a caravan.
Someone else then buys the property at a lower price hence contributing to lower house prices in general. This is how it used to work back when it would have been considered outrageous to use tax-payers money to bail out bankrupt people and banks. The problem we have in this country now is the automatic assumption that the tax-payer should bail people out all the time.
Affordable housing is sold or rented by a social landlord usually known as a housing association, this is where some people confuse affordable and social housing, they are the same thing.
Affordable to buy or rent, the system is run by non for profit social landlords, the housebuilders have to pass the properties once built to a SL.
I think younger people expect more these days, I started out in a tiny terraced needing work.
My son is looking at 3 bed semi's (I won't be helping him out).
As for average wage and tax payers money, You shouldn't get worked up about it, if you haven't earn't average wage all your life £27k then you actually take from the system it's only about 12% of people that actually pay more than they use.
5% of the population pay 95% of the tax.
Back just after the war landlords had to pay 70% tax that kind of thing will come around again.
Question Who would buy a house at the Barrett development in the warren
My wife and son are, they are in temporary accommodation, we have exchanged so we legally own it all now just waiting for the deeds to be re written as they are wrong slight delay as the person whom needs to approve the rewriting is deceased.
Never a dull moment.
Our static that will only take 2 weeks still isn't ready but our son loves school.
We have huge smiles and we sat on the lawn listening to music yesterday followed by scones from Gays.
What a life 
Why is your son looking at 3 bed semi's?
To answer your question, I'd buy a house at Sandpipers, as it's a cracking little development.
"5% of the population pay 95% of the tax" - what a load of rubbish.
The government gets around £150bn a year from income tax. So you are saying only 5% of this comes from 95% of the workforce?
So 95% of the 29.48 million employed people in the UK, i.e. 28 million, are paying £7.5bn a year in income tax between them or £268 each a year on average or £22 each a month? Oh, how I wish that were true.
http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn09.pdf - go to page 4 for a summary of taxes raised in the UK.
As for all the other taxes, NI contributions, VAT, Fuel duty, Council tax, etc. it is more likely 80% of all tax comes from 95% of the population, the rest from corporation tax, employers NI and the 5% high earners.
Paul I apologise I was merely thinking of income tax sorry.
Nelson Just to clarify this is my 19 year old not the younger one that still attends school.
Why 3 bed because generally they are nicer houses, with more parking and larger gardens.
Because he thinks he deserves more than we thought we should have when we were his age.
I've never had a credit card, he has 3 why ?? no idea.