Housing

[Ozyhibby]

One thing you can always count on the UK govt to do with housing is to try re-inflate the bubble rather than actually fix the problem. The crash when it eventually comes will be mighty. In the mean time, we’ll all keep paying more and more of our income on housing.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/jul/01/no-10-considers-50-year-mortgages-that-could-pass-down-generations

Now your going to inherit your parents debt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

That is a minefield and not sure if it can be done unless the children are of legal age and can consent to such a thing.

My kids were two and less than one when I bought my current house, and only two years older when I remortgaged to fund home improvements. Thankfully it’s now paid off but no way I could have passed that on to them.

[Stairway 2 7]

You'd guess they would have the option to cash in the mortgage or keep it going. It will never happen though, more bluster from the tories. There is going to be a bubble bursting in the next decade and the horrors that go with it

[Skol]

If you have life cover to go wit( it though then that should cover the mortgage. I know not everyone has life cover and I know some people might start with that but cancel it as a saving along the way. It is so thing that should be compulsory.

That said ,as each generation goes by the position gets harder. I recall old people at my work complaining when I was first getting property and essentially saying they felt for the youth of the day and how would they afford property.

Looking back though, I did struggle but it was worth it but nowhere near as tough as it is for my own children today. You essentially need two people, good stable income and sav8ngs behind you.

I bought my first flat with 100% mortgage on my own and with not a single penny of savings.

[Keith_M]

This is utterly crazy.

People now have two options: take out ridiculously large mortgages or pay ridiculously over-priced rents.

The actual issue is the spiralling house prices and yet that seems to be welcomed by so many people, which confuses the hell out of me.

:confused:

[Ozyhibby]

This is utterly crazy.

People now have two options: take out ridiculously large mortgages or pay ridiculously over-priced rents.

The actual issue is the spiralling house prices and yet that seems to be welcomed by so many people, which confuses the hell out of me.

:confused:

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs Class]

Sounds like yet another gimmick, just like benefits for bricks a few weeks ago. Produce a soundbite and announce before even discussing with lenders, housing associations, etc.

[Smartie]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We seem to be hell bent on doing just about anything other than the one thing that would work.

[McSwanky]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkCouldn't agree more.

[Hibrandenburg]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But that would mean favouring the have nots over the already haves. Never going to happen under this government.

[Stairway 2 7]

My initial instinct is to think it will be nonsense as it's the telegraph. But I noticed an article yesterday on twitter, the amount of excess houses had risen alot in the last few decades they say

http://archive.today/Pxgd5

[Hibs4185]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try building new houses and you’ll see why the supply is so slow

[degenerated]

Try building new houses and you’ll see why the supply is so slowThe increase in material costs are in excess of anything I have seen in nearly 30 years of working in procurement in the industry. Where once you would see annual increase of 5 or 6% on things, most rarely stuck. Now I've seen bricks going up in double digit increases about 4 times in the last year. Timber is around double the price it was a year or so back, Insulation has just gone up again from yesterday at around 40%, plasterboard has gone up around 25% in past couple of months alone. Every category is being similarly affected and lead times are stretched to ridiculous lengths.

That will have an impact on affordability of new builds.

[Eaststand]

The increase in material costs are in excess of anything I have seen in nearly 30 years of working in procurement in the industry. Where once you would see annual increase of 5 or 6% on things, most rarely stuck. Now I've seen bricks going up in double digit increases about 4 times in the last year. Timber is around double the price it was a year or so back, Insulation has just gone up again from yesterday at around 40%, plasterboard has gone up around 25% in past couple of months alone. Every category is being similarly affected and lead times are stretched to ridiculous lengths.

That will have an impact on affordability of new builds.

Something I've always wondered.
I live fairly near to the Strand housing development just off Fishwives Causeway and I'm amazed at how many houses they're managing to build on that site.

What roughly is the profit margin for housebuilders like Persimmon, Wimpey etc for newly built houses.

Without giving away any detailed sensitive info would you be in a position to give a ballpark about the total costs for buying the land, building the houses, then the final finishing touches like plastering, painting etc against the selling price.

GGTTH

[degenerated]

Something I've always wondered.
I live fairly near to the Strand housing development just off Fishwives Causeway and I'm amazed at how many houses they're managing to build on that site.

What roughly is the profit margin for housebuilders like Persimmon, Wimpey etc for newly built houses.

Without giving away any detailed sensitive info would you be in a position to give a ballpark about the total costs for buying the land, building the jouses, then the final finishing touches like plastering, painting etc against the selling price.

GGTTHTo be honest I wouldn't know, I'm in construction rather than housebuilding. Companies I've worked for have had big name housebuilding divisions but never really been party to that info. They generally tend to be incredibly profitable in comparison to the construction side of business as that's large vale/fairly low margin.

The model was always that construction delivered turnover and cash flow which funded housing, particularly land acquisitions, and the housing delivered the large profits and dividends for shareholders.

[Eaststand]

Ta for the reply.

As you'll know well, there's a lot of new builds going up in Edinburgh and the outskirts, and I've always been a bit curious about the big housebuilders costs v profits.

GGTTH

[Ozyhibby]

To be honest I wouldn't know, I'm in construction rather than housebuilding. Companies I've worked for have had big name housebuilding divisions but never really been party to that info. They generally tend to be incredibly profitable in comparison to the construction side of business as that's large vale/fairly low margin.

The model was always that construction delivered turnover and cash flow which funded housing, particularly land acquisitions, and the housing delivered the large profits and dividends for shareholders.

The big 6 house builder control the uk house building market. They deliberately slow the release of properties to maximise their profits. Small volume builders are a thing of the past.
The planning system does the rest. There is about £150k of planning costs in each new home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Ta for the reply.

As you'll know well, there's a lot of new builds going up in Edinburgh and the outskirts, and I've always been a bit curious about the big housebuilders costs v profits.

GGTTH

Scottish govt are trying to speed up housebuilding. Not enough for me but they are trying. I think we are building at a quicker rate than England are managing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

The big 6 house builder control the uk house building market. They deliberately slow the release of properties to maximise their profits. Small volume builders are a thing of the past.
The planning system does the rest. There is about £150k of planning costs in each new home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No idea where you are getting £150k.

https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/planning-permission-cost/

[lapsedhibee]

No idea where you are getting £150k.

https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/planning-permission-cost/

Contributions to local infrastructure? :dunno:

[Colr]

One thing you can always count on the UK govt to do with housing is to try re-inflate the bubble rather than actually fix the problem. The crash when it eventually comes will be mighty. In the mean time, we’ll all keep paying more and more of our income on housing.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/jul/01/no-10-considers-50-year-mortgages-that-could-pass-down-generations

Now your going to inherit your parents debt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I work in housing and regen and this country hasn’t had a housing policy worthy of the name in 20 years.

Judging from the succession of nobodies Labour have been putting in a shadows, they don’t seem to think its worthy of their attention either. Despite having an expert in John Healey amongst their ranks!

[Paul1642]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everywhere you look in East Lothian there are recently built estates and new ones being built, increasing the population of some of the smaller towns by a huge %. Not sure if it’s quite the same elsewhere but surely an equally large problem is the Number of second homes, holiday homes, air b&b’s ext.

[Just_Jimmy]

Everywhere you look in East Lothian there are recently built estates and new ones being built, increasing the population of some of the smaller towns by a huge %. Not sure if it’s quite the same elsewhere but surely an equally large problem is the Number of second homes, holiday homes, air b&b’s ext.Yes, and it means people living further and further out to work in the cities. Any city...

It means travelling longer and commuting longer. It means the towns don't have the infrastructure and road networks to support. Do the schools have places or the local GP? Can you get an NHS dentist?

The housing crisis in the country causes so many more problems than just putting a roof over someone's head at an affordable price.

I would love to see a proper study of the hidden issues

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Scottish govt are trying to speed up housebuilding. Not enough for me but they are trying. I think we are building at a quicker rate than England are managing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

UK target is 300k a year. We do well if we deliver half that. Meanwhile the French build 400,000 a year.

Politicians are afraid of the old Nimbies impact on their vote. I’m afraid the young need to get organised and active - and maybe turn out to vote

[Andy Bee]

No idea where you are getting £150k.

https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/planning-permission-cost/


Not sure where Ozzy is getting the £150k but I'm guessing the additional infrastructure big house builders have to implement or it's the estimated price to build each house.

As you'll know there's more to it than just the council planning costs, you've got architects and structural engineers if you can get one as they're cherry picking jobs at the moment because of the volume of work available. I just paid over £6k for all the warrants and permissions needed for an existing dormer extension and bifold doors, I was initially quoted £3k. The original quote (before lockdown) for the structural engineer alone ended up triple the cost and don't get me started on the price of Kingspan.

[SChibs]

I wonder what would happen to the housing market in Edinburgh if we banned Airbnb. Its ridiculous how many there are in the city and its definitely contributing to the shortage in Edinburgh

[Just Alf]

I wonder what would happen to the housing market in Edinburgh if we banned Airbnb. Its ridiculous how many there are in the city and its definitely contributing to the shortage in EdinburghThis 100%..... its a disgrace and needs regulation.
The owners also seem to think its OK to stick up lock boxes everywhere, more often than not on communally owned door entrances etc where they don't actually have legal right without permission from the other owners.

[Ozyhibby]

Not sure where Ozzy is getting the £150k but I'm guessing the additional infrastructure big house builders have to implement or it's the estimated price to build each house.

As you'll know there's more to it than just the council planning costs, you've got architects and structural engineers if you can get one as they're cherry picking jobs at the moment because of the volume of work available. I just paid over £6k for all the warrants and permissions needed for an existing dormer extension and bifold doors, I was initially quoted £3k. The original quote (before lockdown) for the structural engineer alone ended up triple the cost and don't get me started on the price of Kingspan.

That’s about the difference in value of an empty field the size of an average plot between not having and then getting planning permission.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

UK target is 300k a year. We do well if we deliver half that. Meanwhile the French build 400,000 a year.

Politicians are afraid of the old Nimbies impact on their vote. I’m afraid the young need to get organised and active - and maybe turn out to vote

France has more than double the land mass of the Uk. It’s a bit easier for them without trashing there green spaces and removing agricultural land meaning even more reliance on imports.

[Keith_M]

The only solution is to build more houses. Everything else just feeds demand. It’s supply that needs to increase.


I realise it's complete sacrilege but...

we need tens of thousands of decent quality Council Houses, for the many decent people that struggle to pay ever increasing mortgages or ridiculously high rents for sub-standard housing.

[Colr]

I wonder what would happen to the housing market in Edinburgh if we banned Airbnb. Its ridiculous how many there are in the city and its definitely contributing to the shortage in Edinburgh

Let property should definitely be a separate use class.

[Colr]

France has more than double the land mass of the Uk. It’s a bit easier for them without trashing there green spaces and removing agricultural land meaning even more reliance on imports.

I don’t think you can argue that we’ve run out of space to build!

[Colr]

The increase in material costs are in excess of anything I have seen in nearly 30 years of working in procurement in the industry. Where once you would see annual increase of 5 or 6% on things, most rarely stuck. Now I've seen bricks going up in double digit increases about 4 times in the last year. Timber is around double the price it was a year or so back, Insulation has just gone up again from yesterday at around 40%, plasterboard has gone up around 25% in past couple of months alone. Every category is being similarly affected and lead times are stretched to ridiculous lengths.

That will have an impact on affordability of new builds.

Same here. We’ve seen about 8% overall this year. We’re expecting it to top out at 10-12% and stay there. It’s potentially stagflation terratory

[Ozyhibby]

I don’t think you can argue that we’ve run out of space to build!

Yip. Scotland is the least densely populated country in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

I don’t think you can argue that we’ve run out of space to build!

No but I would argue that the central belt is loosing its green space at an alarming belt, and because of where the jobs are no one wants to live where we have an abundance of space.

[Ozyhibby]

No but I would argue that the central belt is loosing its green space at an alarming belt, and because of where the jobs are no one wants to live where we have an abundance of space.

Jobs will follow infrastructure. Government can change where they want to invest. That’s why all the best paid jobs are in the south of England. That’s where all the infrastructure investment happens.
If the govt wanted to double the size of Inverness by improving its connectivity, investing in its attractiveness to business it could do that easily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MKHIBEE]

Try building new houses and you’ll see why the supply is so slow

I agreed to buy an already started property in February 2021. I had a buyer for my house 1 day after putting it on the market. I move in on August 2nd. Slow doesn’t begin to describe the process

[hibeesjoe]

Went to look at a small 3 bed newbuild a few months back. It had went up £30k compared to the same house built less than a year ago in the same development. The mortgage would have been close to £1300 a month till the day I retired.

Just feel like I've missed the boat now with it all. My mate always jokes about spam valley, folk with the houses and cars for show but can't afford to go to the pub or do anything else. I take it rising interest rates could potentially cause a crash in years to come?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm one that got on the property ladder at the end of the 1970s. Interest rates in double figures, and your mortgage was linked to your salary. 2.5x man's salary + the wives salary. Didn't matter my wife earned more.

How is it possible for people nowadays?

[Stairway 2 7]

I'm one that got on the property ladder at the end of the 1970s. Interest rates in double figures, and your mortgage was linked to your salary. 2.5x man's salary + the wives salary. Didn't matter my wife earned more.

How is it possible for people nowadays?

Fek knows. This wage to house price graph is frightening.
25993

[Ozyhibby]

Fek knows. This wage to house price graph is frightening.
25993

It’s a giant bubble. It will burst eventually. Not sure when though. Govt will try prop it up for a good while yet. Could get like Japan in the 90’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I realise it's complete sacrilege but...

we need tens of thousands of decent quality Council Houses, for the many decent people that struggle to pay ever increasing mortgages or ridiculously high rents for sub-standard housing.

:agree: It must be a nightmare for young couples looking to set up their first home. The lack of available decent housing pushes up not only house prices but also rent on the most modest of accommodation and thus putting it out of reach for many. Waiting on a council house is like waiting on dead man's boots. Our generation had it easy, we inherited many houses that were previously company supplied in mining and industrial communities where the industries had gone to the wall, of course that brought other problems with it but affordable housing availability wasn't one of them.

In Berlin there are similar problems and there was recently a referendum asking if the authorities should have the right to look at using compulsory government acquisition of property from multiple property owners to free up accommodation for those who need it.

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm one that got on the property ladder at the end of the 1970s. Interest rates in double figures, and your mortgage was linked to your salary. 2.5x man's salary + the wives salary. Didn't matter my wife earned more.

How is it possible for people nowadays?

It is almost impossible. I bought my first house late (7 years ago) but was fortunate enough to be able to buy without borrowing. Getting on the property ladder for young couples means committing to mortgages that mean they have little or no expendable income, how can a society strive when the population has little or no money available for anything other than essentials? If people can't afford things then recession is not far behind.

[Colr]

Went to look at a small 3 bed newbuild a few months back. It had went up £30k compared to the same house built less than a year ago in the same development. The mortgage would have been close to £1300 a month till the day I retired.

Just feel like I've missed the boat now with it all. My mate always jokes about spam valley, folk with the houses and cars for show but can't afford to go to the pub or do anything else. I take it rising interest rates could potentially cause a crash in years to come?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk


Best value is to build your own. - if you can find a plot!

[Colr]

I'm one that got on the property ladder at the end of the 1970s. Interest rates in double figures, and your mortgage was linked to your salary. 2.5x man's salary + the wives salary. Didn't matter my wife earned more.

How is it possible for people nowadays?

I was a bit later but I bought my first flat in a nice bit of Glasgow with a 110% mortgage. Didn’t have a deposit!

[Allant1981]

The wife and i were lucky starting out, we used the help to buy scheme, this was 9 years ago, so only had to put down 5%, was still hard saving but cut back on loads and managed, hard when you have kids also but we wanted away from paying huge ampunts on rent, was a pain when you go to sell as you obviously give loads back but was totally worth it, selling then gave us the deposit for our current house. If these deals come up again id recommend them to first time buyers

[Paulie Walnuts]

The wife and i were lucky starting out, we used the help to buy scheme, this was 9 years ago, so only had to put down 5%, was still hard saving but cut back on loads and managed, hard when you have kids also but we wanted away from paying huge ampunts on rent, was a pain when you go to sell as you obviously give loads back but was totally worth it, selling then gave us the deposit for our current house. If these deals come up again id recommend them to first time buyers

To be fair, although you give loads back you still get back proportionality what you put in, don’t you?

Help to buy is (was?) a great scheme from what I’ve read about it.

[Allant1981]

To be fair, although you give loads back you still get back proportionality what you put in, don’t you?

Help to buy is (was?) a great scheme from what I’ve read about it.

Yeah we ended up scoring out of it, we had a lot of interest in our house so sold for more than the asking price, as i say help to buy was amazing for us, we had one kid at the time and paying more than double in rent than what our mortgage ended up being. We are also fortunate that we could save, not everyone has that luxury unfortunately

[Andy Bee]

Yip. Scotland is the least densely populated country in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The trouble is, in at least my area, farmers are selling off fields in 1 acre sometimes 2 acre plots with outlining planning for 1 house on each. Fields which could see 60/70 maybe 80 social homes are being sold for 10 - 12 huge self builds.

An example here https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/61833699/?search_identifier=c1f3c98ebe6467df05b3a76f9aff44a a I think there's around 8 of those things built in 1 field and they're cropping up all over the place.

[Colr]

It’s a giant bubble. It will burst eventually. Not sure when though. Govt will try prop it up for a good while yet. Could get like Japan in the 90’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We keep saying that. It’s worst in London and that hasn’t burst. It’s largely been driven by cheap money (including buy-to-let mortgages) but the prices are baked in now. In 2008, London prices didn’t much shift, just the supply of homes reduced (to 1/3).

The competitive land market also leads to prices getting pushed up.

I’d like to see supply increased through small new towns and villages (I’m not a huge fan of Prince Charles but his Poundbury scheme is not a bad model compared to the 60s versions and would, I think, be resisted less. Maybe the land should be nationalised so the costs can be kept down and more affordable homes provided.

[Colr]

The trouble is, in at least my area, farmers are selling off fields in 1 acre sometimes 2 acre plots with outlining planning for 1 house on each. Fields which could see 60/70 maybe 80 social homes are being sold for 10 - 12 huge self builds.

An example here https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/61833699/?search_identifier=c1f3c98ebe6467df05b3a76f9aff44a a I think there's around 8 of those things built in 1 field and they're cropping up all over the place.

£715k is presumably for the house not just the plot, yes?

[Andy Bee]

£715k is presumably for the house not just the plot, yes?

Yup, IIRC the plots started at £150k a few years ago then rose to £250k and then fell back to £175k.

[Since90+2]

Yip. Scotland is the least densely populated country in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wrong.

[Colr]

Yup, IIRC the plots started at £150k a few years ago then rose to £250k and then fell back to £175k.

I’d like to buy a plot but not to build that unimaginative guff on it.

[Allant1981]

Yup, IIRC the plots started at £150k a few years ago then rose to £250k and then fell back to £175k.

To be fair, for that size of house with that amount of land thats actually not a bad price

[Ozyhibby]

The trouble is, in at least my area, farmers are selling off fields in 1 acre sometimes 2 acre plots with outlining planning for 1 house on each. Fields which could see 60/70 maybe 80 social homes are being sold for 10 - 12 huge self builds.

An example here https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/61833699/?search_identifier=c1f3c98ebe6467df05b3a76f9aff44a a I think there's around 8 of those things built in 1 field and they're cropping up all over the place.

We have pretty small houses in this country compared to our neighbours. I don’t think that’s the problem.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220703/79fe92dfda95f88f1f417c0181f6fd16.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

We have pretty small houses in this country compared to our neighbours. I don’t think that’s the problem.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220703/79fe92dfda95f88f1f417c0181f6fd16.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Not saying it's the problem but it certainly aint helping. It'd be interesting to see those figures based on say the last 20 years of building, I'd guess we'd be up that list a bit. Post war council houses and old mining houses etc will be dragging that down a bit.

[Andy Bee]

I’d like to buy a plot but not to build that unimaginative guff on it.

I agree, the very first field sold out here around 25 - 30 years ago, it was actually on the news because the seller had gotten round planning by stating they were to be crofts. Every house was built with a shed to keep bantoms. Those plots were IIRC £35k for 1 acre and buyers were left to their own devices on the design, there's some serious monstrosities up there.

[Killiehibbie]

I agree, the very first field sold out here around 25 - 30 years ago, it was actually on the news because the seller had gotten round planning by stating they were to be crofts. Every house was built with a shed to keep bantoms. Those plots were IIRC £35k for 1 acre and buyers were left to their own devices on the design, there's some serious monstrosities up there.

I know a farmer who got permission to change to commercial use as a stepping stone to residential use. He built a big metal barn for use as an equestrian centre and now has 200+ houses in his old fields.

[Ozyhibby]

Not saying it's the problem but it certainly aint helping. It'd be interesting to see those figures based on say the last 20 years of building, I'd guess we'd be up that list a bit. Post war council houses and old mining houses etc will be dragging that down a bit.

I actually think it’s getting worse. Our new builds are smaller than everywhere else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SChibs]

Yip. Scotland is the least densely populated country in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We're actually the 14th least densely populated but so much of our land isnt suitable for building on. Such as mountains, protected forests, bogs etc

[Paul1642]

This is along the lines of what’s needed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62034658

24k homes in wales that could be on the market to those looking to buy, not to mention the impact on smaller communities that having a ton of regularly empty houses has.

That 24k won’t include those who have used loopholes to avoid second home tax such as using a spouse or a company to buy the property.

[The_Exile]

UK target is 300k a year. We do well if we deliver half that. Meanwhile the French build 400,000 a year.

Politicians are afraid of the old Nimbies impact on their vote. I’m afraid the young need to get organised and active - and maybe turn out to vote

Agree 100%, this is the ONLY thing that will solve it. There are a huge number of young voters now that outnumber the traditional Tory voters but the youth vote is simple non-existent. I’m not sure how to get them engaged really, I think I was fairly politically apathetic in my teens and early twenties, it wasn’t until I started realising the system wasn’t serving me well that I got pissed off enough to start voting. I would make it mandatory to vote and heavy fines if you refused.

In relation to housing, I missed out on a house in my early 20s, another person outbid me by less than 1k. A few months later the market exploded and buying a house became a distant pipe dream. The banks would say I couldn’t afford a 400 quid mortgage so I would have to go spend 500 on rent. It feels deliberate and targeted to this day, not that I would ever expect a favour from a bank. Although I did, along with everyone else, bail them all out not long afterwards to the tune of many billions.

[LewysGot2]

We're actually the 14th least densely populated but so much of our land isnt suitable for building on. Such as mountains, protected forests, bogs etc

and you need jobs in the area to allow people to live in the least densely populated places…

pretty sure Easter Road/Leith Walk is the most densely populated area in Scotland now. Lots of student accommodation, young transient workforce compared to days gone by.

[lapsedhibee]

UK target is 300k a year.

Stalinists :grr::panic:

[Colr]

https://twitter.com/alecstapp/status/1549041512839008256?s=10&t=KUEDPPIbxjzLpBB1djbQjw

[Stairway 2 7]

https://twitter.com/alecstapp/status/1549041512839008256?s=10&t=KUEDPPIbxjzLpBB1djbQjw

Thing with Japan is people can't complain about housing next to them, nimbys are a big problem in the uk. Has its downsides as green land gets blootered. But on the other hand it allows massive amount of house building so no crisis. We need new planning laws in the uk to allow massive house building, but no one wants it next to them.

[Stairway 2 7]

Developers and environmentalists clash

https://www.ft.com/content/fc0d2e76-cb90-47bc-b792-03287a366e76

[Colr]

Thing with Japan is people can't complain about housing next to them, nimbys are a big problem in the uk. Has its downsides as green land gets blootered. But on the other hand it allows massive amount of house building so no crisis. We need new planning laws in the uk to allow massive house building, but no one wants it next to them.

One thing that might distort Japanese figures is that they rebuild every 40 or so years.

[Ozyhibby]

Feels like Edinburgh is managing to get a lot more houses built over the last few years? Hopefully that’s the case all over the central belt.[emoji1696]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Feels like Edinburgh is managing to get a lot more houses built over the last few years? Hopefully that’s the case all over the central belt.[emoji1696]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We'll need them with the population expected to reach 1 million. Only thing I hope they keep on top of is the parks, schools, doctors ect. Some of these massive development look like they have token amenities and you'd need a car

[LewysGot2]

We'll need them with the population expected to reach 1 million. Only thing I hope they keep on top of is the parks, schools, doctors ect. Some of these massive development look like they have token amenities and you'd need a car

If the population is a million then the roads will be permanently like car parks

[Ozyhibby]

If the population is a million then the roads will be permanently like car parks

Which is why most advanced cities are trying to phase out car use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LewysGot2]

Which is why most advanced cities are trying to phase out car use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately for Edinburgh we don't have any underground capacity and everything will rely on buses meeting demand. The tram is a line, not a network. We are going to face some real challenges other major cities can manage differently

[Ozyhibby]

Unfortunately for Edinburgh we don't have any underground capacity and everything will rely on buses meeting demand. The tram is a line, not a network. We are going to face some real challenges other major cities can manage differently

We are not a major city yet. There is plenty we can do. Without cars our bus network would be a lot more efficient. And I’m sure tram building will be constant from now on. It will be a network eventually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LewysGot2]

We are not a major city yet. There is plenty we can do. Without cars our bus network would be a lot more efficient. And I’m sure tram building will be constant from now on. It will be a network eventually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The topography of Edinburgh brings challenges that mean a tram network is not going to be easy. Always wondered what has prevented us reviving the inner city rail network for an integrated transport system. My old boy went to work by train every day when he started work. All the stations from Morningside to Abbeyhill and Leith Walk to Blackford...and everything in between.

[Stairway 2 7]

People should be encouraged to walk and cycle more, especially if they live in town. It's less than an hour across town

[Colr]

People should be encouraged to walk and cycle more, especially if they live in town. It's less than an hour across town

Electric bikes are a game changer in this regard. You no longer need to be really fit to start commuting by bike. It just needs the council to ensure safe cycle routes.

[Ozyhibby]

Electric bikes are a game changer in this regard. You no longer need to be really fit to start commuting by bike. It just needs the council to ensure safe cycle routes.

I was thinking that the other day when one went flying by me. Drug dealers seem to be early adopters with this tech.[emoji6][emoji23] Seriously though, the potential is huge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

I was thinking that the other day when one went flying by me. Drug dealers seem to be early adopters with this tech.[emoji6][emoji23] Seriously though, the potential is huge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brompton’s come in an electric version and are easy to store but its cheaper to buy a normal one and fit a conversion kit.

[Moulin Yarns]

Brompton’s come in an electric version and are easy to store but its cheaper to buy a normal one and fit a conversion kit.

I did that to my ridgeback hybrid bike, very simple to do with the kit I got. Front wheel is easiest to convert but the most efficient is the mid-drive.

[Stairway 2 7]

How much does it cost to convert a bike if yous don't mind me asking

[Moulin Yarns]

How much does it cost to convert a bike if yous don't mind me asking

Depends on the battery you want, I went for a large one to give me a decent range. Been from pitlochry to dunkeld and back on a circular route including some rough tracks. Approximately 35 miles on and off road. Still had a bit of charge when I got home. My kit was £450 from cyclotricity but there are some starting at £250

[Stairway 2 7]

Depends on the battery you want, I went for a large one to give me a decent range. Been from pitlochry to dunkeld and back on a circular route including some rough tracks. Approximately 35 miles on and off road. Still had a bit of charge when I got home. My kit was £450 from cyclotricity but there are some starting at £250

That's brill thanks

[Moulin Yarns]

That's brill thanks

Be aware of the extra weight of the battery.

[Ozyhibby]

Obviously these bikes a pricey so we need to build infrastructure so people can secure them safely while at work or shopping etc while in town.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Obviously these bikes a pricey so we need to build infrastructure so people can secure them safely while at work or shopping etc while in town.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You get folk with angle grinders nicking bikes off stands in London. This has led to a number of shop-unit bike storage facilities taking up vacant retail units.

[Ozyhibby]

You get folk with angle grinders nicking bikes off stands in London. This has led to a number of shop-unit bike storage facilities taking up vacant retail units.

Yip. Office block should all have secure storage inside as well. Cheaper than a giant car park anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

I cycle to work as often as I can however a few factors make it difficult it times, mostly the weather, the end time of some of my shifts, and the horrendous state of some of our roads.

Little potholes and patches of poor surface that are hardly noticeable in a car can be horrendous on a road bike and a near guaranteed puncture if you hit one at speed. Massive investment in cycle lanes is needed if we want folk to ditch cars.

[Ozyhibby]

Yip. Office block should all have secure storage inside as well. Cheaper than a giant car park anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/more-than-a-third-of-people-have-no-safe-place-to-store-bike-as-edinburgh-highlighted-as-problem-spot-3779939?fbclid=IwAR3fEAmQbovdg2gFwHBhf5C2HPpkinuHb CngezJGrryf-4gfhdfOzJuuSi8&fs=e&s=cl


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KWJ]

Wondering if there's anybody looking to buy/sell around now or soon and what they are doing about it?

I'm a First Time Buyer who decided I'd start saving for a house in January 2020, I've now got 3 times my original target but still can't afford what I'm after due to the increases. Many are now predicting a crash but that'd need to outweigh the rise in mortgage rates to be helpful for buyers.

Apparently it could still take a long time to hit the market and over a year to reach the bottom before recovering, even 2-3 years.

New builds are going up all over the place but you're doing well to find anything under £200,000. There were 30sqm studio homes by leith links that was still about £150k. Put your keys on the table and the place is a mess.

[Mon Dieu4]

Wondering if there's anybody looking to buy/sell around now or soon and what they are doing about it?

I'm a First Time Buyer who decided I'd start saving for a house in January 2020, I've now got 3 times my original target but still can't afford what I'm after due to the increases. Many are now predicting a crash but that'd need to outweigh the rise in mortgage rates to be helpful for buyers.

Apparently it could still take a long time to hit the market and over a year to reach the bottom before recovering, even 2-3 years.

New builds are going up all over the place but you're doing well to find anything under £200,000. There were 30sqm studio homes by leith links that was still about £150k. Put your keys on the table and the place is a mess.

Even if there is a crash Edinburgh and London are two places that never really seem to be effected by them, the boy upstairs from me is selling his house just now and has had 5 offers well over the asking price and is playing them all off against each other just now, his house will likely go for £60k over what I paid for mine 4 years ago

[Since90+2]

Even if there is a crash Edinburgh and London are two places that never really seem to be effected by them, the boy upstairs from me is selling his house just now and has had 5 offers well over the asking price and is playing them all off against each other just now, his house will likely go for £60k over what I paid for mine 4 years ago

Edinburgh was very much effected in the 2008 crash. Prices of homes were dropping by 10/15% all over the city.

I don't think we will see anything like that this time, but will will plateau and potential drop a percentage or 2. If people are waiting on a huge crash in the Edinburgh market this time, I just don't see it happening.

I recently bought a home 2 miles from the City Centre and got it for £7,000 below home report value. Anyone paying massively over HR at this time may get a shock if they are planning to move in the next few years.

[KWJ]

Edinburgh was very much effected in the 2008 crash. Prices of homes were dropping by 10/15% all over the city.

I don't think we will see anything like that this time, but will will plateau and potential drop a percentage or 2. If people are waiting on a huge crash in the Edinburgh market this time, I just don't see it happening.

I recently bought a home 2 miles from the City Centre and got it for £7,000 below home report value. Anyone paying massively over HR at this time may get a shock if they are planning to move in the next few years.

Was that still above asking price? I notice most homes seem that I've viewed seem to be advertised 5 to 10k under the home report.

And congrats on the new home :thumbsup:

[Since90+2]

Was that still above asking price? I notice most homes seem that I've viewed seem to be advertised 5 to 10k under the home report.

And congrats on the new home :thumbsup:

Almost every single home will be advertised at under the home report. Only ones who won't be will be ones that need an immediate sale or have been up for a long time, a lot of time they will shift onto a fixed price. I've bought a home for below fixed price previously, so dont be shy in putting in a cheeky bid.

[Ozyhibby]

https://news.stv.tv/scotland/emergency-rent-freeze-and-eviction-ban-becomes-law-in-scotland?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1666951914-1

Becomes law today. Medium to long term, this policy will fail and result in less houses being built. Short term, I have sympathy. If they leave it at 6 months (they won’t) then it will be a good thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Almost every single home will be advertised at under the home report. Only ones who won't be will be ones that need an immediate sale or have been up for a long time, a lot of time they will shift onto a fixed price. I've bought a home for below fixed price previously, so dont be shy in putting in a cheeky bid.Funnily enough I was looking in an estate agents window today and was struck by the number of fixed price deals. I suspect a mix of the time of the year and buyers nervousness about interest rate rises. Now if we only adopted long term fixed then there would be more stability.

[speedy_gonzales]

Funnily enough I was looking in an estate agents window today and was struck by the number of fixed price deals. I suspect a mix of the time of the year and buyers nervousness about interest rate rises. Now if we only adopted long term fixed then there would be more stability.

I also noticed that (fixed prices) myself over the last two weeks. Properties coming on to the market at FP was virtually unheard of in recent times. I wonder if the vendor had already sold, then bought another property only for the original sale to fall through with the tightening and limited availability of mortgages post the "mini budget".

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/nov/15/death-of-two-year-old-awaab-ishak-chronic-mould-in-flat-a-defining-moment-says-coroner?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1668514423

While it’s fun to have a pop at private landlords, it’s usually housing associations where the worst housing is found.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peanut Shaz]

While it’s fun to have a pop at private landlords, it’s usually housing associations where the worst housing is found.

I would agree to a point but there are some good ones. I work for one in Edinburgh and can state with absolute confidence that we are one of the best.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

[archie]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/nov/15/death-of-two-year-old-awaab-ishak-chronic-mould-in-flat-a-defining-moment-says-coroner?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1668514423

While it’s fun to have a pop at private landlords, it’s usually housing associations where the worst housing is found.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThat's a really big assertion. Housing associations have been at the forefront of inner city renewal for a number of years. They operate within a regulatory system that private landlords just don't face.

[Stairway 2 7]

What happens when you sell of social housing. Tax payers money straight into the pockets of the rich

https://mobile.twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1592164903544315905
@georgeeaton
High private rents mean the UK now spends more on housing benefit each year than on most government departments – today's
@NewStatesman
Chart of the Day. https://newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-d

[Just Alf]

That's a really big assertion. Housing associations have been at the forefront of inner city renewal for a number of years. They operate within a regulatory system that private landlords just don't face.Just wondering on what level?

I agree re the urban renewal bit, but private landlords as a rule don't work in that area most are letting existing properties and in that area Housing Associations have worked to less stringent legislation for years, it's only recently they've been asked to improve their smoke alarm provision to match what private landlords have had to provide for some time as an example.

[archie]

Just wondering on what level?

I agree re the urban renewal bit, but private landlords as a rule don't work in that area most are letting existing properties and in that area Housing Associations have worked to less stringent legislation for years, it's only recently they've been asked to improve their smoke alarm provision to match what private landlords have had to provide for some time as an example.Social landlords - Housing Associations and Councils are heaviny regulated compared to private landlords. You can get a flavour of that here: https://www.housingregulator.gov.scot/

[Just Alf]

Social landlords - Housing Associations and Councils are heaviny regulated compared to private landlords. You can get a flavour of that here: https://www.housingregulator.gov.scot/My company manages on behalf of both private and social landlords.

From a Tenant perspective the legislation is more onerous on the private side however the Scottish government is working to bring the social sector in line with the private.

I do get that the corporate governance side is more complicated on the social sector tho.

Apologies if you're talking about England, they do have a way to go, we're trying to operate those properties we have to the higher standards we have here, if so I'd agree with you on every level.

[Peanut Shaz]

Social landlords - Housing Associations and Councils are heaviny regulated compared to private landlords. You can get a flavour of that here: https://www.housingregulator.gov.scot/

I'll second that as everything we do as a social housing landlord is always based on what the Regulator expects.

[Betty Boop]

While it’s fun to have a pop at private landlords, it’s usually housing associations where the worst housing is found.

I would agree to a point but there are some good ones. I work for one in Edinburgh and can state with absolute confidence that we are one of the best.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

You obviously don't work for the Port of Leith then ?

[Peanut Shaz]

You obviously don't work for the Port of Leith then ?[/QUOTE]

Nope.

[Ozyhibby]

Tonight’s panorama is worth a watch for anyone interested in this subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

Tonight’s panorama is worth a watch for anyone interested in this subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eventually got this episode on the iplayer. It's criminal what greedy landlord's get away with.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65090846?at_link_type=web_link&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_link_id=D2CC79C6-CDFE-11ED-822D-469AFF7C7F44&at_medium=social&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_format=link&at_campaign_type=owned&at_bbc_team=editorial

Badly need to build more housing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Eventually got this episode on the iplayer. It's criminal what greedy landlord's get away with.

That whole episode shows a massive failure of governance. It should be criminal to rent out property with mould at that level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65090846?at_link_type=web_link&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_link_id=D2CC79C6-CDFE-11ED-822D-469AFF7C7F44&at_medium=social&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_format=link&at_campaign_type=owned&at_bbc_team=editorial

Badly need to build more housing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Plenty of new house building along the east Lothian coast to north Berwick. Just the wrong kind, big houses for commuters, not the 1 and 2 bedroom houses that are needed for rent.

[greenginger]

Yeah
That whole episode shows a massive failure of governance. It should be criminal to rent out property with mould at that level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Any landlord that makes deliberate false statements on applications , makes alterations to properties without relevant permissions , breaks building regulations , or lets rooms to people that do not comply with minimum standards should have their properties compulsory purchased by the local authority who should refurb. it and add it to their housing stock .

Once a few dozen offending landlords have lost their slums it might make others wary of completely disregarding the rules that exist.

[Ozyhibby]

Yeah


Any landlord that makes deliberate false statements on applications , makes alterations to properties without relevant permissions , breaks building regulations , or lets rooms to people that do not comply with minimum standards should have their properties compulsory purchased by the local authority who should refurb. it and add it to their housing stock .

Once a few dozen offending landlords have lost their slums it might make others wary of completely disregarding the rules that exist.

Couldn’t agree more. If you want to be a landlord then there should be a responsibility to meet minimum standards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Plenty of new house building along the east Lothian coast to north Berwick. Just the wrong kind, big houses for commuters, not the 1 and 2 bedroom houses that are needed for rent.

Yep £350,000 cheap boxes instead of a good selection of family and single occupancy homes. The government can't leave it to developers they need to take control. NIMBY's are also a massive problem, for wind, nuclear and solar too

[Pretty Boy]

Yep £350,000 cheap boxes instead of a good selection of family and single occupancy homes. The government can't leave it to developers they need to take control. NIMBY's are also a massive problem, for wind, nuclear and solar too

I'm not sure of the legalities of it but could one of the governments in the UK embark on a house building project then set up a nationalised mortgage company that puts up a deposit for the buyer and acts as mortgage provider but holds a share in the property that is then repaid when the house is sold? Broadly similar schemes exist in Scotland already but it's still reliant on the buyer having a sizable deposit contribution, housing stock being available from private sector partners and a mortgage being approved by a selected panel of lenders.

When it comes to housing the private sector is failing. The fault of that isn't entirely at their door of course but it's a failure nonetheless. As has been pointed out above we seem to get either expensive 2 bedroom flats that are of little use to families, those on low incomes or those looking for single occupancy or we get 3, 4 and 5 bedroom developments that price out a huge chunk of young families. I think a lot of first time buyers would be more than happy with a small but functional 2 or 3 bedroom house, maybe with a little garden to keep on an affordable development that was an updated version of the building of the schemes a few decades ago. Mix in good quality homes for social housing with those looking to buy and you could give people something to be proud of.

Such housing exists but it's largely being built for the mid market sector. There's developments of nice little houses in Craigmillar and Pennywell (and I'm sure elsewhere too) . A mix of flats and houses but there's not enough and it's still keeping people trapped in the rent trap and not really addressing the underlying issue. Scale that up and have a real drive to open up both high quality social housing and genuinely affordable housing to buy and you could start to solve the problem. Unfortunately there is too much vested interest in property and land development among politicians for that to ever happen.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm not sure of the legalities of it but could one of the governments in the UK embark on a house building project then set up a nationalised mortgage company that puts up a deposit for the buyer and acts as mortgage provider but holds a share in the property that is then repaid when the house is sold? Broadly similar schemes exist in Scotland already but it's still reliant on the buyer having a sizable deposit contribution, housing stock being available from private sector partners and a mortgage being approved by a selected panel of lenders.

When it comes to housing the private sector is failing. The fault of that isn't entirely at their door of course but it's a failure nonetheless. As has been pointed out above we seem to get either expensive 2 bedroom flats that are of little use to families, those on low incomes or those looking for single occupancy or we get 3, 4 and 5 bedroom developments that price out a huge chunk of young families. I think a lot of first time buyers would be more than happy with a small but functional 2 or 3 bedroom house, maybe with a little garden to keep on an affordable development that was an updated version of the building of the schemes a few decades ago. Mix in good quality homes for social housing with those looking to buy and you could give people something to be proud of.

Such housing exists but it's largely being built for the mid market sector. There's developments of nice little houses in Craigmillar and Pennywell (and I'm sure elsewhere too) . A mix of flats and houses but there's not enough and it's still keeping people trapped in the rent trap and not really addressing the underlying issue. Scale that up and have a real drive to open up both high quality social housing and genuinely affordable housing to buy and you could start to solve the problem. Unfortunately there is too much vested interest in property and land development among politicians for that to ever happen.

The govt can do all those things if the political will is there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[superfurryhibby]

The govt can do all those things if the political will is there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It makes you wonder why we haven't, after nearly 16 years of SNP government?

One of the areas where I've become deeply disillusioned by the lack of will to force change

[Ozyhibby]

It makes you wonder why we haven't, after nearly 16 years of SNP government?

One of the areas where I've become deeply disillusioned by the lack of will to force change

The Scottish govt can’t because they don’t have the borrowing powers. Not an Indy point though because it’s the same in England.
It’s a mad system where govt across the UK is struggling for money but something that can make them money and ease the burden on the tax payer is not being done for idealogical reasons. Building and renting out homes could be very profitable for councils all across the UK. However they are not allowed to borrow the money to invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

The Scottish govt can’t because they don’t have the borrowing powers. Not an Indy point though because it’s the same in England.
It’s a mad system where govt across the UK is struggling for money but something that can make them money and ease the burden on the tax payer is not being done for idealogical reasons. Building and renting out homes could be very profitable for councils all across the UK. However they are not allowed to borrow the money to invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think such an idea would also drive the bad landlords out the market.

There would still be a need and a desire for private rent and the guys who look after their properties and treat their tenants fairly would be highly desirable to those either not qualifying for social rent or looking for something a bit more exclusive. The 'slum landlords' exist purely because of the dearth of housing available and make their money from desperation. They drag the name of all landlords down and removing that scarcity of housing removes one of the only reasons people use them.

[superfurryhibby]

The Scottish govt can’t because they don’t have the borrowing powers. Not an Indy point though because it’s the same in England.
It’s a mad system where govt across the UK is struggling for money but something that can make them money and ease the burden on the tax payer is not being done for idealogical reasons. Building and renting out homes could be very profitable for councils all across the UK. However they are not allowed to borrow the money to invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does the devolved settlement really prevent the Scottish Government from investing in different models of social housing?

I've thought that councils/government should be doing this in partnership for a long time now. We've created a total monstrosity of a housing market in this country. No infrastructure planning to accompany it either.

[Ozyhibby]

Does the devolved settlement really prevent the Scottish Government from investing in different models of social housing?

I've thought that councils/government should be doing this in partnership for a long time now. We've created a total monstrosity of a housing market in this country. No infrastructure planning to accompany it either.

Someone else might be able to explain the exact rules but the amount that can be borrowed to invest is tiny. To be fair, Scotland builds more than anywhere else but it’s minuscule still. I think we build about a 1000 a year these day but when I was born in 1970 we build 35k a year.
Lack of housing is having a crippling effect on our economy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Someone else might be able to explain the exact rules but the amount that can be borrowed to invest is tiny. To be fair, Scotland builds more than anywhere else but it’s minuscule still. I think we build about a 1000 a year these day but when I was born in 1970 we build 35k a year.
Lack of housing is having a crippling effect on our economy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Stats on housing completions here: https://www.gov.scot/publications/housing-statistics-for-scotland-new-house-building/

[Stairway 2 7]

Someone else might be able to explain the exact rules but the amount that can be borrowed to invest is tiny. To be fair, Scotland builds more than anywhere else but it’s minuscule still. I think we build about a 1000 a year these day but when I was born in 1970 we build 35k a year.
Lack of housing is having a crippling effect on our economy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is that 35k in Scotland. Unbelievable drop crazy that no uk party wants near sorting it

[superfurryhibby]

Someone else might be able to explain the exact rules but the amount that can be borrowed to invest is tiny. To be fair, Scotland builds more than anywhere else but it’s minuscule still. I think we build about a 1000 a year these day but when I was born in 1970 we build 35k a year.
Lack of housing is having a crippling effect on our economy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The lack of social housing is causing huge harm to our young people. In my view right to a home is a fundamental mark of a progressive society. Anyone who works and contributes should be able to live in the area they come from, it's an affront to decency that the inflated costs of housing make that such a challenge.

As I get closer to retirement (not that close sadly), I ponder my mortgage burden and pension and think that I would have been retiring in my early 60's if I'd been in an affordable rented home. Instead old buzzards like me cling on until their dotage.

I grew up in Leith in the 70's and 80's, as much as the gentrification has brought positives, it's also deeply saddening to see how people have been priced out of their communities.

[Mibbes Aye]

The Scottish govt can’t because they don’t have the borrowing powers. Not an Indy point though because it’s the same in England.
It’s a mad system where govt across the UK is struggling for money but something that can make them money and ease the burden on the tax payer is not being done for idealogical reasons. Building and renting out homes could be very profitable for councils all across the UK. However they are not allowed to borrow the money to invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not able to post at any length just now (sigh of relief for all) but councils did have access to prudential borrowing which allowed them to build, topping up with SG monies, and pay the cost back over future rents.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65148719


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230420/dc39cc163c7f4b5d080b96d284af334a.jpg

I did say this would happen. Rent freezes do not work. They never do. It’s been tried all over the world and it’s a failure everywhere.
If you want low rents then build loads of houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230420/dc39cc163c7f4b5d080b96d284af334a.jpg

I did say this would happen. Rent freezes do not work. They never do. It’s been tried all over the world and it’s a failure everywhere.
If you want low rents then build loads of houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Evictions are still a problem too.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23424641.scotgov-eviction-ban-travesty-700-face-court-proceedings/

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1653283063529451522?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

House prices back on the up again. We need to start building again.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230502/32ef3c83a028f0c286cb084800934b58.jpg

I doubt the graph for Scotland looks much better. We need to relax planning laws and encourage more council house building.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1653283063529451522?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

House prices back on the up again. We need to start building again.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230502/32ef3c83a028f0c286cb084800934b58.jpg

I doubt the graph for Scotland looks much better. We need to relax planning laws and encourage more council house building.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Their are good developers who are desperate to get on and build houses but their are so many obstacles to overcome that sometimes it becomes unfeasible.

[Ozyhibby]

Their are good developers who are desperate to get on and build houses but their are so many obstacles to overcome that sometimes it becomes unfeasible.

Yes. The planning system is strangling housebuilding here. And it is stopping economic growth. It’s grim and I don’t se anyone changing it. We’ll just keep throwing ever more money into the houses already built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Yes. The planning system is strangling housebuilding here. And it is stopping economic growth. It’s grim and I don’t se anyone changing it. We’ll just keep throwing ever more money into the houses already built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the solution is to build more council housing. This would take a whole group of people out of the market for private renting and marginal owner occupation. I don't think you can compel building housing for sale. Developers will only build if they can make profits.

[Ozyhibby]

I think the solution is to build more council housing. This would take a whole group of people out of the market for private renting and marginal owner occupation. I don't think you can compel building housing for sale. Developers will only build if they can make profits.

You can speed up the rate developers build by starting to tax land that is not being used. I agree that the state needs to get involved in building as well though. I think though that the rules on borrowing for the SG and local councils will need changed at Westminster for it to happen.
Freeing up the planning system though is entirely on the SG, as is the system of taxation on land. Tax can be a very powerful weapon in changing behaviour. If we are serious about wanting more housing then there are lots of things that can be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

Sunak talking about bringing back a variation of Help To Buy.

It does get people into the housing market of course but does nothing to solve the underlying issues. It was a failed policy before and it will fail again.

[Ozyhibby]

Sunak talking about bringing back a variation of Help To Buy.

It does get people into the housing market of course but does nothing to solve the underlying issues. It was a failed policy before and it will fail again.

Help to buy is a direct state subsidy that pushes up prices for everyone. Its not the only one. Housing benefit does the same thing. We are shovelling tax payer money into housing and the net result is actually a negative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DH1875]

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1653283063529451522?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

House prices back on the up again.

Good luck getting a mortgage. Oh and if you do. It'll be at 5%. Utter shambles.

[Kato]

Help to buy is a direct state subsidy that pushes up prices for everyone. Its not the only one. Housing benefit does the same thing. We are shovelling tax payer money into housing and the net result is actually a negative.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkGovt does something they know won't help. Surprise.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

Govt does something they know won't help. Surprise.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

It's the classic macro/micro tension. It will stimulate house prices at a macro level but people who get it will like it. Similar to the right to buy.

[archie]

Good luck getting a mortgage. Oh and if you do. It'll be at 5%. Utter shambles.

Some years ago Gordon Brown proposed that mortgages should be long term fixed, as is the case in many other countries. His rationale was that variable mortgages constrained government use of interest rates to manage the economy (because of the impact on people with variable rate mortgages). This was attacked on the basis that people might pay more with a fixed. But the key point was that it took out risk. How real is that risk? On Black Wednesday in 1992 rates started at 10%, went to 12% and finished at 15%. All on the same day!

[pollution]

Some years ago Gordon Brown proposed that mortgages should be long term fixed, as is the case in many other countries. His rationale was that variable mortgages constrained government use of interest rates to manage the economy (because of the impact on people with variable rate mortgages). This was attacked on the basis that people might pay more with a fixed. But the key point was that it took out risk. How real is that risk? On Black Wednesday in 1992 rates started at 10%, went to 12% and finished at 15%. All on the same day!


I remember this as I bought my first flat 6 weeks later, paying 8.5%.

[Speedy]

Govt does something they know won't help. Surprise.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

It'll help property portfolio owners. Unlikely that they care about anyone else.

[greenginger]

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1653283063529451522?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

House prices back on the up again. We need to start building again.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230502/32ef3c83a028f0c286cb084800934b58.jpg

I doubt the graph for Scotland looks much better. We need to relax planning laws and encourage more council house building.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Impressive building figures in the 60’s and 70’s of around 300,000 new builds a year.

Trouble was they were having to demolish hundreds of thousands of slum houses at the same time so the number of extra houses created was not as good as it looks.

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1653857600260153344?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Amazing. We need more expensive housing apparently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1654402072870043650

Very interesting stats on house building. Mirrors what has been said before, the reason the youth aren't turning right wing as they age is the don't have wealth to protect.

[WhileTheChief..]

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1653283063529451522?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

House prices back on the up again. We need to start building again.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230502/32ef3c83a028f0c286cb084800934b58.jpg

I doubt the graph for Scotland looks much better. We need to relax planning laws and encourage more council house building.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the graph was going in the other direction we'd have the green lobby complaining that it's unsustainable and too much growth!

[WhileTheChief..]

https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1653857600260153344?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Amazing. We need more expensive housing apparently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He didn't say that at all in the 17s clip you posted.

He was asked if it's a good thing that home prices are falling and said no. That's not the same thing at all.

How many home owners do you think would say otherwise??

[McSwanky]

He didn't say that at all in the 17s clip you posted.

He was asked if it's a good thing that home prices are falling and said no. That's not the same thing at all.

How many home owners do you think would say otherwise??I'm no expert, but if people regard a house as being somewhere to live rather than an investment, then house price rises are, in general, surely a bad thing?

Of course, for those with second, third properties etc, house price rises are excellent.

The problem we have now is that first time buyers are spending a massive amount of their income on a mortgage, money that could be going into other areas of the economy.

House price rises relative to average income is fine. They've been outstripping this for decades though, and that's surely only going to create problems.

Sent from my YAL-L21 using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

I'm no expert, but if people regard a house as being somewhere to live rather than an investment, then house price rises are, in general, surely a bad thing?

Of course, for those with second, third properties etc, house price rises are excellent.

The problem we have now is that first time buyers are spending a massive amount of their income on a mortgage, money that could be going into other areas of the economy.

House price rises relative to average income is fine. They've been outstripping this for decades though, and that's surely only going to create problems.

Sent from my YAL-L21 using Tapatalk

Only if you're a buyer!

If you own your own home, the last thing you want is to see the price fall, or worse still, leaving you with negative equity. For a lot of people, there home is there only meaningful asset.

Think of the news headlines any time you see prices falling - nobody is pleased when it happens.

Building huge amount of new homes is the answer. Problem is, nobody wants them built near them. Environment, roads, schools, doctors etc etc being used as the excuse.

It may be tough on the younger generation, but they will also be one of the first generations where most of them will inherit their parents homes. That was generally only available for the well off previously.

[CropleyWasGod]

Only if you're a buyer!

If you own your own home, the last thing you want is to see the price fall, or worse still, leaving you with negative equity. For a lot of people, there home is there only meaningful asset.

Think of the news headlines any time you see prices falling - nobody is pleased when it happens.

Building huge amount of new homes is the answer. Problem is, nobody wants them built near them. Environment, roads, schools, doctors etc etc being used as the excuse.

It may be tough on the younger generation, but they will also be one of the first generations where most of them will inherit their parents homes. That was generally only available for the well off previously.

If you have no intention of moving, the value is irrelevant.

If you are planning to move, within the same environment, price falls across the market are largely irrelevant. If you sell your house for a lower price in a depressed market, the likelihood is that you will have to pay less for your next house in that same market.

[RyeSloan]

Only if you're a buyer!

If you own your own home, the last thing you want is to see the price fall, or worse still, leaving you with negative equity. For a lot of people, there home is there only meaningful asset.

Think of the news headlines any time you see prices falling - nobody is pleased when it happens.

Building huge amount of new homes is the answer. Problem is, nobody wants them built near them. Environment, roads, schools, doctors etc etc being used as the excuse.

It may be tough on the younger generation, but they will also be one of the first generations where most of them will inherit their parents homes. That was generally only available for the well off previously.

There is a large body of work from many sources that suggests a ‘huge amount of new homes’ is not really the answer at all.

The evidence suggests that it’s almost impossible to build your way out of high prices in any sensible manner. To increase the available housing stock by a big enough percentage is simply not feasible in any reasonable timescale.

To understand high prices it’s useful to understand the root cause and the evidence suggests that lack of primary supply is not a meaningful contributor.

By far the biggest contributors have been policy (think the buy to let boom…now brought to a shuddering halt by the belated tax rule changes), stamp duty increases squishing the secondary market (fewer people move as it’s so expensive to do so thus limiting supply at any one point) and of course the biggest culprit of all; availability of credit and the cost of that credit.

I totally understand that the build build build mantra seems intuitively obvious in terms of a basic supply and demand dynamic but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

[Ozyhibby]

There is a large body of work from many sources that suggests a ‘huge amount of new homes’ is not really the answer at all.

The evidence suggests that it’s almost impossible to build your way out of high prices in any sensible manner. To increase the available housing stock by a big enough percentage is simply not feasible in any reasonable timescale.

To understand high prices it’s useful to understand the root cause and the evidence suggests that lack of primary supply is not a meaningful contributor.

By far the biggest contributors have been policy (think the buy to let boom…now brought to a shuddering halt by the belated tax rule changes), stamp duty increases squishing the secondary market (fewer people move as it’s so expensive to do so thus limiting supply at any one point) and of course the biggest culprit of all; availability of credit and the cost of that credit.

I totally understand that the build build build mantra seems intuitively obvious in terms of a basic supply and demand dynamic but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

We do build significantly less that comparable European countries who have lower property prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Only if you're a buyer!

If you own your own home, the last thing you want is to see the price fall, or worse still, leaving you with negative equity. For a lot of people, there home is there only meaningful asset.

Think of the news headlines any time you see prices falling - nobody is pleased when it happens.

Building huge amount of new homes is the answer. Problem is, nobody wants them built near them. Environment, roads, schools, doctors etc etc being used as the excuse.

It may be tough on the younger generation, but they will also be one of the first generations where most of them will inherit their parents homes. That was generally only available for the well off previously.

I think yes, and no.

House prices increasing is only really good for anyone that's more likely to downsize than anything else. I own a house, and would look to move in a bit and probably to a more expensive house - if there's a universal (I appreciate that’s not how it works) 10% drop in the market tomorrow that is actually good for me on that front.

Of course it's also true that relatively new into my mortgage (and even more so for those who bought more recently than myself) then a large crash could result in being in a higher LTV bracket at the next remortgage, or even have the concept of negative equity hanging over their head. Should my circumstances drastically change and for whatever reason I want to sell up and not buy something else then I'm more limited after a crash (or even stuck if it's bad enough), or if I were looking to do some sort of equity release.

[Mibbes Aye]

We do build significantly less that comparable European countries who have lower property prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We do have one of the highest population densities in Europe, notwithstanding the Scottish Highlands, which is roughly the size of Belgium.

There are a number of inhibitors on supply, a number of varying factors shaping demand. It is no wonder the housing market is so distorted but building ever more houses is a simplistic answer to a complex question.

[Ozyhibby]

We do have one of the highest population densities in Europe, notwithstanding the Scottish Highlands, which is roughly the size of Belgium.

There are a number of inhibitors on supply, a number of varying factors shaping demand. It is no wonder the housing market is so distorted but building ever more houses is a simplistic answer to a complex question.

Absolutely. There are many factors at play in the UK market. That’s just one of them.

https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/1534894067196252161?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Is a good follow on Twitter on these issues. It’s complicated, which is why it’s being ignored. Best just to launch another counter productive help to buy scheme.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

There is a large body of work from many sources that suggests a ‘huge amount of new homes’ is not really the answer at all.

The evidence suggests that it’s almost impossible to build your way out of high prices in any sensible manner. To increase the available housing stock by a big enough percentage is simply not feasible in any reasonable timescale.

To understand high prices it’s useful to understand the root cause and the evidence suggests that lack of primary supply is not a meaningful contributor.

By far the biggest contributors have been policy (think the buy to let boom…now brought to a shuddering halt by the belated tax rule changes), stamp duty increases squishing the secondary market (fewer people move as it’s so expensive to do so thus limiting supply at any one point) and of course the biggest culprit of all; availability of credit and the cost of that credit.

I totally understand that the build build build mantra seems intuitively obvious in terms of a basic supply and demand dynamic but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Leaving prices to the side for a moment, whenever there's talk of homelessness on the news, it always comes round to there being a shortage of homes.

So, even taking all your points into account, do we not still need a huge number of new homes being built every year?

[WhileTheChief..]

If you have no intention of moving, the value is irrelevant.

If you are planning to move, within the same environment, price falls across the market are largely irrelevant. If you sell your house for a lower price in a depressed market, the likelihood is that you will have to pay less for your next house in that same market.


Sorry, can't agree on that point at all.

Anyone looking to reportage for any reason, get additional borrowing for home improvements or whatever, leave their home to their kids or considering equity release in their later years are very much affected.

Personally, I've never known or heard anyone say they were pleased if their house value stagnated or fell. I'd be really surprised if I ever do hear that.

[Ozyhibby]

Sorry, can't agree on that point at all.

Anyone looking to reportage for any reason, get additional borrowing for home improvements or whatever, leave their home to their kids or considering equity release in their later years are very much affected.

Personally, I've never known or heard anyone say they were pleased if their house value stagnated or fell. I'd be really surprised if I ever do hear that.

Of course but I think that if house prices are outstripping inflation then that’s not a good thing. And when they are outstripping inflation for 50 years straight as they have done in the UK then that is unsustainable.
Housing is sucking in every spare bit of capital in the UK to the point that we don’t invest in anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[McSwanky]

Personally, I've never known or heard anyone say they were pleased if their house value stagnated or fell. I'd be really surprised if I ever do hear that.

Hi!

Sent from my YAL-L21 using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

Is the solution more affordable homes available for people to buy, or more homes in general available for rent?

I think in general, most people still prefer buying to renting, but accept there will always be a need for rental properties. I've no idea of the numbers or proportions though.

Could a government legislate to pretty much ban anyone owning more than one property, thus eliminating the entire private landlord / tenant system? Forcing loads of properties on to the market at the same time would also see prices everywhere fall ;)

Could councils buy homes from existing landlords and then rent them out as affordable housing?

Could they legislate to make it that you have to be living in, or have lived lived in the UK for X number of years, to buy a property?

Just throwing some thoughts out there. Pretty radical stuff, and a bit of an unfair attack on existing landlords, but if you're going to fix a problem that's been 50 years in the making, you're going to need to do something special / different!!

[WhileTheChief..]

Hi!

Sent from my YAL-L21 using Tapatalk

Interested to hear why, if you're happy to share?!

[Andy Bee]

I'd be interested in banning overseas buyers who have the sole intention of renting the properties out or at least a vastly inflated stamp duty on those types of buyers who predominantly don't pay taxes on the income of those rentals. Properties are being bought up in blocks of 10, 20, 30 properties at a time and just handed over to letting agents to manage.

It'll also be interesting to keep an eye on the new Skipton 100% mortgage deal for people who can show they've got a good credit rating in the rental sector. 5.49% interest rate IIRC which isn't that bad in this market.

[Ozyhibby]

The tax system in Scotland means that there are very few people now going into buy to let. The numbers no longer stack up.
LBTT now works out at about 8-11% which is too high to make it a worthwhile investment.
The UK govt tax treatment (there is no longer tax relief on mortgage payments) of landlords, especially higher rate tax payers is also a massive disincentive.
All these costs get passed onto the tennant as the end user is always the person who pays but it also puts people off investment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Leaving prices to the side for a moment, whenever there's talk of homelessness on the news, it always comes round to there being a shortage of homes.

So, even taking all your points into account, do we not still need a huge number of new homes being built every year?

Or is it a shortage of availability of suitable housing?

It’s a subtle difference but there is plenty of empty or under occupied homes that wouldn’t need a huge building programme to mitigate the issue if they were brought into the mix.

Clearly building new homes is part of the answer but it’s not THE answer.

And that’s before you even begin to work out what type of home needs built, where it is built and how you build it at an ‘affordable’ cost.

Again there is plenty of evidence that new builds are actually a premium priced product and building them does not lower surrounding prices of existing stock but actually raises them.

I certainly don’t have all the answers that’s for sure but it’s also true the law of unintended consequences lives strong in the housing market.

[wookie70]

I've long thought that rising house prices are bad for the vast majority of working people. Like the railways, water, power etc I feel housing is a vital infrastructure and should be controlled for the most part by the state. The way it is going we are just making the situation worse year on year. There needs to be a plan where future population numbers, technology requirements, climate change and building communities that work with proper schooling, health and wellbeing resources are all taken into account.

I live in Newtongrange and there is a massive development planned and approved. The infrastructure simply isn't there to support it. The idea is it would be a 15 minute city type city set up but all the resources are already in place and oversubscribed. It is simply a developer maximising profit and the existing village will negatively impacted with traffic and further dilution of vital services. If I look at my village it is surrounded by what looks like farmland. However, much of that land is already owned by developers having been sold by the good Duke who owns most of the county. I suppose that is a bit of NIMBYism on my part but I would have no issue if what was being built included the resources that were required to support the new occupants. If the village grows as do services and infrastructure that is fine but this is like expecting a 1.0L Fiesta to start towing a massive caravan.

I would like to see housing/land reform as the number 1 priority of the Scottish Government. It is fundamental to the common good and there needs to be some far sighted thought and solutions that look at the next couple of hundred years not the next election or brown envelope. I like the idea of 15 minute cities and I think I would go down that route but not piggy backed onto existing towns. I would go the new town route and build self contained communities, completely powered by onsite renewables with a community that is designed to have the needed doctors, nurses, cleaners, sparks etc within its number. I don't think it could be done in the current financial model but then the world is doomed if we continue down that path.

Tinkering is not going to solve the housing crisis and for me that crisis is really a lack of functioning communities alongside crumbling and overused infrastructure more than just bricks and mortar. Britain is completely broken and it needs a blank sheet of paper approach not more doodling over the scribbles of past government incompetence.

[McSwanky]

Interested to hear why, if you're happy to share?!A combination of 'the greater good' and the fact that house price rises have been outstripping income rises since probably the 70s.

Don't get me wrong, a crash would be a nightmare for a lot of people, I'd much prefer a steady drop in relation to wages over the next 10-20 years. Not going to happen though.

The whole thing is a bloody mess, and it's been perpetuated by all our governments' short term approach over the years.

Sent from my YAL-L21 using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Sorry, can't agree on that point at all.

Anyone looking to reportage for any reason, get additional borrowing for home improvements or whatever, leave their home to their kids or considering equity release in their later years are very much affected.

Personally, I've never known or heard anyone say they were pleased if their house value stagnated or fell. I'd be really surprised if I ever do hear that.

Their house alone in isolation? Or as part of a general market decline?

If it's the later then I'd imagine anyone active in the market would be happy enough for their house value to fall along with everyone else's. Within limits.

[WhileTheChief..]

I'd be interested in banning overseas buyers who have the sole intention of renting the properties out or at least a vastly inflated stamp duty on those types of buyers who predominantly don't pay taxes on the income of those rentals. Properties are being bought up in blocks of 10, 20, 30 properties at a time and just handed over to letting agents to manage.

It'll also be interesting to keep an eye on the new Skipton 100% mortgage deal for people who can show they've got a good credit rating in the rental sector. 5.49% interest rate IIRC which isn't that bad in this market.

A few year ago I got a new boiler installed in my flat in Longstone.

The plumber that did it generally worked for 1 client, an elderly lady that owned over 300 flats in Edinburgh. She was in her late 80s and had built up the portfolio with her husband over the years.

It just feels wrong that one person / company can own so many properties.

I remember when I bought the flat as a new build, I could have left it a month or so and then sold it for a decent profit. Thinking this is maybe something people do?

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/11/its-a-win-win-the-adult-children-living-at-home?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1683792161


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

A few year ago I got a new boiler installed in my flat in Longstone.

The plumber that did it generally worked for 1 client, an elderly lady that owned over 300 flats in Edinburgh. She was in her late 80s and had built up the portfolio with her husband over the years.

It just feels wrong that one person / company can own so many properties.

I remember when I bought the flat as a new build, I could have left it a month or so and then sold it for a decent profit. Thinking this is maybe something people do?

I get that some will disagree with that amount of ownership as a principle and fair enough, not going to argue that.

But I’d suggest that those types of rental businesses are what the sector needs (there is after all an indisputable need and demand for rental properties) as they are much more likely to be run correctly as a long term business, where maintenance and associated rental returns are at the core.

One of the biggest issues (and drivers of price inflation) has been the ‘speculate to accumulate’ types who have the ability to leverage short term and are simply looking for quick investment returns.

That type of investment is coming to an end due to the tax changes and may have short term consequences in raising rents but I think it’s one positive change that has finally happened and will help to stabilise the market over the long term.

[wookie70]

I get that some will disagree with that amount of ownership as a principle and fair enough, not going to argue that.

But I’d suggest that those types of rental businesses are what the sector needs (there is after all an indisputable need and demand for rental properties) as they are much more likely to be run correctly as a long term business, where maintenance and associated rental returns are at the core.

One of the biggest issues (and drivers of price inflation) has been the ‘speculate to accumulate’ types who have the ability to leverage short term and are simply looking for quick investment returns.

That type of investment is coming to an end due to the tax changes and may have short term consequences in raising rents but I think it’s one positive change that has finally happened and will help to stabilise the market over the long term.

The council used to be that rental business. It worked very well until Thatcher destroyed it. I'm not convinced the private sector does a great job of providing the accommodation needed and that would particularly go for these volume landlords. I don't think anyone should be allowed to own a home they don't live in for at least 2 or 3 months every year or at the very least the tax on owning one should make it impossible to profit from rental income.

[Ozyhibby]

The council used to be that rental business. It worked very well until Thatcher destroyed it. I'm not convinced the private sector does a great job of providing the accommodation needed and that would particularly go for these volume landlords. I don't think anyone should be allowed to own a home they don't live in for at least 2 or 3 months every year or at the very least the tax on owning one should make it impossible to profit from rental income.

That’s already happening. Buy to let business is no longer economical.
And while I think we should restart building council houses, let’s not forget that councils were pretty crappy landlords back in the day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

The council used to be that rental business. It worked very well until Thatcher destroyed it. I'm not convinced the private sector does a great job of providing the accommodation needed and that would particularly go for these volume landlords. I don't think anyone should be allowed to own a home they don't live in for at least 2 or 3 months every year or at the very least the tax on owning one should make it impossible to profit from rental income.

I remember the state that some councils allowed their housing stock to get into but I also know there was a number of well kept council stock that served the country well.

I’m not going to argue one way or other to be honest. Both public and private landlords can be very good or very bad and everything in between from what I can see.

I also think if someone wants to own two houses then they should be free to do so without punitive taxation but I also get the fact that too many ‘holiday homes’ can be significantly negative in some communities.

In other words I well comfy on the fence here [emoji1787]

But that’s maybe the point there should be balance and I’ve no definitive answer as to how that equilibrium can be found. What I do know is that many of the policies of the past and the present from all parties appear to have simply made the situation worse each time.

So maybe some mega interventions are required? But if so what and how can anyone say with any confidence that such interventions will actually have the required impact…which I assume is somehow making the housing market accessible for most (if not all) at a fair income / cost ratio.

So I’ll stay nice and steady on this fence in this subject for now I think [emoji12]

[wookie70]

That’s already happening. Buy to let business is no longer economical.
And while I think we should restart building council houses, let’s not forget that councils were pretty crappy landlords back in the day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They were by no means perfect but at least the rent was affordable and there wasn't any no fault evictions etc. It would be interesting to see if the councils winding down their in house provision of building and other trades coincided with the housing stock deteriorating. My view is that the Tories always take out investment, privatise in-house provision to increase cost and reduce service, and then sell off what belongs to the public at vastly reduced cost. The only difference in housing was there were many benefactors that were working people. The big reason though was to make home ownership the norm which made striking harder and drove up house and rent prices so the rich and banks etc would profit. Giving the workers something was a bitter pill worth swallowing for the long term gain to the rich. Many of those ex-council houses are again being rented but for a huge mark up and without the security that they once had. I'm glad that it is becoming less economical to allow others to buy houses for you. I just wish it was a deliberate policy rather than an outcome of the mismanagement of every part of society and the economy

[Andy Bee]

They were by no means perfect but at least the rent was affordable and there wasn't any no fault evictions etc. It would be interesting to see if the councils winding down their in house provision of building and other trades coincided with the housing stock deteriorating. My view is that the Tories always take out investment, privatise in-house provision to increase cost and reduce service, and then sell off what belongs to the public at vastly reduced cost. The only difference in housing was there were many benefactors that were working people. The big reason though was to make home ownership the norm which made striking harder and drove up house and rent prices so the rich and banks etc would profit. Giving the workers something was a bitter pill worth swallowing for the long term gain to the rich. Many of those ex-council houses are again being rented but for a huge mark up and without the security that they once had. I'm glad that it is becoming less economical to allow others to buy houses for you. I just wish it was a deliberate policy rather than an outcome of the mismanagement of every part of society and the economy

I'm not sure of Edinburgh but in West Lothian most towns had a council yard which employed tradesmen of all skills, plasterers, roofers, joiners, decorators, plumbers, electricians etc those yards are now all but gone and they were huge employers, ironically the land they were on has now been sold off to private sector housing.

Serious question: would you be comfortable with all private landlords putting their properties up for sale i.e. only social housing left for rentals and what would you think the outcome would be?

[Ozyhibby]

They were by no means perfect but at least the rent was affordable and there wasn't any no fault evictions etc. It would be interesting to see if the councils winding down their in house provision of building and other trades coincided with the housing stock deteriorating. My view is that the Tories always take out investment, privatise in-house provision to increase cost and reduce service, and then sell off what belongs to the public at vastly reduced cost. The only difference in housing was there were many benefactors that were working people. The big reason though was to make home ownership the norm which made striking harder and drove up house and rent prices so the rich and banks etc would profit. Giving the workers something was a bitter pill worth swallowing for the long term gain to the rich. Many of those ex-council houses are again being rented but for a huge mark up and without the security that they once had. I'm glad that it is becoming less economical to allow others to buy houses for you. I just wish it was a deliberate policy rather than an outcome of the mismanagement of every part of society and the economy

It very much is a deliberate policy. Both the UK and Scottish governments have said so at the time of their changes that the policy was to discourage private landlords. It’s been SNP policy for a long time and the Greens have just cranked it up a bit. George Osbourne’s changes were to force small investors out in favour of large investors such as pension funds etc. They paid big dollars to the Tories for those changes. Its why you see all the student flats getting built. These things don’t just happen by accident.
Also, no fault eviction is long gone in Scotland. In fact evictions are banned totally just now in Scotland. It’s one of the reasons rents are rising faster here than in England. The rent freeze is the biggest reason.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wookie70]

I'm not sure of Edinburgh but in West Lothian most towns had a council yard which employed tradesmen of all skills, plasterers, roofers, joiners, decorators, plumbers, electricians etc those yards are now all but gone and they were huge employers, ironically the land they were on has now been sold off to private sector housing.

Serious question: would you be comfortable with all private landlords putting their properties up for sale i.e. only social housing left for rentals and what would you think the outcome would be?

I would be quite happy if the council had a way of CPOing private rental properties so they were in control of purchase prices. I'd also like to see a controlled crash of housing prices with taxes used to make any second or further homes reduce in value drastically and the market reduce over time. Get housing, both bought and rented, back in line with wages and I would go further when they have reset and have both rent control but also house price control.

More secure tenancies for a lower price if done correctly would be the outcome if the council owned all rental properties. That would require resources and a solid plan and neither are likely given the way resource is syphoned off and the lack of any planning from government beyond a single election. It would be very difficult now as all the infrastructure that maintained housing has gone. Lots of land, as you said sold off, so harder to create new developments. The public also seem to think their house being worth huge sums is good for them. It is if you own more than one but a house is worth a home if you only have one and the general direction of travel is upsizing so that means high prices are bad.

[Ozyhibby]

I would be quite happy if the council had a way of CPOing private rental properties so they were in control of purchase prices. I'd also like to see a controlled crash of housing prices with taxes used to make any second or further homes reduce in value drastically and the market reduce over time. Get housing, both bought and rented, back in line with wages and I would go further when they have reset and have both rent control but also house price control.

More secure tenancies for a lower price if done correctly would be the outcome if the council owned all rental properties. That would require resources and a solid plan and neither are likely given the way resource is syphoned off and the lack of any planning from government beyond a single election. It would be very difficult now as all the infrastructure that maintained housing has gone. Lots of land, as you said sold off, so harder to create new developments. The public also seem to think their house being worth huge sums is good for them. It is if you own more than one but a house is worth a home if you only have one and the general direction of travel is upsizing so that means high prices are bad.

If even half that happened I doubt another house would get built in the UK. Almost everything you posted was nonsense that would have the opposite effect to which you intend.
There is nothing stopping the state from building houses now. They should get on with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1657100477731950594?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1657100477731950594?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is one of these posts that would be greatly enhanced by the .net poster saying if the link is to illustrate a point, and if so, what that point is.

I’ve only had a cursory look but the two things that jumped out were:

Cheap and abundant housing would be ‘great’. Also cheap and abundant energy would be ‘great’. Am I missing something more significant here?

And Nissan doesn’t like one of its inputs being expensive. As a private sector business with a core mission to deliver profit for its owners/shareholders, that hardly comes as a surprise?

[Ozyhibby]

This is one of these posts that would be greatly enhanced by the .net poster saying if the link is to illustrate a point, and if so, what that point is.

I’ve only had a cursory look but the two things that jumped out were:

Cheap and abundant housing would be ‘great’. Also cheap and abundant energy would be ‘great’. Am I missing something more significant here?

And Nissan doesn’t like one of its inputs being expensive. As a private sector business with a core mission to deliver profit for its owners/shareholders, that hardly comes as a surprise?

I was watching Iron Man with my youngest and trying not to appear distracted.
I was pointing out that the lack of housing affects the rest of our economy as well, as alluded to in the tweet.
You say that cheap and abundant energy and housing would be ‘great’ as if it’s unachievable? As if we have no control over these things?
Our electricity is the worlds most expensive. That’s a problem if we want industry in this country. And that goes for housing too. It will deter talented people from coming here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

The bit I didn't really get was the writer saying that cheap, abundant housing and energy was a strategy. That's not a strategy. It might be an outcome or it might be an enabler ot it might be contextual circumstances. It's not a strategy though.

Putting 'great' in inverted commas wasn't so much about it being unachievable - though there are countless examples of governments failing to achieve it, especially with housing. Failing to even define how they would try to achieve it.

We could have cheap, abundant housing if we diverted money from other priorities and built loads of multi-storey concrete tower blocks, like the ones that mark some of the fringes of Edinburgh, but I suspect that's not what most people have in mind. I think it is easy to make banal sweeping statements such as the writer saying they are for something no one would say they were against - is anyone calling for less houses that are more expensive to boot? In reality, there are a multitude of factors that impact on housing, as have been highlighted on this thread - whether infrastructure or lenders' appetite for risk or whatever.

To some extent you could argue whether cheap and abundant are 'good' things. Does 'abundant' mean urban spread into rural land, more development on greenfield or on flood plains etc etc. We have very high population density yet are fairly low on average household size - should we be challenging the narratives that exist around what is public good and private good and which we value more?

[Ozyhibby]

The bit I didn't really get was the writer saying that cheap, abundant housing and energy was a strategy. That's not a strategy. It might be an outcome or it might be an enabler ot it might be contextual circumstances. It's not a strategy though.

Putting 'great' in inverted commas wasn't so much about it being unachievable - though there are countless examples of governments failing to achieve it, especially with housing. Failing to even define how they would try to achieve it.

We could have cheap, abundant housing if we diverted money from other priorities and built loads of multi-storey concrete tower blocks, like the ones that mark some of the fringes of Edinburgh, but I suspect that's not what most people have in mind. I think it is easy to make banal sweeping statements such as the writer saying they are for something no one would say they were against - is anyone calling for less houses that are more expensive to boot? In reality, there are a multitude of factors that impact on housing, as have been highlighted on this thread - whether infrastructure or lenders' appetite for risk or whatever.

To some extent you could argue whether cheap and abundant are 'good' things. Does 'abundant' mean urban spread into rural land, more development on greenfield or on flood plains etc etc. We have very high population density yet are fairly low on average household size - should we be challenging the narratives that exist around what is public good and private good and which we value more?

We don’t live that densely here in Scotland. Not even England is as densely populated as some Euro cities.

https://citymonitor.ai/environment/these-maps-reveal-truth-about-population-density-across-europe-3625#

I do think we should be redirecting some of our resources in this country towards building more housing. It’s not popular and no political party wants to do it but IMO it needs done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AgentDaleCooper]

We don’t live that densely here in Scotland. Not even England is as densely populated as some Euro cities.

https://citymonitor.ai/environment/these-maps-reveal-truth-about-population-density-across-europe-3625#

I do think we should be redirecting some of our resources in this country towards building more housing. It’s not popular and no political party wants to do it but IMO it needs done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

agreed, but also very much depends on who is doing it, and what their plans for it are. the other problem is that peoples' morals in terms of pricing, are largely outsourced to 'market rates'. obviously things are more expensive to build at the moment, but profits aren't part of the answer for this. wealth and asset inequality is soaring - it's time for re-distribution.

[Ozyhibby]

agreed, but also very much depends on who is doing it, and what their plans for it are. the other problem is that peoples' morals in terms of pricing, are largely outsourced to 'market rates'. obviously things are more expensive to build at the moment, but profits aren't part of the answer for this. wealth and asset inequality is soaring - it's time for re-distribution.

If it was market rates then they would be a lot cheaper. The market is massively distorted by the govt restricting supply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

We don’t live that densely here in Scotland. Not even England is as densely populated as some Euro cities.

https://citymonitor.ai/environment/these-maps-reveal-truth-about-population-density-across-europe-3625#

I do think we should be redirecting some of our resources in this country towards building more housing. It’s not popular and no political party wants to do it but IMO it needs done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we do mostly. The larger central belt accounts for more than 80% of the population, the smaller central belt 50% of the population. Contained in a small part of the country.

25 of the 32 council areas in Scotland have a population density higher than the European average. Glasgow's is 100 times bigger, even Clackmannanshire is nearly ten times as high.

As for England, population density is very high. There's the odd outlier like the Netherlands but otherwise the UK as a whole is right up there, with only false comparisons like Monaco or the Vatican ahead.

But in terms of your last paragraph, that highlights the point I was trying to make. If we 'need' housing then how do we increase supply? Do we build up, with concrete tower blocks? Will people want to live there? Do we build out, into green field and flood plains? Scotland's density is lowered by the fact we have an area the size of Belgium with a population density in single figures. Is there any real demand to build thousands of houses around Tain and Helmsdale? How do you pay for the infrastructure to make new settlements viable?

[Ozyhibby]

I think we do mostly. The larger central belt accounts for more than 80% of the population, the smaller central belt 50% of the population. Contained in a small part of the country.

25 of the 32 council areas in Scotland have a population density higher than the European average. Glasgow's is 100 times bigger, even Clackmannanshire is nearly ten times as high.

As for England, population density is very high. There's the odd outlier like the Netherlands but otherwise the UK as a whole is right up there, with only false comparisons like Monaco or the Vatican ahead.

But in terms of your last paragraph, that highlights the point I was trying to make. If we 'need' housing then how do we increase supply? Do we build up, with concrete tower blocks? Will people want to live there? Do we build out, into green field and flood plains? Scotland's density is lowered by the fact we have an area the size of Belgium with a population density in single figures. Is there any real demand to build thousands of houses around Tain and Helmsdale? How do you pay for the infrastructure to make new settlements viable?

I actually think density wise, the tenements in Scotland get it just about right. I think there is a sweet spot of about 4-6 storey high building that work well for city living.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1636682164312973316?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Good thread on our housing problems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

My father in law sent me a link to his old house on Right Move earlier today. Nice rural English location, 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and a small garden. Nice enough but nothing that special. Offers over £395K and it will got for a lot more than thay. He sold it in 1999 for £99K. In line with inflation the price should have been about £185K.

A house value increasing by that much whilst wages have risen at nowhere close to the same level is at least part of the reason we have a fully blown housing crisis.

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/bbcbreakfast/status/1658734741133066240?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Promising? Who knows with Starmer. Backing the ‘builders not the blockers’ has to be up there with the worst political slogans ever though. Makes me doubt his sincerity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

https://twitter.com/bbcbreakfast/status/1658734741133066240?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Promising? Who knows with Starmer. Backing the ‘builders not the blockers’ has to be up there with the worst political slogans ever though. Makes me doubt his sincerity.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Keir said something you like 😀😀😀

On a more serious note, the alliterative start to his answer needs a bit of work, for sure.

What is interesting for those who are interested in discourse analysis, the use of language, which nouns, adjectives and verbs are chosen is we saw two there that will be deployed more frequently as the election starts to come closer.

First up is reference to fixing a broken system. This will be used across a bunch of topics, not just housing. When Labour presents its manifesto and talks to it, expect to hear the phrase in relation to lots of areas, from asylum to GP provision to housing to the justice system.

Second up is ‘security’. Used there in relation to housing but will also be deployed when talking about energy, foreign policy, environment, affordable child care etc etc

Those two themes, and others, will be used to hammer home the message about 13 years of the Tories. Have they made us feel more secure, have they made the system better?

Of course the other part of the equation is what is Labour for, as opposed to just not being the Tories. As the manifesto takes shape that’s where that question will be road tested.

[Just Alf]

Maybe should be in the Tory thread :dunno:


Tory peer’s family used no-fault eviction against mould complaint tenant


https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/17/tory-peers-family-used-no-fault-eviction-against-mould-complaint-tenant?CMP=share_btn_link


The family of a billionaire Tory landlord used a no-fault eviction to throw out a tenant after he refused a £1,680 annual rent increase having reported mould, damp and cold, the Guardian can reveal........

[Ozyhibby]

Maybe should be in the Tory thread :dunno:


Tory peer’s family used no-fault eviction against mould complaint tenant


https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/17/tory-peers-family-used-no-fault-eviction-against-mould-complaint-tenant?CMP=share_btn_link


The family of a billionaire Tory landlord used a no-fault eviction to throw out a tenant after he refused a £1,680 annual rent increase having reported mould, damp and cold, the Guardian can reveal........

That can’t happen in Scotland because we don’t have no fault evictions. The law needs to be changed to make it illegal to rent out property with mould problems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/17/house-prices-need-to-fall-relative-to-income-keir-starmer-says?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1684347522

Wow, fair play to Starmer. It’s not an easy thing for a politician to say but it absolutely needs said. Let’s see if they have actual plans to deliver on the rhetoric.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wookie70]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/17/house-prices-need-to-fall-relative-to-income-keir-starmer-says?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1684347522

Wow, fair play to Starmer. It’s not an easy thing for a politician to say but it absolutely needs said. Let’s see if they have actual plans to deliver on the rhetoric.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He is of course correct but he will not do anything to bring it about, at least not substantially. There was a few phone ins on LBC today on housing and one caller pretty much summed it up for me. We don't need to build houses we need to build communities. That should be governed by some form of long term commission and not be party political. The timeframe he suggested was 100 years which is way too long but the rest I agreed with completely. I would say a 25 year period should be enough to completely change the way housing works in the UK. It could run perfectly alongside trying to make our housing stock more prepared for changing weather and much, much more energy efficient and also built with energy production incorporated.







substantially

[Andy Bee]

Keir said something you like 😀😀😀

On a more serious note, the alliterative start to his answer needs a bit of work, for sure.

What is interesting for those who are interested in discourse analysis, the use of language, which nouns, adjectives and verbs are chosen is we saw two there that will be deployed more frequently as the election starts to come closer.

First up is reference to fixing a broken system. This will be used across a bunch of topics, not just housing. When Labour presents its manifesto and talks to it, expect to hear the phrase in relation to lots of areas, from asylum to GP provision to housing to the justice system.

Second up is ‘security’. Used there in relation to housing but will also be deployed when talking about energy, foreign policy, environment, affordable child care etc etc

Those two themes, and others, will be used to hammer home the message about 13 years of the Tories. Have they made us feel more secure, have they made the system better?

Of course the other part of the equation is what is Labour for, as opposed to just not being the Tories. As the manifesto takes shape that’s where that question will be road tested.

Jock Ashworth on Peston tonight in regards to how he would fix sewage and the water companies......Ahhh look everything is broken in this country now, everything needs fixing, blah blah blah.

Serious question, have you got this weeks lottery numbers?

[WhileTheChief..]

Keir said something you like ������

On a more serious note, the alliterative start to his answer needs a bit of work, for sure.

What is interesting for those who are interested in discourse analysis, the use of language, which nouns, adjectives and verbs are chosen is we saw two there that will be deployed more frequently as the election starts to come closer.

First up is reference to fixing a broken system. This will be used across a bunch of topics, not just housing. When Labour presents its manifesto and talks to it, expect to hear the phrase in relation to lots of areas, from asylum to GP provision to housing to the justice system.

Second up is ‘security’. Used there in relation to housing but will also be deployed when talking about energy, foreign policy, environment, affordable child care etc etc

Those two themes, and others, will be used to hammer home the message about 13 years of the Tories. Have they made us feel more secure, have they made the system better?

Of course the other part of the equation is what is Labour for, as opposed to just not being the Tories. As the manifesto takes shape that’s where that question will be road tested.

Labour need to avoid doing anything daft with their manifesto and they'll be fine.

You just need to read the Conservatives 5 key priorities. Not one of them is aspirational or likely to get Joe public talking positively or enthusiastically about them.

Halving inflation? Who cares. It may be a sensible thing to strive for but it's in no way a vote winner. It's never been a subject to motivate people to get out and vote and isn't one that gets discussed round the dinner table.

Reducing national debt? Ditto.

I've noticed Labour talk more and more about preparing to govern. It's a good strategy and they should stick with it. They need to be the party offering hope and positivity to the country, something the Conservatives have failed to do for a while.

Just realised I put this in the wrong thread!

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/channel4news/status/1659115842125144066?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

plans for 7,000 new homes between ingliston park and ride and the Gogar roundabout gets a step closer New Edinburgh town with 7,000 homes set for outskirts of the city (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/new-edinburgh-town-with-7-000-homes-set-for-outskirts-of-the-city/ar-AA1bmjuq?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=c32fa3cc298341dd8ef0d758691cc874&ei=11)

a 20-minute neighbourhood, i've never heard that saying before

[Ozyhibby]

plans for 7,000 new homes between ingliston park and ride and the Gogar roundabout gets a step closer New Edinburgh town with 7,000 homes set for outskirts of the city (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/new-edinburgh-town-with-7-000-homes-set-for-outskirts-of-the-city/ar-AA1bmjuq?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=c32fa3cc298341dd8ef0d758691cc874&ei=11)

a 20-minute neighbourhood, i've never heard that saying before

Great news. And already has the tram running through it.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

plans for 7,000 new homes between ingliston park and ride and the Gogar roundabout gets a step closer New Edinburgh town with 7,000 homes set for outskirts of the city (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/new-edinburgh-town-with-7-000-homes-set-for-outskirts-of-the-city/ar-AA1bmjuq?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=c32fa3cc298341dd8ef0d758691cc874&ei=11)

a 20-minute neighbourhood, i've never heard that saying before

The 15 or 20 minutes neighbourhood is a real conspiracy theory rabbit hole on social media.

On the face of it it's an idea to promote local amenities that meet the needs of the local populace and allow the basic needs of society to be withing walking distance of said population. The conspiracy goes it's a plan to trap us all in local ghettoes with permission needed to leave your own sector.

[Ozyhibby]

The 15 or 20 minutes neighbourhood is a real conspiracy theory rabbit hole on social media.

On the face of it it's an idea to promote local amenities that meet the needs of the local populace and allow the basic needs of society to be withing walking distance of said population. The conspiracy goes it's a plan to trap us all in local ghettoes with permission needed to leave your own sector.

Conspiracy theories get weirder all the time. It’s hard to imagine anyone would believe stuff like that but there are obviously people out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Conspiracy theories get weirder all the time. It’s hard to imagine anyone would believe stuff like that but there are obviously people out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk"Go on youtube, do your own research."

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/29/labour-allow-local-authorities-buy-land-cheaply-for-development?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1685386957

Promising. The value from the granting of planning permission should be given to the public who grant the planning permission.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/29/labour-allow-local-authorities-buy-land-cheaply-for-development?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1685386957

Promising. The value from the granting of planning permission should be given to the public who grant the planning permission.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry ozy, are you suggesting that community councils should be the decision makers on planning applications? Dear god, no!! NIMBYism means nothing would get built.

[Ozyhibby]

Sorry ozy, are you suggesting that community councils should be the decision makers on planning applications? Dear god, no!! NIMBYism means nothing would get built.

No, the article is about allowing councils to compulsory purchase land for development.
So I’m Edinburgh that could allow the council to buy the land owned by Murray at Ratho for the price of farmland. It can then give it the appropriate planning permission and build the houses. The council would bank the profit from their actions, we all get new houses and Murray gets no windfall from planning permission that we gift. I think this will result in more planning applications being granted rather than less if the council coffers were being swelled by doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

No, the article is about allowing councils to compulsory purchase land for development.
So I’m Edinburgh that could allow the council to buy the land owned by Murray at Ratho for the price of farmland. It can then give it the appropriate planning permission and build the houses. The council would bank the profit from their actions, we all get new houses and Murray gets no windfall from planning permission that we gift. I think this will result in more planning applications being granted rather than less if the council coffers were being swelled by doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So why can the council get planning permission and Murray can’t? It’s a massive conflict of interest seems as the council are the ones who grant it.

Refuse the developer, buy it from the the developer, gain planning? That would be scandalous.

A right to buy over certain plots or farmland would be fine.

For example, a landowner who could gain planning for 100-200 houses in a desirable area, but chooses not too. That would be a reasonable use of such powers.

[Ozyhibby]

So why can the council get planning permission and Murray can’t? It’s a massive conflict of interest seems as the council are the ones who grant it.

Refuse the developer, buy it from the the developer, gain planning? That would be scandalous.

A right to buy over certain plots or farmland would be fine.

For example, a landowner who could gain planning for 100-200 houses in a desirable area, but chooses not too. That would be a reasonable use of such powers.

Why should Murray benefit from planning permission that the public grants? It’s the public who have to put up with the loss of green space, therefore it’s the public who should benefit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Why should Murray benefit from planning permission that the public grants? It’s the public who have to put up with the loss of green space, therefore it’s the public who should benefit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what confused me before. The public don't grant planning permission, the council planning officers are the ones who determine planning applications. More contentious applications usually being determined by the elected members of the planning committee.

[Ozyhibby]

That's what confused me before. The public don't grant planning permission, the council planning officers are the ones who determine planning applications. More contentious applications usually being determined by the elected members of the planning committee.

The government know roughly how many new houses we need to build. It should have the power to buy the land it needs to build them. It can then build to a timetable that suits our needs and not a developers needs. No more land banking. House builders can then start making their profits from building houses and not land appreciation. It will encourage them to build quicker, invest in productivity etc.
Local govt is incentivised to provide housing and we all benefit from the healthier balance sheets in local govt. Less council tax rises etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

The government know roughly how many new houses we need to build. It should have the power to buy the land it needs to build them. It can then build to a timetable that suits our needs and not a developers needs. No more land banking. House builders can then start making their profits from building houses and not land appreciation. It will encourage them to build quicker, invest in productivity etc.
Local govt is incentivised to provide housing and we all benefit from the healthier balance sheets in local govt. Less council tax rises etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're forgetting one major hurdle, the Scottish Government has no borrowing power! Where is this magic money tree to buy hectares of land and who will build the 'affordable housing'?

[Stairway 2 7]

You're forgetting one major hurdle, the Scottish Government has no borrowing power! Where is this magic money tree to buy hectares of land and who will build the 'affordable housing'?

Land that makes you massive profits doesn't need to come from a magic money tree. I think it's a great idea but dubious it happens. We desperately need more housing however it happens

[Ozyhibby]

You're forgetting one major hurdle, the Scottish Government has no borrowing power! Where is this magic money tree to buy hectares of land and who will build the 'affordable housing'?

There is no doubt it needs Labour in London to make it happen. We are not allowed to make decisions like this in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Land that makes you massive profits doesn't need to come from a magic money tree. I think it's a great idea but dubious it happens. We desperately need more housing however it happens

It’s been talked about for years by economists. Be great if it eventually happens. It’s a bit mad that private individuals profit of something that is gifted by the public when it’s the public who lose out on the amenity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

It’s been talked about for years by economists. Be great if it eventually happens. It’s a bit mad that private individuals profit of something that is gifted by the public when it’s the public who lose out on the amenity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please, please explain what is being gifted by 'the public'? Who owned the land at Hermiston Gate before Murray, for example?

[Ozyhibby]

Please, please explain what is being gifted by 'the public'? Who owned the land at Hermiston Gate before Murray, for example?

If the land is worth x as farmland and the council allows planning permission then it’s worth y then who should gain from that?
In my opinion it should be the council on our behalf who gave the planning permission that realise the gain. After all, it is us who lose the unspoilt farmland and have houses there instead and we will also have to provide amenities for those new houses from the public purse.
The system just now is not working and is discouraging building in favour of speculating. We need building to be happening a lot faster.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/housing-crisis-labour-lisa-nandy-b2348000.html

More here. It’s a good policy. Not sure if Labour will see it through though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

If the land is worth x as farmland and the council allows planning permission then it’s worth y then who should gain from that?


In my opinion it should be the council on our behalf who gave the planning permission that realise the gain. After all, it is us who lose the unspoilt farmland and have houses there instead and we will also have to provide amenities for those new houses from the public purse.
The system just now is not working and is discouraging building in favour of speculating. We need building to be happening a lot faster.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/housing-crisis-labour-lisa-nandy-b2348000.html

More here. It’s a good policy. Not sure if Labour will see it through though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I live in the countryside. When I moved here in 1989 there were 13 houses. There are now 29. The farmer who owned the land sold it as individual plots for development. He benefited financially from the sales. Why should anyone else benefit from his enterprise?

My biggest town is Perth, currently expanding north and west to the tune of 5,000 or so houses. But also schools, retail and other amenities as part of the planning approval. If this isn't happening where you live then it is down to your local authority. But Perth and Kinross is getting added value from developers.

[greenginger]

You're forgetting one major hurdle, the Scottish Government has no borrowing power! Where is this magic money tree to buy hectares of land and who will build the 'affordable housing'?

Even when the Council own the land they seem to take an age to get any development off the ground.

Take the redundant land that was part of Meadowbank. Sports centre. It’s been lying dormant for 5-7 years. Just last month a planning application for housing etc has been submitted.

I would guess it might might be another 5 years before a brick is laid.

[greenginger]

There is no doubt it needs Labour in London to make it happen. We are not allowed to make decisions like this in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is this not what Scottish Futures Trust was set up to do. Oil the wheels of Scottish Developments .

[Ozyhibby]

I live in the countryside. When I moved here in 1989 there were 13 houses. There are now 29. The farmer who owned the land sold it as individual plots for development. He benefited financially from the sales. Why should anyone else benefit from his enterprise?

My biggest town is Perth, currently expanding north and west to the tune of 5,000 or so houses. But also schools, retail and other amenities as part of the planning approval. If this isn't happening where you live then it is down to your local authority. But Perth and Kinross is getting added value from developers.

Planning permission is controlled by the council though. It was in their gift to turn down that farmer. And why should he be lucky enough to get permission but not all farmers who own land?
The farmers profit should not come from the uplift in land price at the stroke of a pen in a planning dept, it should come from the supply of fantastic houses.
Every farmer in the country would jump at the chance to build on their land. They can’t all get to for obvious reasons. Your farmer was given a gift from the people of Scotland. He had a lottery win. That can’t be what our planning system is?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

That's what confused me before. The public don't grant planning permission, the council planning officers are the ones who determine planning applications. More contentious applications usually being determined by the elected members of the planning committee.

I tthink that's a very narrow interpretation. Council planning officers don't make decisions in isolation, otherwise it would be a system with no consistency, open to bribery and blackmail of individuals. Planning officers implement policy, in line with the legislation, national policy and guidance and local plans set to meet SG requirements around the SHIP and their own agreed priorities through the LHS.

Where decisions need escalated, you are right they will be determined by elected members, or Scottish Ministers. Critically, they are acting as democratically-elected representatives of the people - in essence they speak for 'the public' in that capacity.

[Mibbes Aye]

No, the article is about allowing councils to compulsory purchase land for development.
So I’m Edinburgh that could allow the council to buy the land owned by Murray at Ratho for the price of farmland. It can then give it the appropriate planning permission and build the houses. The council would bank the profit from their actions, we all get new houses and Murray gets no windfall from planning permission that we gift. I think this will result in more planning applications being granted rather than less if the council coffers were being swelled by doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:agree:

In one of your other posts you said you weren't sure that Labour would see this through, if elected. Technically it's not in the manifesto yet anyway, but what do you think would lead to it not going ahead?

[Ozyhibby]

:agree:

In one of your other posts you said you weren't sure that Labour would see this through, if elected. Technically it's not in the manifesto yet anyway, but what do you think would lead to it not going ahead?

Just that I’m not convinced they’ll see it through to the manifesto stage never mind after elected. Not just a Labour thing, I’m wary of any party doing anything about housing in the UK. I would be checking quickly to see how many house builders. developers and land owners are donating to Labour just now and watch if it rises over the next 18 month to the election. Plenty time for it to be quietly dropped. Not a dig at Labour as all parties guilty of it.
We are getting close now to it being politically worthwhile though so maybe.
Couldn’t say for sure but I think that housing must be close to number one issue for the under 40’s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

I live in the countryside. When I moved here in 1989 there were 13 houses. There are now 29. The farmer who owned the land sold it as individual plots for development. He benefited financially from the sales. Why should anyone else benefit from his enterprise?



Spoken like a true Thatcherite! Not so much Moulin Yarns as Moolah Yarns :greengrin

Developments like these don't reaally strike me as genuine enterprise. It's not as if the farmer 'built' the land, is it? What he has done is monetized a land asset. Depending on whether he inherited it or bought it at land value for farming, he may have made a massive return solely from market speculation.

[Ozyhibby]

Spoken like a true Thatcherite! Not so much Moulin Yarns as Moolah Yarns :greengrin

Developments like these don't reaally strike me as genuine enterprise. It's not as if the farmer 'built' the land, is it? What he has done is monetized a land asset. Depending on whether he inherited it or bought it at land value for farming, he may have made a massive return solely from market speculation.

I don’t mind people making money from adding value. The council added to the value by giving the planning permission. The farmer added to the value by building the houses. The profits should be split accordingly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/lbc/status/1663605445175508992?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Just that I’m not convinced they’ll see it through to the manifesto stage never mind after elected. Not just a Labour thing, I’m wary of any party doing anything about housing in the UK. I would be checking quickly to see how many house builders. developers and land owners are donating to Labour just now and watch if it rises over the next 18 month to the election. Plenty time for it to be quietly dropped. Not a dig at Labour as all parties guilty of it.
We are getting close now to it being politically worthwhile though so maybe.
Couldn’t say for sure but I think that housing must be close to number one issue for the under 40’s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get where you are coming from. My own concerns are that, as in 1997, there is a massive need for direct investment into a number of problem areas, but the economy has been wrecked under the Tories. It's at least a two-term job to fix the mess and then improve.

I also think there are tipping points every so often though and sometimes it isn't always predictable when they happen, except in hindsight. The other thing is that while it is challenging to be trying to fighting on several fronts, or putting out the fire in different rooms of the house, there is also an opportunity there.

I would hope to see Labour coming forward in the run-up to the next election not just with policies in all these areas that need repaired, but also with a compelling narrative that binds them together - almost like a Beveridge Report for the 2020s.

I think there are the indicators that we may see this - fixing what the Tories broke and offering the security of an affordable roof over your head, the security of being able to heat your home and feed those in it, the security of being looked after when you need looked after, not on a waiting list for two years, the security of growing up with opportunity and growing old with dignity. There's a broad appetite for that, if the party can get the message across.

[Mibbes Aye]

I don’t mind people making money from adding value. The council added to the value by giving the planning permission. The farmer added to the value by building the houses. The profits should be split accordingly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think the farmer built the houses according to MY, he sold the plots - speculative acquisition originally by him, or by the purchasers when he sold.

To be honest, I don't mind him making money from it so as long as he pays his taxes (and the taxes are set at a level which isn't punitive but do refelct that society is something we all contribute to and take from, in a way that is fair and benefits the common good as well as the individual)

[Colr]

If the land is worth x as farmland and the council allows planning permission then it’s worth y then who should gain from that?
In my opinion it should be the council on our behalf who gave the planning permission that realise the gain. After all, it is us who lose the unspoilt farmland and have houses there instead and we will also have to provide amenities for those new houses from the public purse.
The system just now is not working and is discouraging building in favour of speculating. We need building to be happening a lot faster.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/housing-crisis-labour-lisa-nandy-b2348000.html

More here. It’s a good policy. Not sure if Labour will see it through though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m hearing this enough to believe they are sincere.

It can also be linked to the greenbelt policy.

Some reference commission for new towns successes.

Land supply is a parallel problem to planning. I’m wholly in favour but I want to see sub-regional planning bodies wrapped around London and maybe elsewhere.

Very excited about this. It’s been a long, long time coming!!!

[Colr]

Just that I’m not convinced they’ll see it through to the manifesto stage never mind after elected. Not just a Labour thing, I’m wary of any party doing anything about housing in the UK. I would be checking quickly to see how many house builders. developers and land owners are donating to Labour just now and watch if it rises over the next 18 month to the election. Plenty time for it to be quietly dropped. Not a dig at Labour as all parties guilty of it.
We are getting close now to it being politically worthwhile though so maybe.
Couldn’t say for sure but I think that housing must be close to number one issue for the under 40’s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You may be surprised then by the level of support for (and active involvement with) Labour from significant sections of the housebuilding and housing association sectors.

The Tories aren’t engaging with the industry. “Bugger business” as Alex Johnson said

[Moulin Yarns]

I don't think the farmer built the houses according to MY, he sold the plots - speculative acquisition originally by him, or by the purchasers when he sold.

To be honest, I don't mind him making money from it so as long as he pays his taxes (and the taxes are set at a level which isn't punitive but do refelct that society is something we all contribute to and take from, in a way that is fair and benefits the common good as well as the individual)

Some of the plots were redundant farm buildings and the rest were field margins with other properties making arable farming difficult. Fine for livestock but not mixed farming. This was certainly not prime agricultural land. The council has benefited from additional council tax from LARGE properties, £600k+ each.

[Mibbes Aye]

Some of the plots were redundant farm buildings and the rest were field margins with other properties making arable farming difficult. Fine for livestock but not mixed farming. This was certainly not prime agricultural land. The council has benefited from additional council tax from LARGE properties, £600k+ each.

Assuming the houses were band H, 30 would generate around £100,000? P&K has a gross budget of over £500m and a significant overspend IIRC.

It would be interesting to know whether P&K know what their spend is on emergency accommodation, out-of-area placements etc and see if CPO legislation would have allowed them to build, using prudential borrowing, and divert the money from facilitating poor outcomes for those in unsatisfacory housing positions.

[1875godsgift]

Some of the plots were redundant farm buildings and the rest were field margins with other properties making arable farming difficult. Fine for livestock but not mixed farming. This was certainly not prime agricultural land. The council has benefited from additional council tax from LARGE properties, £600k+ each.

That's great!

Affordable housing for local people then?

[Hibrandenburg]

Some New Towns anybody?

[Moulin Yarns]

Assuming the houses were band H, 30 would generate around £100,000? P&K has a gross budget of over £500m and a significant overspend IIRC.

It would be interesting to know whether P&K know what their spend is on emergency accommodation, out-of-area placements etc and see if CPO legislation would have allowed them to build, using prudential borrowing, and divert the money from facilitating poor outcomes for those in unsatisfacory housing positions.

100k more than pkc got before, a good thing.

Lots of new people in the area to support the local economy, a good thing.

Employment for local businesses, a good thing.

At least 4 of the properties are also business owners, employing local people, a good thing.


Not everything is a negative you know.

[Ozyhibby]

100k more than pkc got before, a good thing.

Lots of new people in the area to support the local economy, a good thing.

Employment for local businesses, a good thing.

At least 4 of the properties are also business owners, employing local people, a good thing.


Not everything is a negative you know.

Building new houses is good. The system as it is just now doesn’t supply enough of them. It has to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Building new houses is good. The system as it is just now doesn’t supply enough of them. It has to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I gave an example of Perth, which will grow by more than 13% in the coming years. At least one local authority is tackling the shortage.

[Colr]

Some New Towns anybody?

It’s a sensible solution if you can introduce regional planning authorities.

I’d love to do one. As an ex-new town kid, I’ve got a few opinions on how to do it better!

[Mibbes Aye]

100k more than pkc got before, a good thing.

Lots of new people in the area to support the local economy, a good thing.

Employment for local businesses, a good thing.

At least 4 of the properties are also business owners, employing local people, a good thing.


Not everything is a negative you know.

That's short-sighted IMO - once you factor in infrastructure costs for the council, and whether those represented a net loss on the section 75s, then there's a risk to the council.

Perhaps more importantly, there is an opportunity cost. P&K spend at least £2m on out-of-area residential placements for looked after children. It's well-established and agreed by everybody that out-of-area leads to poor outcomes. It feels like the powers around CPOs being talked about may have given P&K the opportunity to save money and deliver better outcomes, if managed properly.

As for the rest of your post, I'm assuming the business owners already employed people before they moved into their new homes? So that's a moot point. Out of interest, was any affordable housing required?

[Moulin Yarns]

That's short-sighted IMO - once you factor in infrastructure costs for the council, and whether those represented a net loss on the section 75s, then there's a risk to the council.

Perhaps more importantly, there is an opportunity cost. P&K spend at least £2m on out-of-area residential placements for looked after children. It's well-established and agreed by everybody that out-of-area leads to poor outcomes. It feels like the powers around CPOs being talked about may have given P&K the opportunity to save money and deliver better outcomes, if managed properly.

As for the rest of your post, I'm assuming the business owners already employed people before they moved into their new homes? So that's a moot point. Out of interest, was any affordable housing required?

Absolutely nothing you say is relevant for individual plots sold for self build which is how the plots were sold. This wasn't a developer building speculative housing. No public money was spent on infrastructure such as roads for infill building plots.

[Mibbes Aye]

Absolutely nothing you say is relevant for individual plots sold for self build which is how the plots were sold. This wasn't a developer building speculative housing. No public money was spent on infrastructure such as roads for infill building plots.

I know he didn't build the houses - you already said. The farmer monetised a land asset and drip-fed it to the market on the basis of its potential for building expensive homes. He didnt 'build' the land, he acquired it in some way, shape or form and let market forces increase its values. Which takes us back to the original point -he didn't exactly show enterprise here, but nevertheless if it is viable land for development, the council could CP it under the proposed legislation and put it to use that is good for a lot more. Let's face it, their finances are a matter of public record and something like this could be a much needed 'spend to save'.

Of course, there may be good reasons why it isn't suitable. Nevertheless, using CPOs that reflect land value rather than hope value is an effective and economic tool to help tackle the housing crisis. Labour are right to be putting it out there, even if it reduces windfall profits for property and land speculators.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-65846327?at_medium=social&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_id=550B8316-05F7-11EE-A69C-42E0D772BE90&at_format=link&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_link_type=web_link&at_bbc_team=editorial

Another blow for housing. Hopefully the council change what they need to change and still follow through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wookie70]

So why can the council get planning permission and Murray can’t? It’s a massive conflict of interest seems as the council are the ones who grant it.

Refuse the developer, buy it from the the developer, gain planning? That would be scandalous.

A right to buy over certain plots or farmland would be fine.

For example, a landowner who could gain planning for 100-200 houses in a desirable area, but chooses not too. That would be a reasonable use of such powers.

If I was FM that is what I would do. I have no issue with being unfair on the face of it for the public good and CPOs are definitely for the Public Good when it comes to improving housing. I would only build state owned homes though and not seek to profit from land sales.

I would grab back all the land that the Duke of Buccleuch etc etc sold to developers that sits there waiting for the areas to be rich enough to make massive profits from. I'd then take the land he hasn't sold and give the least value possible to buy it back. Much of it was essentially "public" land to start with that was gifted to the rich by the English Crown.

I wish the government would do more on Land Reform. They did a good job to start off with but when Andy Wightman lost his seat it all went quiet. Some of the work he did could have been used to make laws which could really transform Scotland.

In terms of the money needed I reckon the Tram project would cost more than buying huge amounts of land and making it social housing with appropriate infrastructure. We could afford that and the Queensferry Crossing so money is available for massive projects that are worthwhile and benefit huge numbers of citizens. Not sure over priced private housing that dilutes an already under resourced infrastructure benefits anyone particularly if profits end up in the Cayman Islands

[Ozyhibby]

If I was FM that is what I would do. I have no issue with being unfair on the face of it for the public good and CPOs are definitely for the Public Good when it comes to improving housing. I would only build state owned homes though and not seek to profit from land sales.

I would grab back all the land that the Duke of Buccleuch etc etc sold to developers that sits there waiting for the areas to be rich enough to make massive profits from. I'd then take the land he hasn't sold and give the least value possible to buy it back. Much of it was essentially "public" land to start with that was gifted to the rich by the English Crown.

I wish the government would do more on Land Reform. They did a good job to start off with but when Andy Wightman lost his seat it all went quiet. Some of the work he did could have been used to make laws which could really transform Scotland.

In terms of the money needed I reckon the Tram project would cost more than buying huge amounts of land and making it social housing with appropriate infrastructure. We could afford that and the Queensferry Crossing so money is available for massive projects that are worthwhile and benefit huge numbers of citizens. Not sure over priced private housing that dilutes an already under resourced infrastructure benefits anyone particularly if profits end up in the Cayman Islands

The SG has land reform proposal going through consultation just now but I think there is zero chance it gets past Alistair Jack so I would get your hopes up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/extending-rent-cap-will-bring-families-stability-lorna-slater-4178611

This is stupidity from Slater as rents in Scotland are rising faster than rest of UK since she introduced it. At the very least, before going back to parliament to seek an extension, she should be commissioning a study to see what effect the policy has had so far.
This hurts young people and those who change tenancy regularly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1668273408335855617?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Housing market in for further shocks. Everything that happened under Truss has now happened again under Sunak, just took a bit longer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65928188?at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_id=BB16D8D8-0C3A-11EE-B606-2A273AE5AB7B&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_type=web_link&at_format=link&at_medium=social

I honestly think we are heading for biggest crash since early 90’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65928188?at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_id=BB16D8D8-0C3A-11EE-B606-2A273AE5AB7B&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_type=web_link&at_format=link&at_medium=social

I honestly think we are heading for biggest crash since early 90’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's inevitable, the only question is how high the waves are going to be and how far they extend beyond the shore.

[Ozyhibby]

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-news-agents/id1640878689?i=1000617293829

Large bit in today’s podcast about housing. They are talking about 30% house price falls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk