Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Snugglybear

Another Good Way To Support House Prices

Recommended Posts

Not only will councils have to wait two years, they can also only take over houses that are run-down and vandalised, meaning it will cost more to make them habitable.

From the Guardian website http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jan/06/empty-houses-rule-change

"The government is to tighten up the rules that allow councils to seize empty homes, claiming the current system, introduced under

Labour, infringes civil liberties.

Local authorities will have to wait two years before attempting to take charge of an empty property, instead of the present six months, and they will only be able to seize buildings that are run-down "vandal magnets".

Eric Pickles, the communities secretary, said he was protecting the "fundamental human right" to property, citing cases where people have had their homes seized when visiting sick relatives abroad for extended periods. But charities claimed the move would deter councils from reclaiming empty buildings to house homeless families.

A Guardian investigation established there are as many as 450,000 long-term empty homes in Britain, prompting calls for more to be used to ease waiting lists.

Pickles said: "There is a case for action to put boarded up and blighted properties back into use. But these draconian state powers have allowed councils to seize private homes in perfect condition, including their fixtures and fittings, just because the homes have been empty for a short while. The coalition government is standing up for the civil liberties of law-abiding citizens. People suffering the loss of a loved one should not have to endure the added indignity of having their home seized because of a delay in them deciding what to do with it.."

The rules will alter empty dwelling management orders, which were introduced by Labour in 2006 to give councils powers to take over properties that have been empty for as little as six months.

Under the existing rules, homes do not have to be in disrepair. The changes will mean that only properties that have become "magnets for vandalism, squatters and other forms of antisocial behaviour, blighting the local neighbourhood" will be targeted, a spokesman said.

A property will have to stand empty for at least two years and owners will have to be given at least three months' notice before the order can be issued.

David Ireland, the chief executive of independent charity Empty Homes, said: "There have only ever been 44 empty dwelling management orders. We don't believe that lots of people's civil liberties have been trampled on.

"This will limit councils' abilities to deal with empty homes. In particular, we are worried about orders on whole blocks of new-build flats that have been developed faster than the market could absorb. Under these restrictions about disrepair, they wouldn't be able to do so."

Caroline Flint, the shadow communities secretary, said so few orders had been issued because they had acted as a deterrent to encourage owners to deal with empty properties themselves.

She said: "Disused properties are an eyesore, a magnet for antisocial behaviour and a waste of a valuable resource"

The government has also introduced incentives to bring properties back into use through a homes bonus, under which the government will match the council tax raised from any empty property which it hopes will encourage the refurbishment of 300,000 homes."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality LA's don't take over derelict properties after six months and will only take such drastic action once it has exhausted all other avenues, this always takes far longer than two years.

I can say this as I help locate ‘rogue’ land owners for the housing section of my local LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality LA's don't take over derelict properties after six months and will only take such drastic action once it has exhausted all other avenues, this always takes far longer than two years.

I can say this as I help locate ‘rogue’ land owners for the housing section of my local LA.

Also yet another reason why local taxes should be levied against the owners of the homes rather than those occupying it.

There wouldnt need to be any reason for such a law then to seize the homes. If the owner didnt pay, then the council could just go to court and seize the home for non-payment of tax.

Council tax needs to be changed, so that it is the owner of the property that has to pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, and it should double or treble in the case of long-term (> 6months) empty property.

Oh yes. There should be a discount if you are UK citizen, and are living in the property, and a bigger discount if you are a couple, living in the same property. Then you can use the NI insurance register to make sure that no one tries to use this discount for more than one property.

Then every property that doesnt have this discount applied will incur tax at a much higher rate. Foreign nationals and companies that own property wont get a discount.

This is an easy tax to collect, and one that encourages people to take less of our precious space up.

I dont understand why they made the occupiers pay it? Just insane doing it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes. There should be a discount if you are UK citizen, and are living in the property, and a bigger discount if you are a couple, living in the same property. Then you can use the NI insurance register to make sure that no one tries to use this discount for more than one property.

Then every property that doesnt have this discount applied will incur tax at a much higher rate. Foreign nationals and companies that own property wont get a discount.

This is an easy tax to collect, and one that encourages people to take less of our precious space up.

I dont understand why they made the occupiers pay it? Just insane doing it that way.

Because they own lots of rented properties and it would make rented property a worse investment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also yet another reason why local taxes should be levied against the owners of the homes rather than those occupying it.

There wouldnt need to be any reason for such a law then to seize the homes. If the owner didnt pay, then the council could just go to court and seize the home for non-payment of tax.

Council tax needs to be changed, so that it is the owner of the property that has to pay.

Good point, that is the case in France, the "council" tax is split in 2, "Taxe fonciere" (paid by owner) and "Taxe d'habitation" (paid by whoever lives there on 1st January). For the latter if no-one lives there no-one pays but there is still the former to pay yearly, occupied or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, that is the case in France, the "council" tax is split in 2, "Taxe fonciere" (paid by owner) and "Taxe d'habitation" (paid by whoever lives there on 1st January). For the latter if no-one lives there no-one pays but there is still the former to pay yearly, occupied or not.

Frency,

the trouble with the French system, having been educated on it by your good self, is that it is more complicated than it need be. Just tax the owner. If the owner is renting out the property, they will pass on as much of the cost of the tax as the market will allow anyway. Creating a two tier system is just an extra and useless piece of admin that the taxpayer has to pay for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frency,

the trouble with the French system, having been educated on it by your good self, is that it is more complicated than it need be. Just tax the owner. If the owner is renting out the property, they will pass on as much of the cost of the tax as the market will allow anyway. Creating a two tier system is just an extra and useless piece of admin that the taxpayer has to pay for.

agreed, I was just explaining how it works in France but am not suggesting a 2 tier system at all. It should all be paid for by the owner and may (or would) be in part passed onto the tenant but at least when the house is unoccupied it cost the owner with no prospect of passing on that cost.

It isn't the only aspect of the french (tax) system that is too complicated...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely there should be tax on properties, and extra tax on empty properties and on any that aren't the owner's main residence.

I'm just struggling with the concept of the Tories introducing such a thing.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 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.