Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
slawek

Properties Occupied By A Single Person In London

Recommended Posts

One third of all London properties are occupied by a single person.

Most of those people live in 3-4 rooms properties. I guess outside of London it is even worse.

11rylpg.jpg

Source census data 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these rooms or bedrooms? A one bed flat with kitchen diner, living room and bathroom would be four rooms and that seems like fair usage, it's the circa 300k above this that look under-occupied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a back-of-envelope on village we live (has banker holiday homes and mostly boomer residents).

The bedroom occupancy on a typical weekday is below 20%.

The last place we lived was probably below 10%.

In both areas our near neighbours were only around for a week or two a year - and there are stacks of boomer couples rattling around in 4-bedders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these rooms or bedrooms? A one bed flat with kitchen diner, living room and bathroom would be four rooms and that seems like fair usage, it's the circa 300k above this that look under-occupied.

"The definition of a room does not include bathrooms, toilets, halls or landings, or rooms that can only be used for storage. All other rooms, for example, kitchens, living rooms, bedrooms, utility rooms, studies and conservatories are counted."

So three room property is a typical one bed with a kitchen and a living room. Assuming your definition of fairness over 500k (50%) of single occupied properties are under-occupied.

Below data for all household sizes. The bigger ones have less spare space but they are not squeezed much, they are usually families with children.

5yaope.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The definition of a room does not include bathrooms, toilets, halls or landings, or rooms that can only be used for storage. All other rooms, for example, kitchens, living rooms, bedrooms, utility rooms, studies and conservatories are counted."

So three room property is a typical one bed with a kitchen and a living room. Assuming your definition of fairness over 500k (50%) of single occupied properties are under-occupied.

Below data for all household sizes. The bigger ones have less spare space but they are not squeezed much, they are usually families with children.

Thanks for the clarification on the room definition. I've posted links to ONS occupancy ratings before but they are pehaps a little unfair on families with children who have seperate bedrooms (I don't think this should be considered a luxury, though it unfortunately is for most people at current prices) so it's really interesting to see this more detailed analysis which still seems to show a lot of under-occupancy even if we allow for kids to have seperate bedrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These statistics hide the true scale of under-occupancy. Many of the worst offenders here will not even occupy their properties at all most of the time as they will be out working, not only leaving a much-needed property empty but also depriving others of the chance to sell their labour.

During the time when these people are out at work it should be mandatory to allow others such as shift workers to make use of this valuable living space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These statistics hide the true scale of under-occupancy. Many of the worst offenders here will not even occupy their properties at all most of the time as they will be out working, not only leaving a much-needed property empty but also depriving others of the chance to sell their labour.

During the time when these people are out at work it should be mandatory to allow others such as shift workers to make use of this valuable living space.

Either that or incur a bedroom tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a clear division between those who own property and those who rent. The under-occupancy is concentrated among owned properties. No suprise Cameron doesn't have a problem with HPI, he belongs to those who have.

25zpjle.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How people spend their money is up to them and them alone, surely? Some people will piss it away on cruises and Starbucks and some will rattle around in a large pile of high maintenance bricks. But it's their wonga and their choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How people spend their money is up to them and them alone, surely? Some people will piss it away on cruises and Starbucks and some will rattle around in a large pile of high maintenance bricks. But it's their wonga and their choice.

Quite right, if a billionaire wants to buy all the food in the world and sit on it to watch us all starve, that's his affair....

To be serious I know one single person who lives in a large 4 bed detached in Balham with an elderly single mother living down the road in another similar. Any attempt I have made to suggest they may not need all that space has been treated with derision ...(they have no other relatives to leave the money too either)

Edited by debtlessmanc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't bringing a property tax in put pressure on multi roomed yet single occupancy homes?

There are a lot of pensioners restricted to living on the ground floor if their old family homes, with demographics as they are this is certainly going to increase, but it is just another symptom of the corrupted housing market on the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite right, if a billionaire wants to buy all the food in the world and sit on it to watch us all starve, that's his affair....

To be serious I know one single person who lives in a large 4 bed detached in Balham with an elderly single mother living down the road in another similar. Any attempt I have made to suggest they may not need all that space has been treated with derision ...(they have no other relatives to leave the money too either)

I would bet those 2 are NIMBYs too. Are their homes kept in a decent state if repair? I can imagine all older single occupancy homes will not exactly be on tip top as they start getting on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite right, if a billionaire wants to buy all the food in the world and sit on it to watch us all starve, that's his affair....

To be serious I know one single person who lives in a large 4 bed detached in Balham with an elderly single mother living down the road in another similar. Any attempt I have made to suggest they may not need all that space has been treated with derision ...(they have no other relatives to leave the money too either)

Surely you should be pandering to their prejudices and not upsetting them, in the hope that they may leave it all to you in their will?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would bet those 2 are NIMBYs too. Are their homes kept in a decent state if repair? I can imagine all older single occupancy homes will not exactly be on tip top as they start getting on.

Nimbys- Oh yes, raised the issue of the need for housing and was told they should build more "up north, where there is plenty of space". The younger person's house has recently been renovated as she still works, not sure about her mothers as i have only seen the exterior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One third of all London properties are occupied by a single person.

Most of those people live in 3-4 rooms properties. I guess outside of London it is even worse.

11rylpg.jpg

Source census data 2011.

Worse?!

How dare people have space...oh how wonderful it would be if we all lived in pods like bruce willis in the fifth element.

Already got the smallest houses in the western world, getting smaller, and you think the problem is people having a whole 3 or 4 rooms to call their own?

I think there is a contingent of futurists who actually lust for us all to live on top of each other like in some dystopian sci-fi film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its such a communist attitude. Communists redistribute existing stuff, capitalists create new stuff.

I dont want to force any widowed little old lady from her 3000 sq ft house, I want every one else to have that same living space, at the very least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself why there are far more single people living anywhere.....one of the reasons I would say is because the policies that exist make it more profitable to have two parents living seperately than together...just a thought. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself why there are far more single people living anywhere.....one of the reasons I would say is because the policies that exist make it more profitable to have two parents living seperately than together...just a thought. ;)

Depends on how they collected the stats. Obviously many men dont declare if they're living with a woman, as the woman loses her child benefits if the man has an income. If anonymous, maybe that wouldnt be reflected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How people spend their money is up to them and them alone, surely? Some people will piss it away on cruises and Starbucks and some will rattle around in a large pile of high maintenance bricks. But it's their wonga and their choice.

Mostly likely those under-occupied properties were bought long time. People living in them couldn't afford them at the current prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse?!

How dare people have space...oh how wonderful it would be if we all lived in pods like bruce willis in the fifth element.

Already got the smallest houses in the western world, getting smaller, and you think the problem is people having a whole 3 or 4 rooms to call their own?

I think there is a contingent of futurists who actually lust for us all to live on top of each other like in some dystopian sci-fi film.

I would love everyone to live in as big properties as they want. Unfortunately resources are limited and the system is not doing a good job of allocating housing in an optimal way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself why there are far more single people living anywhere.....one of the reasons I would say is because the policies that exist make it more profitable to have two parents living seperately than together...just a thought. ;)

Depends on how they collected the stats. Obviously many men dont declare if they're living with a woman, as the woman loses her child benefits if the man has an income. If anonymous, maybe that wouldnt be reflected.

The majority of under-occupied properties are owned, rented are quite efficiently allocated. See the graphs I posted earlier on this thread.

Any preferences to live alone should be fairly indepedendent if property is owned or rented.

Benefits should show rented properties as under-occupied but it is other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its such a communist attitude. Communists redistribute existing stuff, capitalists create new stuff.

I dont want to force any widowed little old lady from her 3000 sq ft house, I want every one else to have that same living space, at the very least.

I think both communism and capitalism try to solve the same problem how to satisfy human needs and wants having limited or scarce resources. Neither of them is optimal in this task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I did a back-of-envelope on village we live (has banker holiday homes and mostly boomer residents).

The bedroom occupancy on a typical weekday is below 20%.

The last place we lived was probably below 10%.

In both areas our near neighbours were only around for a week or two a year - and there are stacks of boomer couples rattling around in 4-bedders.

My father-in-law has a 3 bed semi, and his partner has a 5 bed detached..... 8 beds between the pair of 'em! And they ask me why I just don't buy somewhere! FFS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its such a communist attitude. Communists redistribute existing stuff, capitalists create new stuff.

I dont want to force any widowed little old lady from her 3000 sq ft house, I want every one else to have that same living space, at the very least.

I've not got 30+ years to wait for that.

Almost identical house a few doors down from an woman in her 80s I know of went on market at £1.5m and sold for £1.1m last year. (She's also got 5-7 other London BTLs)

And she's similar to that thread in Off-Topic at the moment - whinging and whining about everything... wallowing in self-pity... thinking young spend too much on ipods, all from top of a £5m property portfolio. Perhaps loneliness but also a bitterness to the world.

If market wasn't unfairly advantageous to older owners (decades wage-inflation, houses bought cheap yonks ago, final sal pensions) + mega QE/FLS/0,5%, more such homes would come to market. They're also building retirement villages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the interesting thing about under occupancy is not those people who are underoccupying because it enhances their quality of life which is fair enough if they can afford it (so I guess people with additional living space rather than unused bedrooms, although I don't think this should be propped up by the state with non-means tested winter fuel allowance, SMI, etc); it's the people who are acquiring or holding on to larger properties that they don't need or get any particular increase in quality of life from (multiple unused bedrooms are essentially dead space) purely because they are speculating on HPI gains and are essentially using their spare bedrooms as investment vehicles. The more under occupied properties there are out there the larger this second cohort is likely to be, which will be interesting when HPI starts to look like less of a sure thing. I expect them to bring volume to market along with the other speculators.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 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.