Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
SarahBell

Bbc Breakfast Affordable Housing In Villages Story

Recommended Posts

Briefly saw the tail end of the first bit about houses in villages being unaffordable for young people.

<bbcbreakfast@bbc.co.uk> if you want to email them about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesitng discussion about this on "Wake up To Money" this morning. Starts at 26.20 mins in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00t0m0d#synopsis

Their guest was from the National Housing Federation, who basically says that because so many wealthy people want to move into rural areas, they are pricing locals out. eg ..commuters, wealthy retireess, second home owners. So, there is a real shortage of properties in rural areas, and in some areas prices are now 20 times local salaries. In some rural areas, 10% of property is owned by 2nd home owners.

Young farmers cannot afford to buy property in their own areas any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesitng discussion about this on "Wake up To Money" this morning. Starts at 26.20 mins in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00t0m0d#synopsis

Their guest was from the National Housing Federation, who basically says that because so many wealthy people want to move into rural areas, they are pricing locals out. eg ..commuters, wealthy retireess, second home owners. So, there is a real shortage of properties in rural areas, and in some areas prices are now 20 times local salaries. In some rural areas, 10% of property is owned by 2nd home owners.

Young farmers cannot afford to buy property in their own areas any more.

I thnk that was the gist.,..

but farmers should be living on the farm surely ... unless the old farmers refuse to let them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's such a shame that there physically is no more land to build on around these villages, if only there was a few hundred square kilometers or so of empty space between the village and the nearby towns then there wouldn't be a problem, we could just build more houses for the young people to live in!

Wait, what's that skippy? There's a state-funded land ownership cartel designed to artificially restrict supply?

Well ********, they didn't mention that in the article. I wonder why?

Edited by DementedTuna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesitng discussion about this on "Wake up To Money" this morning. Starts at 26.20 mins in.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00t0m0d#synopsis

Their guest was from the National Housing Federation, who basically says that because so many wealthy people want to move into rural areas, they are pricing locals out. eg ..commuters, wealthy retireess, second home owners. So, there is a real shortage of properties in rural areas, and in some areas prices are now 20 times local salaries. In some rural areas, 10% of property is owned by 2nd home owners.

Young farmers cannot afford to buy property in their own areas any more.

Why is this news now? This was happening 20 years ago with agricultural communities in many parts of the country being invaded by commuters and 2nd home buyers, and the locals being unable to buy in the villages where they grew up. It happened in the village where I lived as a child. It's certainly not a new move - why have the BBC only just cottoned on to it?

Edited by The Dragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this news now? This was happening 20 years ago with agricultural communities in many parts of the country being invaded by commuters and 2nd home buyers, and the locals being unable to buy in the villages where they grew up. It happened in the village where I lived as a child. It's certainly not a new move - why have the BBC only just cottoned on to it?

Exactly what I was thinking. I come from a village in West Dorset. Its been like that for a generation. No locals can afford to live there. The pretty thatched cottages my ancestors lived in time out of mind (as tenants, they were thatchers, shepherds and ag labourers) are now all costing hundreds of thousands of pounds and are the holiday homes of people from London. I started happening in earnest in the 1980's IIRC - perhaps a bit before. But its nothing new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw it. Not one mention of the simple solution to all this. Make it expensive to have a second home. Taxes or whatever, it doesn't really matter. Just make the idea of buying a second home in a wee village the preserve of the very wealthy - like I imagine it used to be. Then lots of these homes would be sold, prices would drop, and the locals could maybe afford to actually live there. Not rocket science.

You only had to watch some of these property porn shows a few years back to see the problem. Saw one couple, guy was a bus driver and his wife didn't work. I think their budget for a holiday home was 150k or something. Must be from gains in their existing house or whatever. Now if there were large costs involved with buying that second home ? They would probably not have gone for it.

No offence to bus drivers, but when you have one buying a second home at the expense of a local ? Something is very wrong.

Make 2nd homes the preserve of the very wealthy. It would not be difficult to do. However most of those in a position of power would not benefit from this - directly anyway. So they are likely to go for any other option rather than the most obvious and simple one. Not surprising but not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what I was thinking. I come from a village in West Dorset. Its been like that for a generation. No locals can afford to live there. The pretty thatched cottages my ancestors lived in time out of mind (as tenants, they were thatchers, shepherds and ag labourers) are now all costing hundreds of thousands of pounds and are the holiday homes of people from London. I started happening in earnest in the 1980's IIRC - perhaps a bit before. But its nothing new.

Similar in Surbiton. Bloody yokels coming in from out of Town, splashing their cash around like it was water, pricing out the local youth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this news now?  This was happening 20 years ago with agricultural communities in many parts of the country being invaded by commuters and 2nd home buyers, and the locals being unable to buy in the villages where they grew up.  It happened in the village where I lived as a child.  It's certainly not a new move - why have the BBC only just cottoned on to it?

The BBC have been actively promoting it with a constant diet of property porn thats why. Never heard the presenters of "homes under the hammer" ask a buyer, "you do realise you are pricing a farmer out a home?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is this news now? This was happening 20 years ago with agricultural communities in many parts of the country being invaded by commuters and 2nd home buyers, and the locals being unable to buy in the villages where they grew up. It happened in the village where I lived as a child. It's certainly not a new move - why have the BBC only just cottoned on to it?

The Beeb had cottoned on back then, and many were complaining of it.

We also had rural apartheid: low-cost housing for local people, where local was defined as a birthright, paid for by people most of whom could only dream of living somewhere like that. Example: when I lived in Sheffield 20 years ago, those restricted low-cost houses were going up in the nearby Peak District village of Bradfield, paid for by a North Sheffield population that was predominantly poor. Meanwhile if you're born somewhere less nice you can sod off (but we'll still have your money).

Not that it was new 20 years ago. Or even 200 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's such a shame that there physically is no more land to build on around these villages, if only there was a few hundred square kilometers or so of empty space between the village and the nearby towns then there wouldn't be a problem, we could just build more houses for the young people to live in!

Wait, what's that skippy? There's a state-funded land ownership cartel designed to artificially restrict supply?

Well ********, they didn't mention that in the article. I wonder why?

Because it's land that's actually being used for growing stuff? You know "food", that stuff you need in order to stay alive. Anyway, why trash a decent village with loads of modern ugly new-build crap instead of addressing the actual cause of the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what I was thinking. I come from a village in West Dorset. Its been like that for a generation. No locals can afford to live there. The pretty thatched cottages my ancestors lived in time out of mind (as tenants, they were thatchers, shepherds and ag labourers) are now all costing hundreds of thousands of pounds and are the holiday homes of people from London. I started happening in earnest in the 1980's IIRC - perhaps a bit before. But its nothing new.

It started with the Inclosures Acts. They need to be repealed by Mr Clegg.

p-o-p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thnk that was the gist.,..

but farmers should be living on the farm surely ... unless the old farmers refuse to let them?

It sounds like they are talking about a farmers young adult offspring, who want to continue working on the family farm with their parents, but have now been priced out of buying their own place, within close proximity of their family farming area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this argument that rich city dwellers are to blame for pricing young rural folk out. Originally homes in these villages were owned by local folk. They then had the choice of selling to a young local person for a reasonable price or selling to a city person for a huge bonus. Guess which they chose. The priced out young have no one to blame but their parents and grandparents who decided to cash in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm, the priced out young is a country wide problem... no-one who didn't buy prior to 1999 can afford anything anywhere without making stupid financial commitments they won't be able to honour.

City folk comin 'ere takin ore larnd is a symptom certainly, but so are a lot of things.

It's not 'city folk', its people who happened to buy prior to 1999 forcing everyone else into serfdom, I think theres a website where they talk about it a bit somewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this argument that rich city dwellers are to blame for pricing young rural folk out. Originally homes in these villages were owned by local folk. They then had the choice of selling to a young local person for a reasonable price or selling to a city person for a huge bonus. Guess which they chose. The priced out young have no one to blame but their parents and grandparents who decided to cash in.

But were they? I'm not sure what the situation was in England, but in much of rural Scotland a lot of the housing was owned by the local landowners and rented to their workers. In recent times it's been much more cost effective to sell the houses off as second homes for wealthy city-dwellers than to rent them out to some low-paid forestry worker while still having to pay for maintenance and so on. A lot of the rural housing has never actually been owned by locals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate this argument that rich city dwellers are to blame for pricing young rural folk out. Originally homes in these villages were owned by local folk. They then had the choice of selling to a young local person for a reasonable price or selling to a city person for a huge bonus. Guess which they chose. The priced out young have no one to blame but their parents and grandparents who decided to cash in.

"owned by local folk"

I think you'll find that the local folk were tenants, paying rent to the local landowner/rich farmer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People always argue that local services like pubs die in these villages that are swamped with second homes - well thats not always the case, the holidaying family in a holiday let for one week will spend a fortune compared to some local struggling on £10k a year.

Same thing happens when people come down from London for the weekend, they spend more in a day than a local would in a week!

Why do you think there are so many expensive restaurants in these pretty cornish villages? It's not the local farm hand dining on o'dourves.

Second home owners put more into the local economy than you think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But were they? I'm not sure what the situation was in England, but in much of rural Scotland a lot of the housing was owned by the local landowners and rented to their workers. In recent times it's been much more cost effective to sell the houses off as second homes for wealthy city-dwellers than to rent them out to some low-paid forestry worker while still having to pay for maintenance and so on. A lot of the rural housing has never actually been owned by locals.

Ah, I see you already said the same thing.

All my ancestors were incredibly poor but lived in the villages they worked in. They rented off the local yeoman farmer/landowner. Sometimes they would have to move for a short while elsewhere when required, during harvest time for example. Or for lambing. Again, renting all the while.

My parents (now in their 70's) were the FIRST EVER generation in the family to actually own. They were married in 1962 and shortly before one bank manager told them that "owning your own home isn't for the likes of you". He actually said that to my dad. But they did scrape up enough to buy a tiny two up two down cottage in the village. Before that everyone lived in the village, worked on the farms and rented. That's how it was for most people in rural communities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in the old days when country folk rented from rich landowners, they had much better security of tenure. The house came with the job, work well and your family had a roof over thier head that they could treat as thier own. Generally families could live in the same house for generations even though it was not thier own!

A good landowner would recognise that a happy secure worker was a good worker and would not go out of their way to intimidate their tenants.

These days we seem to have returned to this serf-dom, except the land owners are greedy middle classes who would really rather not have to deal with the likes of us! And make sure that they keep laws in place that keep us from being able to put down roots!

Yes the problem of locals priced out is an old one, extra costs on second homes would help to some extent, but there are so few rural economies left that it is difficult to see how locals could afford to feed their families even if they could live in their villages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 259 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.