Housing Crisis

I have friends who work for the council / housing associations as repair men - fixing all the things that get reported-  they say that the corruption is vast - the names on the tenants list rarely match the people living in the house - and no-one in management want to know..     Everyone always want to hear the bleeding-heart stories but no-one wants to really pick the scab.

Worse than that, a lot of the things that are broken are obviously deliberately broken to get a free redecoration service or are things like doors or windows broken to get a crime number so they can commit insurance fraud for a bigger TV and X-box - or to claim they are not safe so they get jumped up the housing list for a better property.    It's unbelievable..

Also, it's the never-ending supply of housing benefit money which creates and fuels the housing market's price inflation - while the local authority will cough out cash, the landlord will charge to the hilt - and a bit more..

Plastic said:

I still think the 'crisis' is purely a huge number of people wanting a lifestyle that they can't afford - for whatever reason - and expecting everyone else to support their fantasy.      The welfare state has created a mass of entitlement and is the cause of all of people's unrealistic dreams.

Food & shelter are the most fundamental, essential human necessities. Without them we would not survive. Having a roof over one's head provides basic dignity to the individual and elementary decency as a society. It's hardly " wanting a lifestyle that they can't afford " or having " unrealistic dreams " is it ? What exactly are these unrealistic dreams you are referring to ?

Plastic said:

People just demanding that they want a place to live shouldn't obligate everyone else to pay for their desires.

Again, wanting a place to live is not merely a desire it is a basic human necessity and who is obligating  " everyone " else to pay for it ? If you are referring to Housing Benefit why don't we simply just scrap it altogether ? Who are the main benefactors of it ?

Plastic said:

If you look at the number of council houses that are sublet, you'll realise that the crisis is totally manufactured.    Houses for the needy are now cash-cows for slum landlords because they know no-one will do their job in either the housing or benefit offices.     And in a country where everything is computerised, it shouldn't take 5 minutes to match addresses with names to sort it out.

Do you have the figures on this or is it more of your own opinion, bias and prejudices ? Firstly, there are not that many council houses left, down by around 70% since the 80's. Secondly, subletting council homes is illegal so would be really interesting to know where you get your information from ? And lastly, why was housing benefit created in the first place ?

I still think the 'crisis' is purely a huge number of people wanting a lifestyle that they can't afford - for whatever reason - and expecting everyone else to support their fantasy.      The welfare state has created a mass of entitlement and is the cause of all of people's unrealistic dreams.

People just demanding that they want a place to live shouldn't obligate everyone else to pay for their desires.

If you look at the number of council houses that are sublet, you'll realise that the crisis is totally manufactured.    Houses for the needy are now cash-cows for slum landlords because they know no-one will do their job in either the housing or benefit offices.     And in a country where everything is computerised, it shouldn't take 5 minutes to match addresses with names to sort it out.

I am currently looking to rent at the moment and I can agree with you about how quick properties are going , 1 beds are gone the same day where I live , and come the end of march what will happen to the rental market now this latest extension has been approved , For me its a blessing but homelessness still looms as i have a sec21 issued so it is a bit scary.

The Riddler said:

The “housing crisis” in the UK is a lie started by the government and building contractors to artificially justify building houses everywhere because it has such an impact on the growth of the economy.

I'm not sure this is the full picture although there maybe an element of truth regarding artificiality of intentions. I think it comes down to the difference between genuine low-cost, Social Housing and  Private house building with only profit in mind. The problem is we have one party who sees the crisis in the former and the other party who are only concerned about the latter. In any case the problem lies in affordability and the shortage of affordable, sustainable homes for people. This is true in both Social Housing and in the Private market for first-time buyers. For example, if you have a look at Council or Social Housing waiting lists around the country, they go into the millions, with stories of years and even decades of waiting to no avail. I would say this is where the crisis really is and because it has not been addressed it has led to a multitude of of other social problems which has institutionalised insecurity & poverty basically. We can't have it both ways. If low-waged, insecure work, zero-hour contracts, gig-economy etc etc are encouraged where are these people supposed to live ? Where can they afford realistically ? We are also talking about essential workers that our economy can't function without ; hospital staff from nurses to cleaners, supermarket & store workers, care home workers etc etc etc.

The Housing Crisis does not end there. There are also those who may be fortunate enough to have more secure jobs & incomes and even help with mortgage deposits from parents who also struggle to get on the housing ladder because the costs are simply to high. You can't just throw out a few gesture policies that say you are building a handful of  ' affordable homes ' in the private market only and expect to address the problems above. There cannot be any surprise then when mental health issues, crime, poverty, homelessness, domestic violence, prison populations and so on go through the roof when these problems are ignored. You can be the judge if these problems are caused by the former or latter parties.

The Riddler said:

The issue with housing is the attitude towards long term renting, poor quality rental stock (sometime just plane dangerous), not enough legislation around controlling the quality of housing stock or the manpower to implement it.

I couldn't agree more and am with you that gov regulation is the only way this can happen but without addressing Social Housing there can be no balance or solution. Policies Simply focusing on the Private Housing Market alone is not addressing the problem at all. 

The Riddler said:

If you are in a position to own second, third...tenth homes you’re criticised and targeted by the socialist left who want to tax you to within an inch of your life for doing well in the world.

It's all about balance is it not ? Is it better for a handful of people in ( the overall population ratio ) to own ten homes tax free at the expense of millions not able to have one secure place to live ? You can't have it both ways. You can't have an economy that encourages a boom & bust housing market with a few winners and lots of losers and expect more balanced housing policies you talk about in other parts of Europe for example can you ?

If you're in Social Housing have you thought about an exchange ? There's often notice boards in Council Housing offices for this type of thing and your local supermarket, Facebook etc. Some people may want to down-size to avoid the bedroom tax.

For social housing allocation there is often a points based system, you might be able to get some extra points if you are on the autistic spectrum. 

Some area have organisations which help people who are on the autistic spectrum find suitable housing, perhaps it would be worth your while finding out if there is help like that in the area in which you live.

I work in the property industry so this thread is a bit too close to home for me! There is definitely a crisis in the rental market in the UK at the moment due to the Government's complete lack of understanding of the housing market and the implications on it caused by the pandemic which impacts landlords and tenants alike. I was disappointed to see that the Government have just announced a further extension to the eviction ban which is just basically kicking the can further down the road because they cannot be bothered to tackle the problem head on.

If the OP is renting and trying to move, then all I can suggest is be proactive in contacting agents to ask what is coming up before it hits the market as in my area, demand is outstripping supply hugely and there is fierce competition for what few properties are available so getting in early is crucial but I'm sorry to say it looks like we'll be in this for the long haul.

If the OP is buying, then it will just be a case of waiting it out until restrictions are eased as the market is still contracted (or at least it is in my area).

I read with interest all the other comments above and agree that the entire UK property sector requires overhaul, but I cannot see it ever happening whilst those with the power to effect the change are also the ones who benefit most from the current system....

Plastic said:

The only concern I have at the moment is I can't work out if we're right in the middle of an engineered financial crash - and the scamdemic is the boogeyman - or if this is actually WW3 and we are on the losing side.

Okey Dokey.  

Yes - I agree with all you say - but it was the first real housing big crash in the US.    Traditionally, houses there are just cheap shelters in most States because nature will take it away every few years - hurricanes, tornados, flooding, fires and termites do a thorough job.    For some reason, they decided to mirror the UK housing boom of the 80s which lead to grossly overpriced property and that why the crash was so big in the US.      I remember visiting Florida in 2009 and seeing all the huge housing estates in darkness - everyone had moved out!

The problem is banks don't want to confiscate property - especially in a collapsing market - they can't ever recover their investment.      They would much rather let you remortgage over and over to avoid it.    

There's an old saying - when you owe the bank £10k you have a problem - but if you owe them £10M, *they* have a problem.

The only concern I have at the moment is I can't work out if we're right in the middle of an engineered financial crash - and the scamdemic is the boogeyman - or if this is actually WW3 and we are on the losing side.

I'm not disagreeing with you on how it happened. My point is why it happened and that was down to the massive de-regulation of the 80's under Thatcher/Reagan that more or less continued to the 2008 crash.

What you describe as happening in the US market was no different in the UK at the time or Spain or Ireland or in any other country that relies heavily on a boom and bust housing market. In the UK there were mortgage shops/financial advisors/estate agents - middle men, popping up in every High Street across the country on a regular basis. It was inevitable as will the next one be. It's basically an unregulated, crash & burn ponzi scheme, where Mr bank, who doesn't bring anything to the table in a mortgage, apart from a piece of paper, has no money to back up the loans then proceeds to hand out millions of mortgages/loans and collects all the interest from those who can afford to make the payments for 25 years. Then when the inevitable crash happens, confiscates all the property from those who can't make the payments and sells it, puts all those profits in a nice Caribbean Island and asks the Gov for a bailout, paid by the tax-payer. I've simplified it but that is Laissez-faire, un-regulated Capitalism - every man for himself. Those are the rules during the boom. When the bust happens, the rules are a wee bit different. It's every man for himself for the public - house re-possessions, bankruptcy, unemployment, austerity. For the banks its Socialism and bailouts. Of course no country totally escaped the aftermath of the 2008 recession but the ones who avoided the worst where those who do not rely heavily on a boom and bust housing market, had more financial regulation protection, had a more balanced economy with manufacturing, a more regulated housing market, no student debt and generally better social/welfare systems in place.

Those companies who avoided the worst were those who were run more democratically where everyone had a say into how the company was run, managers chosen, wages paid etc. Many of these companies avoided redundancies completely while those companies with a director/s on huge salaries and a top down approach, undemocratic, share-holder-driven either had to make massive redundancies or went into administration or bankruptcy .  

When everything is privatised for profit to the extreme ( UK/US ) the market dictates what happens. That's why they don't care about a housing crisis for people with poor incomes or building long-term, sustainable, low-cost, social housing. Unless there is a gravy train, the next big ponzi scheme or huge profits to be made it aint gonna happen. It won't happen with a Conservative party that is for sure.

I find it quite ironic that we clap NHS workers yet many of them are using food banks, having wages frozen and struggling to find any sustainable, affordable housing. 

I could go into great detail about all my points - they may sound contradictory in small chunks but it's hard work typing it all out on here.

It's more of a face-to face down the pub discussion.

The 2008 thing - I was in the US a lot 20 years ago and was watching the housing market (we were looking at moving over there) It was scary - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis 

It was like the mid 80s in the UK - middle men filling in forms overstating income for Pedro the lawnmower so he an get a low-start mortgage on the deposit for a new build plot  with the understanding he could sell the house just before it was finished in a few years and make a huge profit from the rise in value in the intervening years.

The middle classes took advantage of this too as a pension pot - working like dogs to pay the 3 or 4 of these low-start deals and getting into debt so they could make a killing in a few years time when they sell the new houses.

The banks did very well bundling up these good debts and selling them on to the bigger banks.

By 2007, Pedro and everyone else suddenly put all their options on the market at the same time and flooded the market - there were no buyers, only sellers.

Suddenly, the low-start periods all ended and their monthly payments quadrupled-  which they couldn't afford so they defaulted and lost everything to the bank.

The bank suddenly had no cash flow - and the trust up the line was broken when all if the debts that had been bought up suddenly went sour.    All the banks just froze - and there was no cash movement so it all fell flat on its face.      (this is a very simplified version but is totally accurate,.)

there's a huge difference between a flat and a house. i am in a house. you are in a flat. i get that. i think everybody gets it.

a safe space can be any size - as i say above, 'no matter how tiny.' it can be in a closet. a tent. altho i'm not an expert in safe spaces, mine is currently my bed, which has a mp3 speaker, so it can be noise safe, it's very warm, so it's temperature safe, i have a weighted blanket, so it's pressure safe. i may put it in a smaller room, because i prefer small spaces. they feel safer. 

you might research it, if interested. i'm suggesting it merely to be helpful. it might give you some comfort in your current situation, and that might give you more energy to pursue other options, or look at your current one in a new light.

you don't sound ready to move, to be frank. a safe space is probably your best option. up to you.

Plastic said:

From what I read, you are looking only from the bottom up with no hard business understanding.-

Hi, Not really. I always look at the underdog first and if I see pain or suffering I want to understand what is the cause of it. If there is a ' hard business ' understanding or model or whatever, what is it and was it handed down, carved in stone from above ? Is this a religion you are referring to or simply a system you were born into and have gotten to know how it works from a particular point of view ? How old is the current system ?

Plastic said:

you talk of fighting for welfare but in reality, the the public were lied to to get them to vote Labour - they have always known that all the promises were not supported financially so it was doomed to collapse when the amount of people taking out outweigh the money being paid in.      

Well, what you are really talking about is shifting the goal posts. First, we were told that we lived in a meritocracy and that if you simply worked hard or put in the effort you would keep rising through the ranks in a perpetual progression. The sky was the limit as long as you were a good little boy/girl. What a crock of bu!!sh!t that turned out to be. Of course I agree the Labour movement were slow to grasp this but at the time they were only being practical in what was the reality of the time. And that was protecting themselves in the post-war industrialsed world of large manufacturing & Labour and the public sector. Meanwhile, the West was busy telling the rest of the world to become like them but the problem with that was that they did just that. That was when all the Industrialised and decent paid jobs for the semi-skilled, working class etc left because the rich and powerful got their manufacturing from overseas because it was cheaper and more profitable, not because it protected jobs and livelihoods at home - the opposite. The system was in no way doomed to collapse under the post-war world we found ourselves in. It was the reality of the time. Of course, if you want to compete with countries like China with this child-like mentality then I guess if you are really serious about this rigid mindset you will have all the answers to this madness ?  

Plastic said:

he people of the 50s, 60s and 70s acted like spoilt children - expecting everything to be handed to them with no responsibility - and they all got it all until the 80s when the money started running out.     Naturally, the Labour governments kept lying to the voters while the Tories enabled a system where you could invest in your own future rather than rely on a non-existent 'future pensions' that could not be funded.     They, unfortunately, didn't tell the public how screwed the system really was.    All of the people blaming Maggie for selling the Silver didn't understand that the welfare state was bleeding the country dry so money was needed to prop it up.     They kept 'wanting' but refused to think about the ludicrous amount of money they were sucking from the system.

Also, coincidentally when they decided that we could no longer make anything worth selling to the the rest of the world. Or was it that they found other cheaper markets abroad that would maximize their profits ? Was that in countries that before that, we were told were absolute demons ? It's funny that countries like Germany and others, still have a reputation of manufacturing goods and still have a high standard of living ? Also, that Germany and all of the Nordic countries that don't subscribe to the UK/US model have a much higher standard of living to boot ?

Plastic said:

By the 2000s, the term 'austerity' was being thrown around to prepare the people for the system's collapse.  

Couldn't be a very good system in place then ? Did Austerity solve anything or make the situation better ?

Plastic said:

Most people being born today will be back to how their great, great-grandparents were 100 years ago - no pensions, no healthcare and no future.

Who do you blame for this ? Where do you get your information from, honestly.

Plastic said:

ou can pretty much equate the welfare state with the US cities like LA and Chicago - massively unionised and totally bankrupt because of crazy financial policies.

I don't think many economists would agree. But lets take the US as a whole. It is a country afterall isn't it ? 

Arguably, the US is the most capitalistic country in the world. I mean, if you sneeze you may be liable to a court case or go bankrupt if you happen to be sick ?

How many hours do Americans work compared to the rest of the world ?

How much do they pay in private health care provisions for the worst outcomes in the industrialsed world  ?

Do they have Universal health care = no.

What percentage of their population is in prison compared to the rest of the worlds ?

Do they have Labour  rights= questionanable .

How much is spent from the tax payers budget on public services ?|

How much studies have shown that it is those with the most money who get elected every time ?

Do they have legal representation regardless of income or is the law only for those who have deep pockets  ? 

Plastic said:

The entitlement for unearned status is rife today - so many people expecting everything for nothing and refusing to take any responsibility for their own destiny.

Could you expand please ?

Plastic said:

Deadbeat tenants carry zero risk - the law is heavily on their side - a deadbeat landlord can be hauled through the courts and bankrupted very easily.       If you want to pay well below market rate for your accommodation, then common sense says the landlord won't be spending anything on the property upkeep - your choice.

A cold, callous and deadly view of the world.  If you are really serious about talking equality then most landlords would probably be in prison if you are totally honest ?

Tell me this ? How many tenants get gov funding or tax breaks ? How many companies, corporations etc get this and then go into the market to sell their products ? If you are talking about risk, then I would be more than happy to talk about the deficit between ordinary people and companies or corporations in securing gov funding so there is no financial risk ?

Plastic said:

There's always the option of moving somewhere cheaper in the country that you can afford - but people demand local convenience along with their demand for someone else paying for their life.

Hang on a moment. First you're portraying yourself as a unifying force of family and community, then the next, you are saying : get on your bike to look for or take work wherever it may be ? Exactly where do you stand on protecting this 20 to a household, kind of thing you are trying to paint as the ideal ? 

Plastic said:

BTW - the 2008 collapse was brought about by a forced US policy of making lenders loan money to people who absolutely could not afford to pay the loan (to 'buy' minority votes)..    Suicidal.!     (I could go into depth but it's takes more than I want to type.)

Really ? I'd be interested to pursue this . 

I believe there is definitely a housing crisis.

If there would not be one, then I could easily move somewhere else.

I would like a decent and quiet home.

There is really no safe space. I am in a small flat.

I think there is a big difference between being in a flat and in a house.

I do not think that something like this is for me.

I like to be alone.

The Riddler said:

As a builder and an electrician

Cool - me too - I'm currently converting and extending a 1920s bungalow.

I'm talking things like old concrete-cancer blocks of flats - and they were still using Asbestos into the 80s.    The old houses with solid walls now don't meet R-value standards so are a pain to insulate and concrete roof tiles are much heavier than the expensive slates.  

Solid concrete floors are huge heat sinks and often had water pipes run under the surface - it all costs to fix.

Housing associations are under enormous pressure to keep their stock up to current standards - or they get accused of being slums.

I agree with you about Europe - most people rent near where they work so are happy to move if their job changes - which also means they can cycle to work.   They only buy property when they retire.

I helped on of my old workmates move into a flat in The Netherlands - where they even took their electrical fittings with them when they move out!     I had to fit all new lights and sockets.

As a builder and an electrician I can tell you there is no requirement to change the wall structure for rental purposes. The building has to adhere to building regulations at time of building. Only when extending or adapting do you have to bring it up to current regs.

I agree with what you say about some tenants being their own worst enemies though. I saw a program recently looking at housing across Europe. Their attitude is quite different and renting is the norm in some cases. There was a particular couple, in Scandinavia I think, who lived in a beautiful apartment block where everyone rented and was really proud of it. The whole block did their bit to maintain the grounds and the communal areas. As a result it was a great place to live.