National News Rishi Sunak

MC Yellow said:
In addition to the recent mortgage interest rises being passed on to tenants, the targeted tax raid on landlords in terms of mortgage interest relief restrictions, capital gains tax uplift, stamp duty uplift as well additional referencing and regulatory costs etc, has created an exodus of landlords and a barrier to investing.

Demand remains high, supply drops off, and a lack of new housing to keep pace with this swelling population creates a s**t storm.

Ironically, the recent budget announcement to drop the top CGT rate from 28% to 24% was designed to generate more revenue by encouraging more landlords to sell, which will just decrease supply further.
Click to expand...
Why are you saying landlords selling decreases supply? Assuming it's lived in after the sale it's still a house in occupation so the supply of houses hasn't moved.
 
QR said:
Why are you saying landlords selling decreases supply? Assuming it's lived in after the sale it's still a house in occupation so the supply of houses hasn't moved.
Click to expand...

In terms of rental properties available to let.
 
QR said:
But presumably one less renter too.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.. plenty of 1st time buyers who have no intention of renting and plenty more coming through looking for a property to rent.

There are also those that only want to rent for job relocations etc before committing.

Plenty of renters who just want to rent rather than buy, for whatever reason, and of course those that want to buy but just can’t scrape a sufficient deposit.

Vicious circle.
 
MC Yellow said:
Not necessarily.. plenty of 1st time buyers who have no intention of renting and plenty more coming through looking for a property to rent.

There are also those that only want to rent for job relocations etc before committing.

Plenty of renters who just want to rent rather than buy, for whatever reason, and of course those that want to buy but just can’t scrape a sufficient deposit.

Vicious circle.
Click to expand...
But the point I'm making is that landlords selling isn't really the problems you are suggesting it is. The only* solution to the housing problem (ie demand outstripping supply) is more residential properties irrespective of whether they are rental or under mortgages/owned outright.

*I'm ruling out war or a cull of the population.
 
QR said:
But the point I'm making is that landlords selling isn't really the problems you are suggesting it is. The only* solution to the housing problem (ie demand outstripping supply) is more residential properties irrespective of whether they are rental or under mortgages/owned outright.

*I'm ruling out war or a cull of the population.
Click to expand...

Agree… more properties are needed.

But the immediate issue is say for example you have 3 properties and 12 people interested. If you lose one property to a renter, you then have 2 properties and 11 people interested. Reduce that again, you end up with 1 property and 10 people fighting for it.

As the pool of availability and options drop, the fight to secure a property will intensify.

But yes, long term solution… build more properties
 
Last edited:
MC Yellow said:
Agree… mire properties are needed.

But the immediate issue is say for example you have 3 properties and 12 people interested. If you lose one property to a renter, you then have 2 properties and 11 people interested. Reduce that again, you end up with 1 property and 10 people fighting for it.

As the pool of availability and options drop, the fight to secure a property will intensify.

But yes, long term solution… build more properties
Click to expand...

Good luck with that, Kidlington is gridlocked as it is and nothing can be built within a 500 mile radius of it.
 
PottersRightBoot said:
Nice work on the independent football regulator wouldn’t we agree ?
Click to expand...
Not really, no. It will turn into an OFWAT that can dump sewage where it wants , when it wants with no regulation. Or OFGEN providing a cap on energy prices that doesn’t. I can’t be arsed to list all the others.
 
  • React
Reactions: m
holdsteady said:
Plenty of room in Oxfordshire, it’s the least developed part of the south east, the housing shortage is artificially created to win votes.
Click to expand...
There's "plenty of room" in my garden but that doesn't mean I should build an extension covering my entire plot.

The standard of building is currently so shoddy that it's unsurprising nobody wants new housing. The roads, schools and services aren't improving. Just building houses would make the problem worse for everyone.

And that's before we get to the permanent destruction of huge areas of potentially biodiverse land for these estates!!
 
bashamwonderland said:
There's "plenty of room" in my garden but that doesn't mean I should build an extension covering my entire plot.

The standard of building is currently so shoddy that it's unsurprising nobody wants new housing. The roads, schools and services aren't improving. Just building houses would make the problem worse for everyone.

And that's before we get to the permanent destruction of huge areas of potentially biodiverse land for these estates!!
Click to expand...
in long Hanborough there was a development planned with 300 homes, when the developer discovered that they would have to provide services to support that ( upgrading sewers etc) they reduced the size to 150. Once that was completed they put in for another for 150 and because of the size of each individual development didn’t have to complete the upgrades to the services.

Councils hands are tied because there is a national shortage of housing stock so if they turn down planning the developer appeals. Eventually it goes to government who rubber stamp it because they need the housing stock,

It’s a terrible process, to build terrible houses without proper infrastructure.
 
bashamwonderland said:
There's "plenty of room" in my garden but that doesn't mean I should build an extension covering my entire plot.

The standard of building is currently so shoddy that it's unsurprising nobody wants new housing. The roads, schools and services aren't improving. Just building houses would make the problem worse for everyone.

And that's before we get to the permanent destruction of huge areas of potentially biodiverse land for these estates!!
Click to expand...

Not really going to cover the whole of Oxfordshire with houses if you build enough to cover the housing need though are you? You could build the houses and all the infrastructure needed and still have most of the county be green fields as it is now, it’s a county that has barely been developed.
 
Marston Road yellow said:
in long Hanborough there was a development planned with 300 homes, when the developer discovered that they would have to provide services to support that ( upgrading sewers etc) they reduced the size to 150. Once that was completed they put in for another for 150 and because of the size of each individual development didn’t have to complete the upgrades to the services.

Councils hands are tied because there is a national shortage of housing stock so if they turn down planning the developer appeals. Eventually it goes to government who rubber stamp it because they need the housing stock,

It’s a terrible process, to build terrible houses without proper infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Long Hanbrough, for me, is the perfect example of how awful housebuilding is. I think they did put in a GPs in the end, but otherwise it's small characterless developments built all along the main road. The roads are completely fucked all the way from Witney to Oxford, North Leigh is doing it's own expansion and the whole area is now a miserable, crowded, rubbish strewn mess.
 
Councils refuses houses because infrastructure can't cope (schools, road...). Developers appeal to government and wins. Houses are built and locals complain about councils because the infrastructure can't cope (schools, roads...). Times by a large number.

But borrowing to invest (in infrastructure, schools, roads...) is BAD.
 
holdsteady said:
Not really going to cover the whole of Oxfordshire with houses if you build enough to cover the housing need though are you? You could build the houses and all the infrastructure needed and still have most of the county be green fields as it is now, it’s a county that has barely been developed.
Click to expand...
My concern is that Oxfordshire is one of the only counties left in the South East (other than maybe Sussex and Hampshire?) which has not been completely stripped of its character and ruined by development. The South East is crowded and struggling under its own weight.

If housebuilding projects were joined up, Danish affairs with roads, schools, trains/trams and infrastructure built in, then I would not be opposed to development but as it stands, the development of Oxfordshire would mean huge expanses of land swallowed up for characterless, completely paved and concreted, 2-car drivewayed housing estates with absolutely no infrastructure. That would just clog the roads and ruin it even more than it already has been.

If housebuilding was controlled by government with tight controls on environmental and infrastructure benefits then maybe I would change my opinion.
 
QR said:
*I'm ruling out war or a cull of the population.
Click to expand...

bashamwonderland said:
If housebuilding was controlled by government with tight controls on environmental and infrastructure benefits then maybe I would change my opinion.
Click to expand...

At last, the right way of thinking.
Consumerism requires endless population growth and not just on this crowded island.
Global population control is the best answer to many of the globes problems. :)

Government should control the allocation of land for development and ensure the developers put the infrastructure in first. Too often the developers take the S106 "fine" because its cheaper to break their promises and then they move on to the next estate.

As for build quality ............. as long as the box lasts 25 years and some poor soul can get a mortgage on it that`ll do.

Although I`ll take a shot that some won`t last 25 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom