Printable View
There's loads of developments there. These look very similar to the Cruden Homes apartments just up from the new Cammo Estate. I know the article states 1000 affordable homes out of the 3000 but what constitutes an affordable home? The Cruden apartments start at £220k for a 1 bedroom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
What's the source of this statistic please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
That whole site was screaming for social housing, 1000 houses and a hotel built on the old packaging factory site, you can't get any more brown field than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
The ONSQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
https://www.statista.com/statistics/285336/number-of-young-adults-living-with-their-parents-in-the-uk/#:~:text=In%202023%2C%2046%20percent%20of,with%202 2%20percent%20of%20women.
Can't disagree. The area has decent (in my opinion) public transport links. Statistically, folk in social housing rely more on public transport than private car use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
The cynic in me says this will end up like all other developments, overpriced private housing and and a little afterthought paid towards the "social housing" compliment.
It's good obviously as is all new projects but it isn't scratching the surface. There were 16,000 new homes started building last year but net migration was 50,000 in Scotland. With the average house in Scotland having 2.1 people in it, the house building isn't covering the immigration let alone fixing the housing emergency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
It’s very good news but should only be the start.
Speaking of the airport, we also desperately need a new terminal. The current one is no longer fit for purpose. It’s seems like there is no investment in the UK these days though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How do you reconcile the environmental impact of airport expansion with your stance on creating a greener city?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I accept that air travel is not going away and that in time technology will make it greener. I also think it brings huge benefits. I’m not against air travel. Also, Edinburgh needs a new terminal to deal with the current amount passengers.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
I’m in favour of better roads outside cities as well. But inside, public transport should be encouraged.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lots of housing chat down south today. Hopefully it’s not just announcement and then no follow up as usual but also that we are thinking of copying it in Scotland.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LOL. You say it like it's big news, but fail to mention it's actually down on 2021 figures and has been consistently more than 40% for the last 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
The males 22 to 35 is up from 27% living at home to 33% in 1996, females is up from 15% to 22%. That will have a huge effect on birth ratesQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
More than 1 in 10 (11.6%) of those aged 30 to 34 years were living with their parents in Census 2021, up from 8.6% just a decade earlier
Furthering the problem is the price. House price to earning ratio was 3 times the average wage in 96 it's now 7 times. Less spare income means less available income to have a child. Childcare costs have also massively increased above inflation in the last 30 years. It's death by a thousand cuts for young people. An aging population and a collapsing birth rate is a recipe for a failing nation
I know it's lol's for you who is fortunate to have a home but the trend is terrifying and will get worse the higher rents rise above the average wage.
2021 was also a covid year as ONS says in a caveat
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Also, if 100% of 16 year old males lived with their parents, that would probably be something to celebrate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
My green agenda is a bit more radical that that, but probably best to save my disagreement with every point made to the climate change thread :wink::greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
We can’t afford to be left behind as a country / city in terms of infrastructure and services in the name of being green. Doing it as efficiently and as green a possibly is the way to go rather than simply not improving things that need improvement. Edinburgh airport falls far behind the airports of almost all capital cities including those in 3rd world counties. Tourism is one of our biggest industries and a fit for purpose airport is essential for that, as well as our own residents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
This also applies to the bypass and sheriff hall.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcas...=1000680159525
Yesterday’s Newsagents podcast on the housing reforms planned by Labour.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The UK economy has been underpinned by artificially high house prices. We are so dep in it that house prices are always protected. It may seem good if you have a nice appreciating asset but it is terrible for society, particularly the young. The best thing that can happen is wide scale CPOs and massive social housing builds which would deflate the rental market and hopefully start house prices falling. Politicians just don't think that far ahead and most would lose out so we will continue on the same path and society will continue to break downQuote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
On CPOs, I read about an individual in Hastings who renovated an empty office block into flats with their own money and has since been given £1.5 million from the council to do more.Quote:
Originally Posted by wookie70
I know of three large department stores in the centre of Perth that have lain empty for a number of years crying out for something similar. Bound to be the same in most cities.
Planning rules are different in England. Down there you don’t need permission to turn retail into housing. Think it’s called permitted development. We don’t have it in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't even know why it's a debate tbh. The trends around home ownership, particularly among younger generations, are clear. It's stagnant or declining and that impacts a whole load of areas, the willingness and ability to have children among them. People will point to short term fluctuations but between 2016 and this year the drop in ownership was about 10%. For under 65s it's dropped from around 55% in 1995 to just under 40% in 2020. That's a clear and consistent direction of travel. Among 22-34 years olds ownership is 22.5%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
The graph between house prices and wages tells the story. Two lines going in very different directions, the old adage about 'we just worked harder and saved' doesn't hold true anymore. It's a crisis that's already happening but a bigger one is in waiting; huge chunks of a generation or 3 relying on rented accommodation in their retirement years in the decades to come. Someone will have to pay for that because pensions certainly won't.
We have permitted development in Scotland. I can't believe change of use is permitted development in England.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I read an article that said the biggest problem with changing all our empty retail and office space into homes is natural light. They have large areas inside generally, that is OK for an office floor but people like windows in homes.
Did say it was a fine for smaller offices and retail. The price didn't make sense also for larger units. You also have problems with ventilation, needing individual heating control for each unit, complete change in plumbing set up and ceiling heights. Usually cheaper to knock down
That’s because, largely, it’s not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Devil in the detail of course but changing a large retail / office block to domestic abodes would need planning permission.
I’m sure that it has a prior approval clause though. Don’t know the exact details but it is def easier to do in England.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeSloan
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah fair enough, wouldn’t surprise me if the rules n regs were even more complex in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Glad I don’t have to navigate them as part of my day job that’s for sure!
I see liitle point in Government promises where developers are the decision makes. I'd love to see Labour build millions of council houses on sites like you mention, remove any planning permission from development that have broken ground and sat on it for years and combine it with some form of apprenticeship and training where those building the houses could be given preferential treatment in those particular houses. It would be separate from normal social housing but hopefully slash demand in renting and build up housing stocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
There are lots of things govt can do to increase housebuilding, both private and public. There is not much evidence of them being interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by wookie70
They just announce targets and wait until they are missed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Loosely linked to housing but I thought it was quite interesting. Halifax have brought out an 18 month fixed mortgage. Decent rate considering at 4.37% but 60% ltv needed so a 40% deposit. £1499 fees though. I think it shows mortgage companies fear a recession and the interest cuts that go along with it.
That seems like a lot to pay for such a short term - be reapplying for mortgages in a year and having to do it all again!Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
I'm struggling to understand the logic in your conclusion. Surely if they expected interst rates to drop they'd not be wanting people on short deals and the better rates would be on the longer term products?
I don't think many are taking fixed rates at the moment DH, consensus is tracker is the way to go so the shorter term may bring them in on fixed. If Halifax sense that mortgage rates are going to fall and Bailey has came out and more or less stated they'll be cut four times next year then Halifax will at least lock people in on above 4% for a short time.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
Mortgage companies don’t fear interest rate cuts particularly. They match their liabilities as and when, locking in their margin as they go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sure if rates go back to where they were nailed to the floor (unlikely) then their margin will have to shrink but this product is nothing more than them seeing a niche that they think they can fill.
With such a hefty fee they are more likely to be hoping just to fool a few into thinking it’s a good deal than anything more insightful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeSloan
If there's 4 cuts next year that'll take rates well below 4% and closer to 3%, I think it's Nationwide hinting it could go as low as 2.75% with others going as high as 3.75 by year end, all assuming inflation comes down. I agree they're just trying to hoover up anyone they can on a fixed rate over 4%.
Just catching up after a weekend in the capital.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...mes-in-england
I'm SO glad Scotland has tighter planning control.
I think that there's a place for change of use but not at the cost of living standards.
It should be two different things. Planning permission and building control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They are. At least, in Scotland, 6 years ago when I retired from local government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ky&CMP=bsky_gu
Rent caps stopping housing associations building more houses.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The article is fair and accurate except the bit about grant funding to buy developer-led affordable which is not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Don’t know where you got the rent caps bit, though?
Its to do with available capital and other prioritised call on financial and staff resources.
Its primarily office into housing in England.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
It was a Tory policy and has been successful in someways in freeing up office blocks in the suburbs for conversion when councils were blocking them based on outdated and fanciful employment land policies (although developers could have been smarter by assessing job density levels and including a small amount of office space).
Anyway, the big problem with the policy is that they don’t need to comply with space standards and a whole bunch of other regs so, at the bottom of the scale, they have produced a load of slum housing - some of it regrettably now in London being used for temporary housing for the most vulnerable like single mothers.
Was here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Housing associations’ finances have also been squeezed by sub-inflation caps on the amount they can charge tenants.
This could be referring to a couple of things.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
George Osborne enforced rent reductions on Housing Associations which hit them hard. However, the Labour government has agreed a rent increase formula linked to inflation for the next 10 years to give them predictability. So maybe not that.
I think that is more likely referring to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA).
This is not a cap on Housing Association rents per se but can act as one.
The amount of rent that an HA can charge depends on what type of affordable housing it is.
Back in the early 90s, another great Tory wheeze was to allow rents of 80% of market value to be charged!! This seems to have sunk into the public psyche but in really, any housing association will assume that the maximum amount they will get will be the amount Housing Benefit will pay because many of their tenants are unemployed and many may become unemployed.
The amount of Housing Benefit a person can claim is limited by the LHA which the government has consistently restricted to save them money.
So the LHA acts like a de facto cap due to the HAs sensible, self-imposed prudence – which is the right thing for them to do.
Forms of affordable housing like social/target rents or London Affordable Rent are pretty close to LHA in any case. Councils and government agencies look for Social Rent affordable housing to be delivered now with its specific rent setting formula but there’s not much in it, really.
The other factor that has hit values is the HAs cost of capital which increased (as did everyone’s) after Dim Lizzie’s wacky budget.
Interest rates are coming down but I would guess the market’s perception of HA risk (the fire safety and maintenance improvement mentioned being a priority) is keeping borrowing restricted and rates high. Also, HAs being Industrial and Provident Societies mostly (charities) will need to manage their finances prudently. (the private for-profit associations do not seem to have the same problems raising funds!!!).
I can’t see the government getting anywhere close to increasing housebuilding unless it re-capitalises the HA sector.
The Councils are helping by ramping up direct delivery where they have HRA headroom but their resources (funding and personnel) were filleted by 14 years of Tory government. They can only do so much.
My guess is that the government will step in to underwrite/guarantee housing association borrowing to energise the sector again.
We’ll see.
Shared Ownership values have dropped dramatically - by around 15% - as well due to Tory wheezes but that’s another story.
:aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
I suppose Mr Ozy's retort would be that any mechanism which keeps rents artificially low is A Bad Thing.
Not if his government is paying the HB bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
The Tories were hopeless on housing. Always thinking short-term and governing by Daily Mail headlines.
What a mess.
Agree with you both. [emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
The principle of capping prices cuts investment. It’s been proven more often than most things in economics. It always leads to shortages.
I also support cutting housing benefits. That’s actually just a straight out subsidy for landlords and pushes rents up. There is no benefit for the tenant at all.
Both those things are distorting the market and not in a good way that helps tenants.
Instead of spending billions on housing benefit, spend it on building houses. We’ll all be better off in the long run.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Worked in Vienna where the availability of good quality public housing hold private rents and prices down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
It was Thatcher who decided the public housing in the UK should be for the poorest only (housing of last resort, I think she called it) turning some estates into ghettos in the process.
I go more with Nye Bevan’s vision of mixed communities - one which John Prescott also pushed when he was DPM taking a role in regeneration.
It’s incredible how the amount of damage Thatcher’s politics have done to this country (rail and power for example)
It's actually crazy to think the amount of social housing that has been lost. In my own area and many many more it was the norm to rent a council house, probably over 90% of people rented, it was a mix of council and Scottish Special where I am. When you think that places like Livingston were predominantly rented housing younger people don't seem to realise the actual levels of social housing that existed. Thatchers mistake wasn't selling the houses, it was not replacing them like for like. I remember council yards in every town and them employing vast swathes of school leavers on good apprenticeships, most of them now enjoying a very good pension although that has taken a hit over the years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Agree and the discounts were too generous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Forgive me for being short on the details here…Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Whilst I’m no fan of Thatcher, was the concept of having more people being able to own their own home not a reasonable and honourable one… but the problem with this policy came much later (maybe even under Blair?) when an adjustment to the legalities regarding lending criteria meant that it was easier for people to then own multiple properties… and our drift from the government being the slum landlord of millions to private individuals being the slum landlord to millions accelerated and not really in the way that Thatcher had initially intended?
No it was a horrific idea for Thatcher to sell of the council homes for a pittance without replacing them. A total wealth redistribution to boomers at the expense of every generation after. Every prime minister after just followed along. Thankfully SNP ended it here or there would be no social housing left. Great for one generation crippling for future ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Nothing she did was reasonable or honourable. People had homes for life, at a low rent. They were maintained and there was a large social housing stock. If the Tories had embarked upon an extensive programme of new social housing, then maybe there was some benefit to society. As it was, they just ensured a housing crisis for future generations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Worth mentioning that the government didn't own council houses, the local authority did. Also worth keeping in mind that social housing wasn't just schemes, it was across all areas (Housing Associations, like the Port of Leith did a lot to improve living conditions for people).
Younger contributors should also keep in mind that the disparity between wages and house prices in Edinburgh didn't really start to get too acute until the ultra commoditisation of property, from the aspirational 80's onwards. The sale of the social housing stock was part of the immoral social engineering that began then and has never stopped.
Anytime there are horror stories about slum landlords on TV the landlord tends to be in the public sector.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Private landlords tend to look after their properties.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let’s not kid ourselves about the council being good landlords. They tended to be terrible at it and repairs when they happened were usually late and shoddy.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
That’s not me advocating for or against Thatchers policy, just that the public sector rarely make good landlords.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Like this kind of looking after?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Leith Members Stuart and Rory and Violette and Fatima from Fountainbridge, just WON a total £5300 of rent rebates in negotiation with DJ Alexander!
Stuart and Rory had gone without heating for a year, and Violette, Fatima and their flatmates had broken drafty windows, mold and painted-over lights with no action for months and wanted compensation for the time their homes wasn't suitable to live in.
After low offers from their landlords they went to action a couple weeks ago to demand a meeting with executives. Two very successful negotiations later they agreed to £2.5k and £2.8k for the Leith and Fountainbridge cases respectively. This came on top of repairs to the property from DJ Alexander, such as new windows which improves the quality of our homes long term.
If you are having repair issues in your home with you letting agent, housing association or the council, come along to one of our meetings.
"
I wasn’t saying there were no bad private landlords, just that the overall quality is better in private sector.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here's a festive good news story. It perfectly illustrates why Scotland needs rent controls. Community action from Living Rent-worth your support, they do excellent work.
https://www.livingrent.org/rent_adju...ul_and_sesilia
Rent adjudication win for Paul and Sesilia
Paul and Sesilia tell their story of fighting their rent hike!
In September, we were given notice of a rent increase, and found ourselves in a tight spot like many tenants across the country.
We found ourselves faced with a 10% rent increase! This just 6 months after being made to pay two months rent upfront (in addition to the deposit) because the landlord and letting agent weren't sure we could afford the rent as it was.
Considering that the rent increase was significantly above both CPI and CPHI inflation at the time the notice was received (and over the duration of the tenancy) and lack of any improvements made to the property, we decided to contact Living Rent for the first time and promptly joined our union.
Having spoken to Niamh (the local organiser for our branch) and establishing what our choices were, we elected to exert our rights and challenge the rent increase through referring it to the Rent Officer to adjudicate. With Living Rent at our side we also offered to negotiate with the landlord. We proposed to start from 2.6% (the inflation figure at the time). Unfortunately, the letting agent refused to entertain a negotiation on the basis of having started the rent adjudication process. Not having the chance to negotiate worried us as we believed it would be our best bet to fight the increase as the few (expensive) properties on the market in the area at the time made us think that the Rent Officer would adjudicate in line with the proposed increase. However, we were extremely surprised to learn during the Rent Officer's quick inspection (which also functioned as a nerve racking first meeting with our landlord) that they considered rents over the past year which gave us a glimmer of hope.
Within the week we had received the Rent Officer's provisional decision. A 3.5% increase. Compared to the 10% which was proposed, and the fact that we had proposed to start negotiations at 2.6%, we were ecstatic but we still had to nervously wait another two weeks for the time in which the landlord (or ourselves) could appeal. Eventually, the final decision came through. No change and no appeal. The landlord will have another two weeks to appeal (this time to the First-tier Tribunal rather than to the Rent Officer themselves) but we are very pleased with how the Rent Officer's adjudication went.
New EPC rules being proposed for the rental market. The obvious being all rental properties must be Band C. EPC ratings must be obtained every year or when a tenancy ends (whatever is sooner), HMO properties have 24 months to comply but after that must comply after every new tenancy (how does that work in a 10 bed HMO? I'm assuming that'll be tweaked). Properties who can't comply because they're older or listed must show a £10k investment towards becoming Band C and that's not retrospective i.e. they must spend £10k after the new proposals are implemented. Properties cannot be marketed until an EPC is obtained or the £10k has been proven for older houses. An estimated 30% of rental properties were sold last year in the UK, not sure if that involved Scotland but it's a significant amount.
And they wonder why rents are rising?[emoji2369][emoji849]Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Annual EPC certificate? Who do they think is paying for that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is this a new announcement/suggestion, Mr Andy? If so, link please. EPC ratings every year sounds a bit mad!Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
As far as I can see most of it has been kicked into the long grass as it’s pretty unworkable.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
If a property is rated only D and landlord can’t get it any higher is he to make the tenants homeless?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...conomy-at-risk
The importance of housing. Without fixing it, the rest of the economy will suffer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://cairnestateagency.com/landlords-are-you-ready-for-the-changes-to-epc-regulations/#:~:text=EPC%20requirements%20are%20changing%20in, What%20is%20an%20EPC%3FQuote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
First one on Google search. It's not just rented properties, private owned homes are also affected. Not a snowball chance in hell of my house meeting the regulations. Over 200 years old, stone walls!
Thanks but there's no mention there of the £10k spend requirement. Most of what's on letting agents' websites is out of date.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
No, from Andy's information he is to spend at least £10k on bumping up the property's energy efficiency rating, and even if it's still D the tenants will be able to live there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Tenants will end up paying for that of course, one way or another.
https://quinnergy.co.uk/epc-regulations-2030/Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
That's another one, both links are October this year.
https://www.gov.scot/policies/energy-efficiency/energy-efficiency-in-homes/
Government website.
Is there any mention in these links of the £10k spend or the annual EPC requirement, which is what Andy raised and I am asking about? If so I can't see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
That the tenant pays is well established so it seems unfair to put the costs on tenants 5 years before owner occupiers?Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've no idea, I'm not wasting my time other than finding recent informationQuote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0b9f3fa69d.png
More info here.
https://scottishlandlords.com/news-a...ncy-proposals/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, that's from 2023. I'm assuming Andy's post refers to something more recent than that. :dunno: :I'm waitiQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Following the smoke alarms precedent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
It's still being proposed and my information comes from the vague outlines on the UKG website and the opinion of a few landlords that I know have been following this very closely over the the last year or two. The yearly EPC checks seem to be a goer but HMOs would have serious problems if they had to get an EPC every time a tenant gave up a room so a solution to that is needed. The £10k isn't on the UKG website as far as I'm aware but I'm assured that's what they're looking into. All just proposals at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
https://www.gov.uk/government/consul...ildings-regime
:aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Just the sort of uncertainty that investors love. No wonder no new houses or flats are getting built.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ukraine has gained in Russia this week also but apart from people who get excited by minor gains like above, I think everyone would agree its a stalemate.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
I saw an satellite image of territorial gains in the last 2 years and you'd need a magnifying glass. There will be a deal next year unfortunately for Ukraine. Russia failed to take Ukraine but it will have to lose some land. Some boot lickers will take it as a win but I don't think Putin will be able to sell half a million lives, social separation, European independence from Russian gas and oil. All for a little section of Ukraine, bizarre
Housing?Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
Lebensraum im Osten? :dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
https://bsky.app/profile/tobyn.bsky..../3lfmgcvv7e22c
Depressing thread on UK housing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yet to see a study that shows increased supply doesn't lower rents
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...51137724000512
@Sam_Dumitriu
NEW STUDY on the impact of YIMBY reforms in New Zealand.
Lower Hutt in Wellington made it much easier to get permission to build at higher densities.
The result?
🏗️ Housing Starts TRIPLED!
📉 Rents down by 21%
That’s just crazy talk. We need to make it harder for people to supply housing and prices will inevitably fall and we’ll all be given a free unicorn.[emoji849][emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Given rent controls are so hotly talked about.
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properti...hannel=STU_LET
**Please note rent is temporarily reduced from £3,000 per calendar month till 31st July 2025 from the start date of the tenancy, after the introductory period the rent will return to £3,000 per calendar month.**
Presumably, one can pluck a large number as the baseline rent and indefinitely give discounts which are slightly less each year to work back to a situation where rents increase as desired for the landlord? :dunno:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...droidApp_Other
Council reducing council houses rather than increasing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The government should take a loan and build 10 million social homes. It shouldn't be hard to finance the loan and payment over 30 years. They don't want to be the party that tak the hit. But if they weren't children they would have a cross party panel to sort the emergencyQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
You can hardly get any council or housing association to take the affordable homes we build at the moment. It needs intervention from government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Definitely but Labour Tories SNP have zero interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
I have a home my bairns will be OK, but I genuinely think bar climate it's the biggest problem facing the UK, certainly for a section.
It's awful having no choice but to pay 1.5k rent when you curls easily afford the mortgage, we need more houses. Labour has failed I'd vote them out for anyone that says they will build and I've no skin in the game.
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news...int_source=nba
Some good news.[emoji106]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...ky&CMP=bsky_gu
More good news.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A lot of these figures are skewed at the moment especially down south. They've got the tenants rights bill coming in or already in? They've got the 90 day rule in London for holiday lets and serviced accommodation and Sect 24 for the same cohort. Registration for HLs and SAs (it's unbelievable we don't know the amount of holiday lets and SAs there are) and the big one, stamp duty rises coming in April for landlords, also the CGT changes and probably more changes if there's another interim budget. I'm not sure what of these has been implemented in Scotland but they should be looking at the added measures for HLs and SAs if they aren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Just anecdotal but I've noticed a lot of property developers/landlords getting into renovating old Victorian houses down south which are fairly abundant and converting them into 6,7,9 sometimes 12 bed HMOs and leasing them straight to the council for a fixed fee per room for years, they basically pass on all the obligations to the council and sit back collecting the rent, surely it's cheaper just to build the houses? There's a whole industry growing because of the property shortage, rent to rents where one landlord rents from another, takes on all the management of the property, refurbishes it and rents it out as serviced accommodation for a large profit. You've got people scouring the property sales sites or sending letters to prospective sellers looking for deals, finalising the deals then selling the deals on to property investors for £3 - £5k. You've got the BRRR scheme where landlords buy unmortgageable or run down properties using cash or a bridging loan, refurbish the property, rent the property and then have it revalued at it's higher rate and refinance with a normal mortgage then use that to finance the next deal. The whole thing is becoming far bigger than just your normal buy to let punter that's looking to enhance his/her pension.
It just shows how much money is in it and how much renters are being screwed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
I couldn't agree more about Councils just building homes or renovating properties into useful accommodation. Labour could create well paid jobs, build more houses, train more skilled builders etc by creating a group of workers to build those homes on land they already own or land that can buy cheaply or CPO. There seems an insistence from all the big parties that business can do it better than public. I have a little knowledge about IT in terms of public and agency workers and the comparison of how much more third party workers are is scary. I suspect sub-contracting will be similar and it would be interesting to see how much councils are spending on contingent workers and the service/value they are getting.
If they are buying run down and unmortgageable property then surely that’s a good thing and these guys are the heroes of the housing emergency?Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've actually forgotten about one of the biggest money spinners gaining momentum, the emergency accommodation strategy. This is where a person navigates all the compliance, gains the qualifications to become a registered property provider with the council and then fills properties with people needing EA passed on from the council. The strategy is to approach landlords and sublet their properties if they comply with EA guidelines for a fee slightly higher than they're charging. The council contact you, ask for an available property for say a family of 4, you then take the family to your property, book them in and receive payment from the council every 1st of the month. Fees are anything from £100 - £200 a night and occupancy is 100%, the family also stays a minimum of 10 months and almost always longer on those rates. That's anything from £3k - £6k every month for a property that probably rents for £1.5k on average. I'm beginning to wonder if the Government is really that incentivised to stop this by building more.Quote:
Originally Posted by wookie70
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0z-RVCHzTE I wouldn't focus too much on the interviewer as he's just trying to sell his academy membership, he's a bit of a chancer IMO
My point was more about the fact people are making serious money finding and passing the deals onto investors who then bring those properties back into circulation, it's yet another middleman that adds more costs along with inflated stamp duty, higher mortgage interest, lack of tax incentives onto ultimately the renter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Middle men are def not needed but housing is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pretty sure Samuel Leeds is under investigation for fraud. There are a lot of chancers in the property training lark. The whole thing is a con.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yup, £12k a year for the academy, promises everything, delivers nowt. I actually think he hooks in punters for his academy to then train them on how to deliver deals to his investors/mentors and they pay £12k a year for the privilege.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The consultation previously mentioned is gathering steam. A few changes in that the initial £10k you'd need to invest in properties that can't make band C has risen to £15k. The date has been brought forward to 2028 for new tenancies and still 2030 for existing tenancies. New EPC calculations and software are coming out in 2026 so an existing band C may not qualify as band C after the new calculations, nobody knows the new calculations yet. Existing EPC providers will need new training and be monitored more closely. If you have rental property and they're band C now I'd suggest renewing it soon even if it has a few years left of the 10 year period.
I’m broadly in favour of energy efficiency but can’t help think that the focus should be on more houses while we have such a shortage. Worrying about loft insulation while people are sleeping in shop doorways seems mad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg9y544wx3o
Sounds like Wales is going the right direction.
I was really happy to read this. Nobody should own two homes until everybody has one. I've been directly affected by not having a home over the years and absolutely zero chance of ever owning one, so I'm fairly radicalised about housing at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
I think we can do both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
People who live in rented properties also have rights to well maintained property, they pay enough for the privilege.
Living Rent have a survey for people living in rented accommodation.
https://www.livingrent.org/private_renters_survey_20251
Tenants survey on evictions, quality and affordability
This survey takes 5 minutes to complete. The findings will support our campaigns to for rent controls and better protections for tenants and will highlight to our politicians the reality of renting in Scotland.
We will use the survey results to lobby politicians, in press releases and to inform our campaigns.
You are welcome to complete the survey anonymously and skip questions, however the more information you give us, the more comprehensive and effective our campaign will be. We will use the results to lobby politicians, in press releases and to inform our campaigns.
The survey is broken down into questions on:
- Evictions,
- Joint tenancies,
- Affordability
- Quality,
- Accessing a home
- Deposit
And at the end a section regarding sharing testimonies and being in touch.
Thanks for doing it!
Plan to make landlords fix mould in social housing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly89yl3p54o
"New measures are being introduced in Scotland to make it easier for social housing tenants to have damp and mould in their homes fixed.
The Scottish government plans to amend to the Housing (Scotland) Bill to give ministers the power to impose repair deadlines on landlords.
The move comes in response to the Awaab's Law campaign, named after two-year-old Awaab Ishak who died from mould exposure in Rochdale in 2020.
The Scottish bill, external, which follows similar changes in England, was introduced in March last year. The new amendments are due to be debated next month.
The bill was announced at a time when a number of Scottish local authorities were declaring housing emergencies."