Housing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

If managed properly then it would appear so. I really don't understand the role of the financial intermediary?

"A £22 million investment has been made into a scheme to increase investment in affordable homes and deliver more housing.

As part of Scotland's Charitable Bond Programme, the Scottish Government has provided funding to issue two new bonds via finance intermediary Allia to housing providers Link and Cairn Housing Association to provide support for more than 150 new homes.

The programme, which has been running since 2014, provides loans to social landlords to construct new affordable homes, with the interest being reinvested by the Scottish Government into the affordable housing budget to support more homes for social rent.

This latest extension will see the total number of bonds issued increased to 40 and a total investment of more than £482 million.

---

The SG is simply the source of capital.

The intermediary essentially does the donkey work. Most likely doing due diligence on the proposals from those seeking to raise the capital, the legals around the specific bond issuance and looking after the flow of monies between the parties and the like.

The assumption here is the bond interest will be lower (and thus the lower funding costs will ultimately feed through to lower rent) than what can be found on the normal capital markets and that the SG uses that return on capital and the return of capital to feed back into the loop.

All seems sensible enough but without actual ££ figures on how much better that approach is and how large this is in ££ against the rest of funding in the sector who really knows if it’s making any difference and if so how much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

The SG is simply the source of capital.

The intermediary essentially does the donkey work. Most likely doing due diligence on the proposals from those seeking to raise the capital, the legals around the specific bond issuance and looking after the flow of monies between the parties and the like.

The assumption here is the bond interest will be lower (and thus the lower funding costs will ultimately feed through to lower rent) than what can be found on the normal capital markets and that the SG uses that return on capital and the return of capital to feed back into the loop.

All seems sensible enough but without actual ££ figures on how much better that approach is and how large this is in ££ against the rest of funding in the sector who really knows if it’s making any difference and if so how much.

---

Seems to have been ramped up a bit in 2023.

https://alliacc.com/debt-capital-mar...ritable-bonds/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

An advert popped up on Instagram,


https://www.amazon.co.uk/MOLVUS-Cont...s%2C125&sr=8-2




Housing solution for temporary accommodation? There's a few options, search tiny house on amazon.

---

How much does a basic house actually cost to build in terms of labour and materials.

Of the cost of a house price, the land is probably the majority and the roads and utilities another chunk. I googled UK’s cheapest new build and the result was

“ Hyndburn, North West (£99,034 average new build price”

By the time you bought land to put the cabin on and built some roads and connected it to the grid, sewage ext, the price would be much higher than £12500. For all the difference in price you would probably be as-well building a low spec house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Only 150 homes though. If that is all govt can afford to invest then they need to find a way to leverage in some private investment. We need a lot more than 150 homes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

https://www.amazon.co.uk/MOLVUS-Container-Expandable-Portable-Restroom%EF%BC%8CPortable/dp/B0CZ1472MX/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=Q8VNDE64RDXC&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9. DVxwH4kdCzAzxrkSE0O8Yf6BGq9rPM5gVosZweN2Aa4e6cY2wk FMlfBfL9PLJCknlpj6lZHpOrqYO0i5sTqGtc_TqCXRiANF1til LaSZaPf_PaMeD_kTmqtKqOih_ab8zJqin6MSF4rFgA2Hi3vwNA HqnZywgot-MwiA-tc6WhniGCTAFn3NxTBvet-owcVa9IfECfPfFK_bMw3vMtmwpA.khCRV7bp5GicwsDx1zBhpt 9J9PYMygczSH0AG4MzOtA&dib_tag=se&keywords=tiny+hou se&qid=1727785950&sprefix=tiny%2Caps%2C125&sr=8-2

Oh look, cheap affordable temporary accommodation, which you dissed. Static caravans are 3 times the cost. The biggest problem is land to put them on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.amazon.co.uk/MOLVUS-Container-Expandable-Portable-Restroom%EF%BC%8CPortable/dp/B0CZ1472MX/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=Q8VNDE64RDXC&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9. DVxwH4kdCzAzxrkSE0O8Yf6BGq9rPM5gVosZweN2Aa4e6cY2wk FMlfBfL9PLJCknlpj6lZHpOrqYO0i5sTqGtc_TqCXRiANF1til LaSZaPf_PaMeD_kTmqtKqOih_ab8zJqin6MSF4rFgA2Hi3vwNA HqnZywgot-MwiA-tc6WhniGCTAFn3NxTBvet-owcVa9IfECfPfFK_bMw3vMtmwpA.khCRV7bp5GicwsDx1zBhpt 9J9PYMygczSH0AG4MzOtA&dib_tag=se&keywords=tiny+hou se&qid=1727785950&sprefix=tiny%2Caps%2C125&sr=8-2

Oh look, cheap affordable temporary accommodation, which you dissed. Static caravans are 3 times the cost. The biggest problem is land to put them on.

---

I wasn’t dissing it. It’s just that build cost isn’t what is making housing unaffordable. It’s the deliberate restricting of the supply of land for putting the houses on. There is less chance of getting planning for one of them than an actual house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's land that's the big problem and the irony is everyone is screaming out for land reform whether that's in the form of a land tax, some sort of Council Tax equivalent or whatever. There's actually big political points to be had in a radical change of land ownership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I wasn’t dissing it. It’s just that build cost isn’t what is making housing unaffordable. It’s the deliberate restricting of the supply of land for putting the houses on. There is less chance of getting planning for one of them than an actual house.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I agree, release the land banks and we could build thousands of homes. Unfortunately the developers hold all the cards. I have a large enough garden that I could put one of those on,but we need thousands.

My point is the costs of the infrastructure is minimal, the land and utility connections are what brings the cost up.

I've no idea what the energy rating of these are, but the hebhomes I linked earlier is A rating for about £150k built.


Edit: I think you, Andy and me are on the same page

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

I agree, release the land banks and we could build thousands of homes. Unfortunately the developers hold all the cards. I have a large enough garden that I could put one of those on,but we need thousands.

My point is the costs of the infrastructure is minimal, the land and utility connections are what brings the cost up.

I've no idea what the energy rating of these are, but the hebhomes I linked earlier is A rating for about £150k built.


Edit: I think you, Andy and me are on the same page

---

I’m not disagreeing. Land needs freed up for building. And the minute you get permission to build on it, you should start getting taxed on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I’m not disagreeing. Land needs freed up for building. And the minute you get permission to build on it, you should start getting taxed on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

https://www.social-bite.co.uk/what-we-do/the-social-bite-village-model/

This model has to be expanded around the country. At least as a stepping stone to a permanent home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.social-bite.co.uk/what-we-do/the-social-bite-village-model/

This model has to be expanded around the country. At least as a stepping stone to a permanent home.

---

I’m all for schemes like that.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.social-bite.co.uk/what-we-do/the-social-bite-village-model/

This model has to be expanded around the country. At least as a stepping stone to a permanent home.

---

There are some flaws to what has been done by Social Bite Village down at Granton. Two folk sharing a tiny wee cabin isn't a model of temporary housing that works for many, the same with communal kitchen areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

There are some flaws to what has been done by Social Bite Village down at Granton. Two folk sharing a tiny wee cabin isn't a model of temporary housing that works for many, the same with communal kitchen areas.

---

It’s better than sharing a doorway though. No scheme is ever perfect.
I’d prefer we could just build enough houses that these schemes were not needed but until then it’s better than nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

It’s better than sharing a doorway though. No scheme is ever perfect.
I’d prefer we could just build enough houses that these schemes were not needed but until then it’s better than nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Of course it's better than a doorway. However, there are other many other less hyped services providing temporary accommodation in Edinburgh and cramped shared living spaces don't feature in them.

There has been a lot of publicity given to Social Bite and whilst it's received huge backing from media, celebrities and the wider public, it's not been a model that has been hugely developed upon. The proposed new village now includes single occupancy cabins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Of course it's better than a doorway. However, there are other many other less hyped services providing temporary accommodation in Edinburgh and cramped shared living spaces don't feature in them.

There has been a lot of publicity given to Social Bite and whilst it's received huge backing from media, celebrities and the wider public, it's not been a model that has been hugely developed upon. The proposed new village now includes single occupancy cabins.

---

How do you know it's not been developed?

The social cafe movement is huge, and there's more than the Granton village.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

How do you know it's not been developed?

The social cafe movement is huge, and there's more than the Granton village.

---

I know because I looked at their website. They have three projects accommodating around 50 people across Scotland. This suggests to me that it's a model of housing that hasn't had huge uptake. I'm not saying they don't do good work, but I can guarantee you that there are people in this sector that would make a good case for making more effective use of the resources Social Bite have had access to.

How many Social Bites cafes are there across Scotland? I question the huge description. There are lots of community, social care and religious organisation's feeding people, including our football club.

Social Bites is well marketed and the public like it. Good for them, they do good work, and not just with temporary housing. There is also amazing work from other under the radar organisations, some of whom reach a lot more people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

I know because I looked at their website. They have three projects accommodating around 50 people across Scotland. This suggests to me that it's a model of housing that hasn't had huge uptake. I'm not saying they don't do good work, but I can guarantee you that there are people in this sector that would make a good case for making more effective use of the resources Social Bite have had access to.

How many Social Bites cafes are there across Scotland? I question the huge description. There are lots of community, social care and religious organisation's feeding people, including our football club.

Social Bites is well marketed and the public like it. Good for them, they do good work, and not just with temporary housing. There is also amazing work from other under the radar organisations, some of whom reach a lot more people.

---

Except you are only looking at Social Bite, the Scottish enterprise. Go around the uk, I saw 3 Social cafes in Oxford alone last week on holiday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Except you are only looking at Social Bite, the Scottish enterprise. Go around the uk, I saw 3 Social cafes in Oxford alone last week on holiday.

---

Ok :rolleyes:

The link you posted , which I responded to identifies 4 social bite cafes in the UK, three of which are in Scotland. All the Social Bite Villages are in Scotland.

It’s weird how everyone thinks landlords make a fortune but we have to get charities to provide housing for people? That shows how broken the system is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

It’s weird how everyone thinks landlords make a fortune but we have to get charities to provide housing for people? That shows how broken the system is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

That's why landlords will be at the top of the list of hammerings come budget time. Although there's not much hammering left they can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

That's why landlords will be at the top of the list of hammerings come budget time. Although there's not much hammering left they can do.

---

Yip. They are being forced out at a rapid pace now. And it’s stopping new housing being built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Ok :rolleyes:

The link you posted , which I responded to identifies 4 social bite cafes in the UK, three of which are in Scotland. All the Social Bite Villages are in Scotland.

---

I've no idea if they do well with the money they receive or if they could do better as I don't know the facts. Without other knowledge I'd say they do good and highlight an important cause.

What they say

https://www.social-bite.co.uk/who-we-are/

Social Bite began life as a small coffee shop in Edinburgh, Scotland, in August 2012. We became involved in the homelessness issue when a young homeless man named Peter came into the coffee shop one day to ask us for a job.

When we offered this young man employment, this was the origin of an unexpected 10 years of charitable work and campaigning on the homelessness issue. We believe in the power of supportive employment to transform people’s lives; our ongoing aim is for 1 in 4 of our team to have come from a background of homelessness

This has led to us becoming a major employer of people experiencing homelessness and extreme barriers to employment, as well as one of the largest providers of free freshly made free food in the UK to those in need. We typically provide over 180,000 items of food and hot drinks every year through our network of coffee shops and distributed over 800,000 food packs during the pandemic

From 2016 to 2018, we organised mass participation fundraising sleep out events called Sleep in the Park. These events have seen over 18,000 people sleep out to call for an end to homelessness. The events have raised over £8 million which has been invested in a range of flagship projects to try and bring an end to homelessness

With funds raised from Sleep in the Park events, in 2018, we launched The Social Bite Village. For this project we took on some vacant council-owned land in Edinburgh and built a small village made up of 11 two-bedroom prefabricated houses and a large community hub. Today this village is home to a vibrant community of people helping each other get back on their feet. We partner with the Cyrenians to provide dedicated on-site support with links to employment, education and community activities.

We also created and launched Scotland’s Housing First program. For this program we secured 830 mainstream flats across 5 cities to provide permanent homes to Scotland’s rough sleepers and alongside The Scottish Government, we helped to fund wrap-around support to help people sustain their tenancies. More than 1333 people have now been given homes with support, and the response has been adopted by all local authorities in Scotland

Starting in 2014 we have opened our shops every Christmas Day and Christmas Eve to host festivities with all the trimmings, for people who might not have anywhere else to go. Since 2020 our annual Festival of Kindness collects gifts and donations throughout the festive period to support for people who are vulnerable or experiencing homelessness

In 2021, we consolidated learnings and launched our UK-wide employment programme. Jobs First provides real job opportunities with wrap-around support to people who have experienced homelessness. We have already supported over 28 formerly homeless people into employment and are working with 9 employers across the UK to transform access to the job market for those who have previously been excluded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

That's why landlords will be at the top of the list of hammerings come budget time. Although there's not much hammering left they can do.

---

Are you referring to the predicted alignment of CGT with income tax band, or something else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

Are you referring to the predicted alignment of CGT with income tax band, or something else?

---

That for starters but I reckon there'll be more, landlords are an easy target.

Not housing but planning which is ridiculously poor in the UK. There must be a reason why planning is so slow and so expensive in the UK it can't just be NIMBYs, some people probably donors must be trousering the money from this insanity

https://x.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/184220891053237494

@Sam_Dumitriu
It cost £297m to produce the Lower Thames Crossing's 359,866 page long planning application.

That's more than it cost Norway to build the world's longest road tunnel.

The Department for Transport was meant to decide whether to approve it today. Instead, we got another delay

There have been 7 (!) consultations on the Lower Thames Crossing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Ok :rolleyes:

The link you posted , which I responded to identifies 4 social bite cafes in the UK, three of which are in Scotland. All the Social Bite Villages are in Scotland.

---

Social Bite is one enterprise, based in Edinburgh, there are other ones in other areas of the UK!

As I said, in Oxford I found 3 cafes with Social enterprises at the core. Feel free to find others because there are plenty!


I see that Stairway has given more context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

Are you referring to the predicted alignment of CGT with income tax band, or something else?

---

Osbourne struck the biggest blow with his section 24 tax changes. It has decimated the industry. There are very few new entrants now and people are selling up and getting out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Social Bite is one enterprise, based in Edinburgh, there are other ones in other areas of the UK!

As I said, in Oxford I found 3 cafes with Social enterprises at the core. Feel free to find others because there are plenty!


I see that Stairway has given more context.

---

"We also created and launched Scotland’s Housing First program. For this program we secured 830 mainstream flats across 5 cities to provide permanent homes to Scotland’s rough sleepers and alongside The Scottish Government, we helped to fund wrap-around support to help people sustain their tenancies. More than 1333 people have now been given homes with support, and the response has been adopted by all local authorities in Scotland"

Very disingenuous statement. Social Bite are speaking about contributing funding to a largely Scottish Government funded national initiative, implemented by local authorities in partnership with a number of partners from housing providers and the third sector (not all local authorities have joined this initiative).

History

"That year, Social Bite catalysed a Housing First Pathfinder across 5 cities with £3m funding. In 2019, the Scottish Government connected the Government/CoSLA high level commitment to Housing First to the Social Bite programme that was already underway and in doing so became the main funder of a larger £10m Housing First Pathfinder programme to March 2022 that can reach further.

Toward the end of 2019, Scottish Government approved a progressive programme of work to ensure that people with frontline and lived experience of homelessness, through a new change team, will be at the heart of driving change over the next decade. We are proud to be leading on this work."

https://homelessnetwork.scot/history/

Social Bite are not senior partners within the Housing First initiative, far from it. As far as I understand they aren't really involved in the delivery at all. Information on the various partnerships seems a bit out of date. Here's an annual report from the Rapid Rehousing Transition initiative. I will credit Social Bite with contributing to the funding, alongside Merchant's House Glasgow and the Scottish Government, but not with providing the properties or supporting the people who live in them.

Rapid Rehousing Transition Initiative Plans are part of Scotland’s strategy to end homelessness, developed and delivered in response to local authority
circumstances. Local authorities have been working on the development and implementation of their rapid rehousing transition plan (RRTP) since 2019 and this report provides a summary of the work carried out by local authorities and their partners on progressing their plans in 2020/21. Many well known providers quoted, not Social Bite though.


https://www.gov.scot/binaries/conten...%2B2020-21.pdf

The founder of Social Bite is a polemic figure. He has been fantastic at engaging the wider public, fund raising and publicity/raising awareness of homelessness, whilst also managing to be subject to investigation by the Scottish Charities regulator, which was upheld (this was around governance).

https://x.com/holyroodsources/status...dxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

It's land that's the big problem and the irony is everyone is screaming out for land reform whether that's in the form of a land tax, some sort of Council Tax equivalent or whatever. There's actually big political points to be had in a radical change of land ownership.

---

I think the SNP could get back on track if they started forming policy on radical land reform. Tax would be one way but I would rather the land was back in public hands with a view to building new towns and houses. CPO at the lowest cost possible massive chunks of land that was essentially gifted to Lords and Dukes and use it for the common good. Better still just take it back much of it was acquired on the back on citizens who got nothing for what they sacrificed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

"We also created and launched Scotland’s Housing First program. For this program we secured 830 mainstream flats across 5 cities to provide permanent homes to Scotland’s rough sleepers and alongside The Scottish Government, we helped to fund wrap-around support to help people sustain their tenancies. More than 1333 people have now been given homes with support, and the response has been adopted by all local authorities in Scotland"

Very disingenuous statement. Social Bite are speaking about contributing funding to a largely Scottish Government funded national initiative, implemented by local authorities in partnership with a number of partners from housing providers and the third sector (not all local authorities have joined this initiative).

History

"That year, Social Bite catalysed a Housing First Pathfinder across 5 cities with £3m funding. In 2019, the Scottish Government connected the Government/CoSLA high level commitment to Housing First to the Social Bite programme that was already underway and in doing so became the main funder of a larger £10m Housing First Pathfinder programme to March 2022 that can reach further.

Toward the end of 2019, Scottish Government approved a progressive programme of work to ensure that people with frontline and lived experience of homelessness, through a new change team, will be at the heart of driving change over the next decade. We are proud to be leading on this work."

https://homelessnetwork.scot/history/

Social Bite are not senior partners within the Housing First initiative, far from it. As far as I understand they aren't really involved in the delivery at all. Information on the various partnerships seems a bit out of date. Here's an annual report from the Rapid Rehousing Transition initiative. I will credit Social Bite with contributing to the funding, alongside Merchant's House Glasgow and the Scottish Government, but not with providing the properties or supporting the people who live in them.

Rapid Rehousing Transition Initiative Plans are part of Scotland’s strategy to end homelessness, developed and delivered in response to local authority
circumstances. Local authorities have been working on the development and implementation of their rapid rehousing transition plan (RRTP) since 2019 and this report provides a summary of the work carried out by local authorities and their partners on progressing their plans in 2020/21. Many well known providers quoted, not Social Bite though.


https://www.gov.scot/binaries/conten...%2B2020-21.pdf

The founder of Social Bite is a polemic figure. He has been fantastic at engaging the wider public, fund raising and publicity/raising awareness of homelessness, whilst also managing to be subject to investigation by the Scottish Charities regulator, which was upheld (this was around governance).

---

What is your fixation with Social Bite? I have mentioned others, here's one in Perth https://www.giraffe-trading.co.uk/our-social-aims/

As well as homeless people, those with learning difficulties are given employment. In a few hours in Oxford I came across 3 similar social cafes, none were part of the social bite empire.

Regardless, they are all helping those people who are disadvantaged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

What is your fixation with Social Bite? I have mentioned others, here's one in Perth https://www.giraffe-trading.co.uk/our-social-aims/

As well as homeless people, those with learning difficulties are given employment. In a few hours in Oxford I came across 3 similar social cafes, none were part of the social bite empire.

Regardless, they are all helping those people who are disadvantaged.

---

I have a long standing professional interest in social care (including homelessness, addictions and mental health services) and an enduring passion for addressing inequality. I'm hardly fixated on Social Bite, I thought we were having a conversation?

I can tell you anecdotally that they are not universally loved in their sector, neither is Housing First approaches to reducing homelessness.

I totally agree that social enterprise has a significant role to play in supporting people who are disadvantaged.

Heard in my Local BackWerk that Labour will be sending high profile observers to look at the German system of providing social housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg

Heard in my Local BackWerk that Labour will be sending high profile observers to look at the German system of providing social housing.

---

Commissions a couple of studies by McKinsey or the like, spend a few hundred million quid and by year 5 of this government we’ll have about 10 houses.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://news.stv.tv/east-central/fal...sing-emergency

This happens in Edinburgh as well. Council houses lying empty for months because the council does not have the budget to bring them up to standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quality housing can be achieved

Kevin McCloud: ‘The whole house-building market, and model, is broken’ – Article here-https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandproperty/property-news/kevin-mccloud-the-whole-housebuilding-market-and-model-is-broken-b1186346.html

The Grand Designs host has argued against a fixation on housing numbers, saying that it leads to a neglect of quality in construction. According to McCloud, the house-building market prioritizes profit for shareholders over providing affordable, quality housing. The consequence is the compromising of standards and issues such as the Grenfell tragedy.

McCloud argues that local authorities should have the power to set higher building standards than those set out in the building regulations in order to promote environmentally friendly housing solutions. He points out that quality housing can be achieved by learning from successful social housing projects, which often employ innovative technologies like passive housing and renewable energy sources. Social housing is often at the forefront of implementing new technologies that prioritize residents’ well-being: the government should look to local housing associations for examples of high-quality, sustainable housing rather than foreign models, demonstrating that quality housing can be built effectively in the UK.

It is incredible and tragic that we continue to build housing that will need to be retrofitted at great expense to meet the challenges of Net Zero, climate change, and spiralling future energy costs. It points to a massive market failure both in housebuilding and the mortgage sector, where banks and building societies are prepared to lend money for the purchase of homes and homeowners that will be highly exposed to increases in energy costs. It also points to the failure by successive governments to adequately regulate and protect home purchasers and occupiers. It is possible to build social housing to passivhaus standards, and there is no excuse for private sector housing not to be built to those same standards.

Back to the question of whether 1.5 million houses are realistic: do you think that it shouldn't be done on the numbers at all?
Well, it's irrelevant.

You have a housing market which has moved from a position in 2009 where it was trying to deliver against government targets to one today, where profits on the average new home have jumped from £6,000 per new dwelling on average to £65,000 per new dwelling on average.

And in that time, by the way, costs have remained static and land values have remained relatively static. For these developers, the focus has shifted from delivering against government targets to delivering profits to shareholders.

Persimmon to March 2022 turned over 4.4 billion pounds and made a 25 per cent profit of £1.1 billion. These are rough generalised figures, but in any other industry, 25 per cent profits would be seen as obscene.

That goes to shareholders. It's just as simple as that. That's what the focus is.

So it doesn't matter what government targets are set, it's irrelevant to that industry.

Does that industry want to deliver against government targets? Does it really want to deliver a surfeit of housing or to deliver against demand? Why would it do that?

Because that creates a basically a situation where you've supplied everything that's demanded of you. In which case, prices start to come down. No one's interested in the industry and prices coming down. They want prices to go up.

It's a simple rule of simple laws of supply and demand. If you create a restriction in the supply, prices go up because things are in short supply, people compete for them.

https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandp...-b1186346.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Quality housing can be achieved

Kevin McCloud: ‘The whole house-building market, and model, is broken’ – Article here-https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandproperty/property-news/kevin-mccloud-the-whole-housebuilding-market-and-model-is-broken-b1186346.html

The Grand Designs host has argued against a fixation on housing numbers, saying that it leads to a neglect of quality in construction. According to McCloud, the house-building market prioritizes profit for shareholders over providing affordable, quality housing. The consequence is the compromising of standards and issues such as the Grenfell tragedy.

McCloud argues that local authorities should have the power to set higher building standards than those set out in the building regulations in order to promote environmentally friendly housing solutions. He points out that quality housing can be achieved by learning from successful social housing projects, which often employ innovative technologies like passive housing and renewable energy sources. Social housing is often at the forefront of implementing new technologies that prioritize residents’ well-being: the government should look to local housing associations for examples of high-quality, sustainable housing rather than foreign models, demonstrating that quality housing can be built effectively in the UK.

It is incredible and tragic that we continue to build housing that will need to be retrofitted at great expense to meet the challenges of Net Zero, climate change, and spiralling future energy costs. It points to a massive market failure both in housebuilding and the mortgage sector, where banks and building societies are prepared to lend money for the purchase of homes and homeowners that will be highly exposed to increases in energy costs. It also points to the failure by successive governments to adequately regulate and protect home purchasers and occupiers. It is possible to build social housing to passivhaus standards, and there is no excuse for private sector housing not to be built to those same standards.

---

I’m 100% behind increasing building standards and enforcing them if it also comes with freeing up land and lifting planning restrictions.
The standard of workmanship in most new builds is horrific.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I’m 100% behind increasing building standards and enforcing them if it also comes with freeing up land and lifting planning restrictions.
The standard of workmanship in most new builds is horrific.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Why should one be contingent on the other?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Why should one be contingent on the other?

---

It’s not. I just worded it wrong. Both should happen though.
Although I would argue that the planning system has left us with only 6 big house builders in the UK so they have no need to really compete on quality. Bringing back small volume builders may help with improving standards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

It’s not. I just worded it wrong. Both should happen though.
Although I would argue that the planning system has left us with only 6 big house builders in the UK so they have no need to really compete on quality. Bringing back small volume builders may help with improving standards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Fair enough, not sure if the "cartel" issue is just down to planning but your point about standards and small volume builders is a good one. From the same article,

"I went to Sweden to look at social housing and then visited some amazing examples in the UK.

And I found this extraordinary thing, up in Lancaster, a wonderful passive house scheme of 40 new homes built by a local developer for a local housing association. And he made profit. He made about 12-15 per cent profit on the thing. He was happy. Housing Association were delighted. Residents were super delighted because they got these super low cost homes. And it was just as the heating crisis was really beginning to bite. They were living in homes with a tenth of the size of bills of people living in conventional homes".


Talking about standards, he says,

"We have a supply chain which has been deskilled over 40 years, and professionals have been effectively emasculated. They've been removed from the accountability and the verification processes within the supply chain. So engineers have been replaced through processes like design and build. Instead, you've got managers in development companies trying to value engineer schemes down in price and a supply chain which is interested in helping them and obviously just making a sale"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Persimmon to March 2022 turned over 4.4 billion pounds and made a 25 per cent profit of £1.1 billion. These are rough generalised figures, but in any other industry, 25 per cent profits would be seen as obscene.

---

I cannot understand how the Stewart Milne Group went bust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Fair enough, not sure if the "cartel" issue is just down to planning but your point about standards and small volume builders is a good one. From the same article,

"I went to Sweden to look at social housing and then visited some amazing examples in the UK.

And I found this extraordinary thing, up in Lancaster, a wonderful passive house scheme of 40 new homes built by a local developer for a local housing association. And he made profit. He made about 12-15 per cent profit on the thing. He was happy. Housing Association were delighted. Residents were super delighted because they got these super low cost homes. And it was just as the heating crisis was really beginning to bite. They were living in homes with a tenth of the size of bills of people living in conventional homes".


Talking about standards, he says,

"We have a supply chain which has been deskilled over 40 years, and professionals have been effectively emasculated. They've been removed from the accountability and the verification processes within the supply chain. So engineers have been replaced through processes like design and build. Instead, you've got managers in development companies trying to value engineer schemes down in price and a supply chain which is interested in helping them and obviously just making a sale"

---

The small builders who only build between 1 and 5 houses a year just can’t afford the costs involved in planning applications. It means lots of small sites just go undeveloped.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://news.stv.tv/east-central/dev...-council-homes


Oops!!

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0f90a34686.jpg
Only 100 objections in a city the size of Glasgow should be automatic approval.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/pla...given-go-ahead

Another 700 flats for rent in Glasgow.

Looks like scot gov going with rent controls again. Hope it works although I've yet to see anywhere in the world where it's done anything but create huge rises

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc...eng8qnn7ro.amp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Looks like scot gov going with rent controls again. Hope it works although I've yet to see anywhere in the world where it's done anything but create huge rises

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc...eng8qnn7ro.amp

---

It’s so dumb when all the evidence is there for them. [emoji35]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"After receiving a shocking 36% rent increase notice for his flat, Robert decided to take action. He followed the Rent Adjudicator process, a procedure designed to help tenants contest unreasonable rent hikes when landlords are unwilling to negotiate.
,
Acting within the required 21-day window, he was successful: the increase was capped at 12%. But the story doesn’t end there. His landlady is now challenging this decision in a First-Tier Tribunal, aiming to reinstate her original 36% increase. Robert has turned to Living Rent Member Defence, seeking reassurance and support from our members during this challenging time.
,
Landlords have the ability to raise rent above the current 12% cap, placing the responsibility on tenants to file a complaint with the Rent Officer within 21 days if they want to challenge the increase. If tenants aren't aware of this option or miss the deadline, they’re forced to pay the steep rent hikes set by landlords. This situation makes it clear that landlords cannot be relied upon to act fairly without government oversight.
,
,Rent controls are urgently needed to prevent unlawful rent hikes and to hold landlords accountable with penalties for any attempts to impose them
Together, we are stronger, standing united for fair rents for all tenants"
,
https://www.livingrent.org/join

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

"After receiving a shocking 36% rent increase notice for his flat, Robert decided to take action. He followed the Rent Adjudicator process, a procedure designed to help tenants contest unreasonable rent hikes when landlords are unwilling to negotiate.
,
Acting within the required 21-day window, he was successful: the increase was capped at 12%. But the story doesn’t end there. His landlady is now challenging this decision in a First-Tier Tribunal, aiming to reinstate her original 36% increase. Robert has turned to Living Rent Member Defence, seeking reassurance and support from our members during this challenging time.
,
Landlords have the ability to raise rent above the current 12% cap, placing the responsibility on tenants to file a complaint with the Rent Officer within 21 days if they want to challenge the increase. If tenants aren't aware of this option or miss the deadline, they’re forced to pay the steep rent hikes set by landlords. This situation makes it clear that landlords cannot be relied upon to act fairly without government oversight.
,
,Rent controls are urgently needed to prevent unlawful rent hikes and to hold landlords accountable with penalties for any attempts to impose them
Together, we are stronger, standing united for fair rents for all tenants"
,
https://www.livingrent.org/join

---

Either way, the rent will make its way back to a market clearing price. How many years at 12% will it take?
We are creating a deliberate shortage of housing by refusing to build more and then blaming landlords for price rises. If you want lower rent or lower house prices you need to build more houses. Edinburgh is creating households quicker than we are building.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Endorse our response: tourist tax to build more council flats
https://www.livingrent.org/endorse_t...-council-flats


Edinburgh City Council is implementing a "visitor levy", or tourist tax, which has the ability to generate up to £50 million a year.

The unchecked growth of tourism over the past decades has exacerbated the housing crisis in Edinburgh. Developers and landlords have taken full advantage of tourism to hollow-out our homes and communities in the name of soaring profits.

As a result, members in Edinburgh organised together to push for the council to commit money raised from the tourist tax to be spent on council housing. And we won.

The council has to committed to £5 million a year from the visitor levy to borrow a further £150m to build new council and affordable homes.

But we think this does not go far enough.

There are 5,123 families in temporary accommodation and 23,000 people waiting for a permanent council house. New rents in the private sector in the city have increased by 18.4% over the last year, and over 80% over the last decade.

It is us who work in tourism, hospitality, administration and cleansing who work hard to generate profit for the visitor sector, but rarely does it end up in our pockets. Edinburgh is our home and we deserve affordable homes and well funded public services.

Right now, Edinburgh City Council is consulting on the policy to get peoples views on how this money should be spent. We have written a response to this consultation and we need Edinburgh residents to sign our petition to back our call for a tourist tax for council flats before the consultation closes on December 15th.

In order to make our responses as strong as possible we need people to tell us why you think the tourist tax should be spent on social housing. Text or email your reason to Sinead on 07593128079 or [email protected].

You can also submit an organisational or individual response on the council website by using our template here

By signing our petition you are agreeing for us to submit a response on your behalf to Edinburgh City Council's "Vistory Levy" consultation.

Endorse our response!

Increase the nightly tax from 5% to 8%, similar to Amsterdam and Porto.
Significantly increase the spending on housing.
Commit to majority of builds being social housing not mid-market rents.
Commit to money being spent on other essential public infrastructure, for example permanent public toilets and cleansing.


EndorseTouristTax2024

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8dlrlkxmyo

Another example of why the private market rentals need regulation and rent controls. 34% increase due to change in tenancy to single person occupancy.

Allan’s old flat, which is near the city centre, is now being advertised at £1,060 per month.

He added: "You can only really feel at home somewhere if you can afford to live there."

Evicted, Tenants on the Edge follows the stories of four young renters who face being priced out or pushed out of their homes as the law in Scotland changes, rents rise and evictions grow.

You can watch the programme on the iPlayer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8dlrlkxmyo

Another example of why the private market rentals need regulation and rent controls. 34% increase due to change in tenancy to single person occupancy.

Allan’s old flat, which is near the city centre, is now being advertised at £1,060 per month.

He added: "You can only really feel at home somewhere if you can afford to live there."

Evicted, Tenants on the Edge follows the stories of four young renters who face being priced out or pushed out of their homes as the law in Scotland changes, rents rise and evictions grow.

You can watch the programme on the iPlayer.

---

Millions of more houses would clip the landlords wings, we have the least spare homes in the oecd so landlords can call the shots.

I like the idea of rent controls but I've yet to see any city where prices haven't spiralled upwards and then slowed when they ended. I'd genuinely like to see a city where it worked and I'd love for it to work here, I'd be all for it.

The easiest and obvious way every normal nation knows to ease prices is building houses, the UK isn't normal though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Millions of more houses would clip the landlords wings, we have the least spare homes in the oecd so landlords can call the shots.

I like the idea of rent controls but I've yet to see any city where prices haven't spiralled upwards and then slowed when they ended. I'd genuinely like to see a city where it worked and I'd love for it to work here, I'd be all for it.

The easiest and obvious way every normal nation knows to ease prices is building houses, the UK isn't normal though

---

People need protected from extortion, it's as simple as that. We need social housing but our government isn't going to deliver them. Until then community action and pressure on government, via the likes of Living Rent.

Housing is a human right and so is being part of your community. People on average wages are being squeezed out and it's shameful.

Would zoning where Airbnb is permitted not help increase supply? It might cause less distortion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Tubs

Would zoning where Airbnb is permitted not help increase supply? It might cause less distortion.

---

There's a lot of new rules for AirBNB which should see them not being as good an option now.

https://bsky.app/profile/annaclarke..../3lcfeb5v4ac24

Good thread on the stupidity behind Scotlands new rent controls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

https://bsky.app/profile/annaclarke..../3lcfeb5v4ac24

Good thread on the stupidity behind Scotlands new rent controls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Where does it discuss the "stupidity" of rent moderation measures? The quoted article presents different views, from interest groups across the sector. The statement from Anna Clarke merely says

"So it seems the Scottish Government is pushing ahead with rent controls.
With increases allowed up to CPI+1% (capped at 6%) the first thing they'll achieve will be steady increases in rents - as landlords see the annual increase as a "use it or loose it" opportunity. But it won't end there....🧵"

That's hardly an insightful deconstruction of the measures just voted on.

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news...rliament-89606

For anyone interested, here's the main thrust of the article Anna Clarke quoted in her post.

"Paul McLennan, the Scottish housing minister, said: “The Housing (Scotland) Bill will play an important role in helping to tackle poverty by keeping rents affordable and ensuring people can stay in their homes.

“Ensuring everyone has the right to a safe and stable home is essential to the Scottish government’s priority of ending child poverty, and the bill will play a role in reaching that goal.

“Scotland has led the way in protecting tenants and providing rights for homeless people. The Housing (Scotland) Bill aims to create a rental system that improves the rights of tenants while maintaining investment, and provides greater support for people threatened with homelessness.

“I am pleased parliament has supported the general principles of the legislation, especially on our proposals for a system of rent controls that keep costs lower for tenants.”

Living Rent, Scotland’s tenants’ union, said: “We need to celebrate the vote bringing rent controls one step closer. But landlords are fighting hard and it’s clear there is a lot of work to be done.”

David Melhuish, director of the Scottish Property Federation, which represents developers, said: “We believe the proposals for consulting on the bill’s framework powers for exemptions from the rent control regulations must be addressed to encourage and facilitate new housing investment for Scotland, given that at least £500m of investment could already have been lost as the policy of rent controls has been formed.

“Of particular concern remains the application of rent controls on empty properties in between tenancies. This part of the bill must be reconsidered if we are to restore investor confidence and begin to address the housing shortfall.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news...rliament-89606

For anyone interested, here's the main thrust of the article Anna Clarke quoted in her post.

"Paul McLennan, the Scottish housing minister, said: “The Housing (Scotland) Bill will play an important role in helping to tackle poverty by keeping rents affordable and ensuring people can stay in their homes.

“Ensuring everyone has the right to a safe and stable home is essential to the Scottish government’s priority of ending child poverty, and the bill will play a role in reaching that goal.

“Scotland has led the way in protecting tenants and providing rights for homeless people. The Housing (Scotland) Bill aims to create a rental system that improves the rights of tenants while maintaining investment, and provides greater support for people threatened with homelessness.

“I am pleased parliament has supported the general principles of the legislation, especially on our proposals for a system of rent controls that keep costs lower for tenants.”

Living Rent, Scotland’s tenants’ union, said: “We need to celebrate the vote bringing rent controls one step closer. But landlords are fighting hard and it’s clear there is a lot of work to be done.”

David Melhuish, director of the Scottish Property Federation, which represents developers, said: “We believe the proposals for consulting on the bill’s framework powers for exemptions from the rent control regulations must be addressed to encourage and facilitate new housing investment for Scotland, given that at least £500m of investment could already have been lost as the policy of rent controls has been formed.

“Of particular concern remains the application of rent controls on empty properties in between tenancies. This part of the bill must be reconsidered if we are to restore investor confidence and begin to address the housing shortfall.”

---

Price controls inevitably lead to shortages. This is a sure fire way to kill investment in property in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Price controls inevitably lead to shortages. This is a sure fire way to kill investment in property in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You just ignore any attempt at debate or discussion and resort to bland, untrue, blanket statements. At least post something that has some substance behind it.

And no, studies from Buenos Aires, Melbourne or wherever do not apply to Scotland. Neither do the utterances of right wing think tanks or far right minded individuals deeply immersed in their own neo-liberal agendas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

You just ignore any attempt at debate or discussion and resort to bland, untrue, blanket statements. At least post something that has some substance behind it.

And no, studies from Buenos Aires, Melbourne or wherever do not apply to Scotland. Neither do the utterances of right wing think tanks or far right minded individuals deeply immersed in their own neo-liberal agendas.

---

I just haven’t seen anywhere in the world where controlling the price of anything did not lead to a drop in investment in producing that thing leading to shortages?
Maybe Scotland is different from the rest of the world in that respect? If so, we should def apply it in other areas as well. We should for sure make new iPhones only £500. And milk should only really be 10p a pint. Who in their right mind is not in favour of that? Why would this not work? What are they all doing down at Holyrood?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I just haven’t seen anywhere in the world where controlling the price of anything did not lead to a drop in investment in producing that thing leading to shortages?
Maybe Scotland is different from the rest of the world in that respect? If so, we should def apply it in other areas as well. We should for sure make new iPhones only £500. And milk should only really be 10p a pint. Who in their right mind is not in favour of that? Why would this not work? What are they all doing down at Holyrood?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Rent controls aren't determining investment in the production of new housing in Scotland. As for the rest, typical hysterical ramblings :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Rent controls aren't determining investment in the production of new housing in Scotland. As for the rest, typical hysterical ramblings :rolleyes:

---

Aw, I thought you were going to show me a successful example?[emoji2369]
And your first sentance is completely wrong.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...ild-rent-plan/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Surely investment is determined by the returns achievable? An example would be a £300k property bought as a buy to let which costs £322600 when including landlord stamp duty but not including legals. I'd estimate the £300k would get you a new 3 bedroom home in todays market? I'd also estimate rent on that property to be around £1200 a month? That property returns a net yield of 4% when you include estimated yearly costs of £1500 which I think is fair. So your money is better off elsewhere. When you take the emotion out of the rental business the figures state it's becoming a mediocre investment at best.

The simple fact is that we need a lot of new social housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

Surely investment is determined by the returns achievable? An example would be a £300k property bought as a buy to let which costs £322600 when including landlord stamp duty but not including legals. I'd estimate the £300k would get you a new 3 bedroom home in todays market? I'd also estimate rent on that property to be around £1200 a month? That property returns a net yield of 4% when you include estimated yearly costs of £1500 which I think is fair. So your money is better off elsewhere. When you take the emotion out of the rental business the figures state it's becoming a mediocre investment at best.

The simple fact is that we need a lot of new social housing.

---

Even less, if you have to factor in a mortgage.

But I'd say it's more complicated than just the rental income. A lot of people invest in property for the capital growth, and the annual income is less of a driver. In those situations, depending on where the property is, the "return" can be much better (and more secure) than elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Even less, if you have to factor in a mortgage.

But I'd say it's more complicated than just the rental income. A lot of people invest in property for the capital growth, and the annual income is less of a driver. In those situations, depending on where the property is, the "return" can be much better (and more secure) than elsewhere.

---

Yup I agree, just trying to change the narrative from the morality of buy to let to simple hard facts over the actual viability of the business. Interestingly the example above would cost £1520 a month on a £300k mortgage over 30 years, that's obviously also putting down the stamp duty value as a deposit. I get a lot of landlords use interest only but that is one big gamble using the example above in todays climate. Add to that rent controls and it's becoming non investable in a big area of the sector. No idea if that's a good thing or not, do we need private lets in the housing market? I'd argue we do at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

Yup I agree, just trying to change the narrative from the morality of buy to let to simple hard facts over the actual viability of the business. Interestingly the example above would cost £1520 a month on a £300k mortgage over 30 years, that's obviously also putting down the stamp duty value as a deposit. I get a lot of landlords use interest only but that is one big gamble using the example above in todays climate. Add to that rent controls and it's becoming non investable in a big area of the sector. No idea if that's a good thing or not, do we need private lets in the housing market? I'd argue we do at the moment.

---

And if your a higher rate tax payer then your going to be paying about 20% tax on that £1520 a month. Fun.
I’m not sure of there a figure available but I would say there are a lot less people investing in housing than say 15-20 years ago. And it’s showing in the rents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we've just got to accept that we cannot both have a booming housing market where people get very rich with the commoditisation of shelter as well as having a property ladder that people who don't come from the property owning class can actually remotely aspire to ever get onto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Aw, I thought you were going to show me a successful example?[emoji2369]
And your first sentance is completely wrong.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...ild-rent-plan/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

More unsustainable property commoditisation which contributes to the on-going concerns around gentrification in Glasgow.

"While not classed as affordable housing, the proposal approved by councillors would have been the first build-to-rent development in that part of the city.
That means all of the studio apartments, and one and two-bedroom flats, would have been built specifically for tenants rather than for selling"

I'll explain the key principles of the bill and outline why greed /profiteering and protecting tenants is being targeted by the Scottish Government, because we all know the market can't be trusted to regulate itself in a reasonable manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

I think we've just got to accept that we cannot both have a booming housing market where people get very rich with the commoditisation of shelter as well as having a property ladder that people who don't come from the property owning class can actually remotely aspire to ever get onto.

---

We need social housing and loads of it, new, well built, carbon neutral social housing powered by publicly owned renewable energy. I wonder how we go about getting that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bee

We need social housing and loads of it, new, well built, carbon neutral social housing powered by publicly owned renewable energy. I wonder how we go about getting that?

---

The state can borrow more cheaply than the private sector. It can be funded by the rents obtained. Building housing should not be a hard decision at all. There is a supply shortage.
I suspect that the reason it’s not happening is something to do with rules around what local govt is allowed to borrow for.
Weird things is, most people agree we need it (so long as it’s not near them[emoji849]) but it never happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

The state can borrow more cheaply than the private sector. It can be funded by the rents obtained. Building housing should not be a hard decision at all. There is a supply shortage.
I suspect that the reason it’s not happening is something to do with rules around what local govt is allowed to borrow for.
Weird things is, most people agree we need it (so long as it’s not near them[emoji849]) but it never happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

There are some interesting stats estimating the savings to the public purse from taking families out of temporary accommodation and into secure affordable housing. The amounts spend on temporary accommodation in London are eye watering and going into the hands mostly of dodgy private landlords and private equity as well as hotels, hostels but the other savings to the health sector, education, and so on are pretty compelling. The spend to save argument is really strong.

Regretably, the housing association desperately need recapitalised as they are in real mess. Councils could take the homes but need to build capacity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colr

There are some interesting stats estimating the savings to the public purse from taking families out of temporary accommodation and into secure affordable housing. The amounts spend on temporary accommodation in London are eye watering and going into the hands mostly of dodgy private landlords and private equity as well as hotels, hostels but the other savings to the health sector, education, and so on are pretty compelling. The spend to save argument is really strong.

Regretably, the housing association desperately need recapitalised as they are in real mess. Councils could take the homes but need to build capacity.

---

I know of a council house in West Pilton empty for over a year because council doesn’t have money to renovate it. Rent is being lost because the estate is not being run properly. It’s a cracking 4 bed house as well in a nice wee cauldiesack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

The state can borrow more cheaply than the private sector. It can be funded by the rents obtained. Building housing should not be a hard decision at all. There is a supply shortage.
I suspect that the reason it’s not happening is something to do with rules around what local govt is allowed to borrow for.
Weird things is, most people agree we need it (so long as it’s not near them[emoji849]) but it never happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Not forgetting the limits imposed....

Under the Fiscal Framework Agreement, the Scottish Government can borrow*up to £3 billion cumulatively for capital expenditure, with an annual limit of £450 million in 2023-24.*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Not forgetting the limits imposed....

Under the Fiscal Framework Agreement, the Scottish Government can borrow*up to £3 billion cumulatively for capital expenditure, with an annual limit of £450 million in 2023-24.*

---

The only limit should be if there is enough rent can be charged to cover the payments. If so then it’s a no brainer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I know of a council house in West Pilton empty for over a year because council doesn’t have money to renovate it. Rent is being lost because the estate is not being run properly. It’s a cracking 4 bed house as well in a nice wee cauldiesack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I read that East Lothian had around 500 long term empty council houses last year, the majority of those have been empty for longer than a year so I guess most other councils are in a similar position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I know of a council house in West Pilton empty for over a year because council doesn’t have money to renovate it. Rent is being lost because the estate is not being run properly. It’s a cracking 4 bed house as well in a nice wee cauldiesack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

There are 2000+ empty council houses in Edinburgh.

It must be quicker and cheaper to get these up to a lettable standard than setting the wheels in motion for new developments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by w pilton hibby

There are 2000+ empty council houses in Edinburgh.

It must be quicker and cheaper to get these up to a lettable standard than setting the wheels in motion for new developments.

---

They are not very good landlords.
This is likely down to the way they see the money. It will be seen as a cost rather than an investment.
They would be better selling them to the private sector. At least it would provide a home for someone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

They are not very good landlords.
This is likely down to the way they see the money. It will be seen as a cost rather than an investment.
They would be better selling them to the private sector. At least it would provide a home for someone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

... with the proviso that the new owner must provide accommodation for council tenants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

They are not very good landlords.
This is likely down to the way they see the money. It will be seen as a cost rather than an investment.
They would be better selling them to the private sector. At least it would provide a home for someone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Just goes to show the difference in councils, I know West Lothian council were actively bidding on ex council houses up to the home report value. I know of one that was bought privately 7 years before at a heavily discounted rate and that was after heating, kitchen and a new bathroom was fitted for the council to come back in and bid the home report value. Absolutely crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

... with the proviso that the new owner must provide accommodation for council tenants.

---

Means the selling price will be lower but still, it’s better than them sitting empty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know a house builder who can build houses cheaper than a local authority.

So much so, the local authority are now giving him land to deliver their quota of new housing.

Like most public sector projects, the costs involved are astronomical compared to the private sector.

Just a point from a post above….many build to rent schemes have been cancelled/mothballed due to rent controls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibs4185

I know a house builder who can build houses cheaper than a local authority.

So much so, the local authority are now giving him land to deliver their quota of new housing.

Like most public sector projects, the costs involved are astronomical compared to the private sector.

Just a point from a post above….many build to rent schemes have been cancelled/mothballed due to rent controls.

---

I could build cheaper than a local authority as well. Surely most contractors could?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good news for those who think landlords are the problem. Stamp duty in Scotland for landlords has gone up to 11%. That should discourage plenty from entering the market.
Rents will rise though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Good news for those who think landlords are the problem. Stamp duty in Scotland for landlords has gone up to 11%. That should discourage plenty from entering the market.
Rents will rise though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

i think they are part of the problem, but in a fairly subtle way - IMO, the problem with small-time landlords is that they're something of a political bulwark for the portfolio holding types. It's also just a crap system that entirely relies on the government genuinely supporting and defending the interests of tenants, which no government will be allowed to do if it wants to keep people with money on-side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AgentDaleCooper

i think they are part of the problem, but in a fairly subtle way - IMO, the problem with small-time landlords is that they're something of a political bulwark for the portfolio holding types. It's also just a crap system that entirely relies on the government genuinely supporting and defending the interests of tenants, which no government will be allowed to do if it wants to keep people with money on-side.

---

Portfolio landlords buying 6 or more properties together won’t pay it.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Portfolio landlords buying 6 or more properties together won’t pay it.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I agree that it's not a solution...i think there needs to be wider discussion about how we do housing in general, because our current system relies on so many people not being greedy at so many levels that it can't work - the best it can hope for is occassional patch ups that kick the can down the road.

I'd read the UK would need 6 million homes to have the same amount of spare homes as the average oecd nation and normal countries like Germany. Scotland has less spare homes than England, but still, 500k council houses built in Scotland would blunt all power from the private landlord and decimate rent prices.

Labour should borrow to make it happen, they won't, they probably won't hit the pathetic 1.5 mil target

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

I'd read the UK would need 6 million homes to have the same amount of spare homes as the average oecd nation and normal countries like Germany. Scotland has less spare homes than England, but still, 500k council houses built in Scotland would blunt all power from the private landlord and decimate rent prices.

Labour should borrow to make it happen, they won't, they probably won't hit the pathetic 1.5 mil target

---

And nothing will boost Reform more than lack of access to housing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

And nothing will boost Reform more than lack of access to housing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Yes it's also why we need immigration which also boosts reform. 46% of 16 to 34 year old males now live with their parents, due to lack of houses and high rents. That explains our plummeting birth rate. With an aging population if we want pensions to be paid in 30 years we need young people. You either get that by having kids or importing people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Yes it's also why we need immigration which also boosts reform. 46% of 16 to 34 year old males now live with their parents, due to lack of houses and high rents. That explains our plummeting birth rate. With an aging population if we want pensions to be paid in 30 years we need young people. You either get that by having kids or importing people.

---

... or by saving up for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

... or by saving up for them.

---

It's obviously not just about pensions but the state pension bill alone is estimated to be £105 billion per year more by 2050. Who's paying that if we have less workers than now going forward

Its not just about pensions though, our population is aging massively and our birthrate is collapsing. A population top heavy is a recipe for utter disaster. Who pays the majority of the taxes and does all the labour.

I'm all for mass immigration but I'd like a higher birth rate too, more houses and cheaper childcare needed for that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Good news for those who think landlords are the problem. Stamp duty in Scotland for landlords has gone up to 11%. That should discourage plenty from entering the market.
Rents will rise though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Ouch. The 10% portion of LBTT last time I moved was quite a pain. Not sure where I stand on the landlord debate tbh - they shouldn't have an easy ride, but it should be a viable investment option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

Ouch. The 10% portion of LBTT last time I moved was quite a pain. Not sure where I stand on the landlord debate tbh - they shouldn't have an easy ride, but it should be a viable investment option.

---

It’s only 3% if you only have one house. An extra 8% if you have rental properties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

It's obviously not just about pensions but the state pension bill alone is estimated to be £105 billion per year more by 2050. Who's paying that if we have less workers than now going forward

Its not just about pensions though, our population is aging massively and our birthrate is collapsing. A population top heavy is a recipe for utter disaster. Who pays the majority of the taxes and does all the labour.

I'm all for mass immigration but I'd like a higher birth rate too, more houses and cheaper childcare needed for that

---

I really wish our politician would front up to this because if they did, we might end up with solutions to match the problems.

I’ve actually lost all hope in the UK and in particular Scotland. My life’s work is now to create mindset and opportunity for my kids so they can leave. There’s going to be nothing here for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

I really wish our politician would front up to this because if they did, we might end up with solutions to match the problems.

I’ve actually lost all hope in the UK and in particular Scotland. My life’s work is now to create mindset and opportunity for my kids so they can leave. There’s going to be nothing here for them.

---

Renting in Scotland will become the most expensive in the UK over the next couple of years. The amount of landlords will plummet. The rent controls and stamp duty will see to that.
The last lot of rent controls raised rents faster than they had for years. The new lot will do the same.
As landlords die or retire and sell up, they will not be replaced by new entrants as 11% tax is too high.
There will be more tenants chasing fewer properties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyv3ed33mqeo

This has to be a good thing, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyv3ed33mqeo

This has to be a good thing, right?

---

If they do it right, definitely.
That part of Edinburgh, bordering the A8 corridor is getting hella busy with traffic. A significant %age is just traffic passing through but adding large housing estates like this and the ongoing West Craigs will only add to the issue, regardless of the trams, trains & buses on their doorstep.
Re the actual housing, if they stay away from the overpriced Cala boxes they built over at Cammo, it would be a start. £1mil for a 5 bed timber frame house, that ain't the answer to a housing crisis. Even the Miller & Wimpey 4 beds at West Craig's are going for £600+K.
I'm clearly no expert on the matter, but we need quality social housing. Why can't Edinburgh Council/SG not leverage the money to build their own housing rather than rely on the 10% kickback of cheap housing pushed to the periphery of any new build estate, as per the planning conditions.
Quality social housing would pay itself off within a generation, but it needs brave/bold politicians to make it happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales

If they do it right, definitely.
That part of Edinburgh, bordering the A8 corridor is getting hella busy with traffic. A significant %age is just traffic passing through but adding large housing estates like this and the ongoing West Craigs will only add to the issue, regardless of the trams, trains & buses on their doorstep.
Re the actual housing, if they stay away from the overpriced Cala boxes they built over at Cammo, it would be a start. £1mil for a 5 bed timber frame house, that ain't the answer to a housing crisis. Even the Miller & Wimpey 4 beds at West Craig's are going for £600+K.
I'm clearly no expert on the matter, but we need quality social housing. Why can't Edinburgh Council/SG not leverage the money to build their own housing rather than rely on the 10% kickback of cheap housing pushed to the periphery of any new build estate, as per the planning conditions.
Quality social housing would pay itself off within a generation, but it needs brave/bold politicians to make it happen.

---

The article

The development proposed by Crosswind Developments would include a mixture of one, two and three-bedroom homes, as well as office space, shops, a school, active travel routes and a green urban park.

Developers hope to create a "car-lite" neighbourhood with about 9km (five miles) of designated walking and cycling routes to "reflect the increased opportunities for those who live and work here".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

The article

The development proposed by Crosswind Developments would include a mixture of one, two and three-bedroom homes, as well as office space, shops, a school, active travel routes and a green urban park.

Developers hope to create a "car-lite" neighbourhood with about 9km (five miles) of designated walking and cycling routes to "reflect the increased opportunities for those who live and work here".

---

Yeah, I'm fairly familiar with the pitch. West Craig's was pretty much the same. There are flatted developments but most properties are 4/5 bed with ample parking for cars (which I have zero issue with). That is not car lite and I haven't noticed an upturn in passenger numbers at Edinburgh Gateway tram or train stop.
I've seen some vocal opposition to this development, if the council do approve it they really need to ensure the units are more 1 or 2 bed than not.