Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ticket2ride

400,000 Homes In England Waiting To Be Built

Recommended Posts

Time for a "Build on it or lose it" Law.

They've got 1 year from planning permision being granted to build, or face the land being seized (at 100% loss to the failed house builder).

We could do with some new entrants into the market in my opinion.

IKEA, VIRGIN, APPLE, TESCO... come on! huge demand for housing from us 20 and 30 somethings. Today's house builders don't want our business. Time for new blood to push out the old fart house builders.

Edited by DogTired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Councils want to take on more debt.

Problem: the borrowing counts towards public sector debt.

Suggested solution: Don't include their house building borrowing in deficit figures.

Genius way to free Councils from their investment shackles.

What could possible go wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for a "Build on it or lose it" Law.

They've got 1 year from planning permision being granted to build, or face the land being seized (at 100% loss to the failed house builder).

We could do with some new entrants into the market in my opinion.

IKEA, VIRGIN, APPLE, TESCO... come on! huge demand for housing from us 20 and 30 somethings. Today's house builders don't want our business. Time for new blood to push out the old fart house builders.

They may have borrowed for the land and paid for the permission but still need extra money to borrow to build......but there are not enough that can earn enough or borrow enough to make them a profit even with lower costs of importing the labour......maybe if they paid living wages and reduced the costs more people could afford to buy the finished product without needing artificial help manipulation. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may have borrowed for the land and paid for the permission but still need extra money to borrow to build......but there are not enough that can earn enough or borrow enough to make them a profit even with lower costs of importing the labour......maybe if they paid living wages and reduced the costs more people could afford to buy the finished product without needing artificial help manipulation. ;)

I think some of these proposals are a bit draconian, but why they cant at least pay council tax from inception of permission on the development, i dont know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some of these proposals are a bit draconian, but why they cant at least pay council tax from inception of permission on the development, i dont know.

Quite. It's a big-builders cartel. Nothing less. It's similar to what JP Morgan or whatever bank it was, was doing with aluminium in warehouses to keep prices high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some of these proposals are a bit draconian, but why they cant at least pay council tax from inception of permission on the development, i dont know.

.....some penalty should be imposed if they do not use the permissions granted to them.......get your house in order with the funds available before asking for something you do not want to use, only to sell. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Planning permission expires if not used already - 3 yr limit.

Realistically a big firm will be planning 2-3yrs ahead regardless.

So 400k sounds like what you expect @120k new homes a year.

Real issue is why there are not more in the queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Councils want to take on more debt.

Problem: the borrowing counts towards public sector debt.

Suggested solution: Don't include their house building borrowing in deficit figures.

Genius way to free Councils from their investment shackles.

What could possible go wrong?

Quite.

Jones added: "Government has an unrivalled opportunity to create jobs, provide tens of thousands of homes and help the economy without having to find a single extra penny.

Free debt ftw! Genius. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite.

Free debt ftw! Genius. :rolleyes:

While it might not be free, building houses is surely better than giving it to the banks.

However it's the banks that will stop this, building houses will affect supply and drive down the value of their loans portfolios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it might not be free, building houses is surely better than giving it to the banks.

However it's the banks that will stop this, building houses will affect supply and drive down the value of their loans portfolios.

why would it drive down the value......whilst the debt is being repaid the value can be hypothetically anything you want it to be......it is only bad non payment of unaffordable debt that brings out the true value.........anyway banks are in the business of lending, lending at the right price to the right people those that can pay it back, people with jobs and businesses secure enough that pays enough to pay it back. ;)

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but I thought planning was the only problem...

It is.

What are the chances of me, you anyone on this forum who does not have a million quid getting planning permission anywhere. It's all well and good saying build on brownfield sites, but that excludes small firms / individuals who don't have a million quid to buy an old factory, knock it down and put shoe boxes on it.

What we need is planned serviced plots made available to small companies / individual builders. This was done back in victorian times with much success.

The area of Dover I lived in was built by small companies & individuals. It was initially a large area of GREEN land at the edge of the town that was split up into smaller sites and sold off to small building firms.

If there were someway of breaking up the large builders then small builders would thrive and the situation would be different now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Victorian builder would stagger through one small development before going bust - they had their own house price crash hitting sales back then too!

There needs to be some room for bigger builders to zone out projects up to 5 years in advance. That probably means a 600k planning "blockage" is desirable.

On top of that should be the smaller builders; and private individuals.

So should be more like a million in the queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commenting on the report, the housing minister, Mark Prisk, said that over 330,000 homes had already been delivered in the past three years

So that's 110,000 a year - which is the lowest amount since records began - but he wants us to to think this is a great achievement.

This is Orwellian.

Edited by oldsport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's 110,000 a year - which is the lowest amount since records began - but he wants us to to think this is a great achievement.

This is Orwellian.

He obviously needs to brush up on his double talk...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.