Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Ah-so

Guardian: Names of wealthy empty-home owners in Grenfell borough revealed

Recommended Posts

An administrative error has apparently lead to the names of the owners of empty homes being revealed. 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/aug/01/names-of-wealthy-empty-home-owners-in-grenfell-borough-revealed

"Owners of the 1,652 properties listed as unoccupied by Kensington and Chelsea council include a Ukrainian billionaire fighting extradition to the US, a former mayor of New York, a high-profile luxury property developer and a senior television executive."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could put a 1% land value tax on these empty properties, the council could raise about £50m p/a.

These are houses and if the owners do not want to use them for housing then they should pay for the privilege. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, common sense.....there must be reasons why TPTB are happy for property to be purchased and left empty in an area where there is a great demand for homes by working residents.....;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

If you could put a 1% land value tax on these empty properties, the council could raise about £50m p/a.

These are houses and if the owners do not want to use them for housing then they should pay for the privilege. 

I think you are being far too generous; why not a 10% tax on empty properties based on their current market value rather than the value of the land.  That would give a real push to lower prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dougless said:

I think you are being far too generous; why not a 10% tax on empty properties based on their current market value rather than the value of the land.  That would give a real push to lower prices.

I certainly meant market value of the property rather than just the land it sits in. 

Perhaps we could go at 10%, but even 1% would still raise a lot of money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

I certainly meant market value of the property rather than just the land it sits in. 

Perhaps we could go at 10%, but even 1% would still raise a lot of money. 

Better still. CPO them and turn them into council flats.


The owners clearly dont want to live in them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Better still. CPO them and turn them into council flats.


The owners clearly dont want to live in them.

Now that's a thought......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anecdotal from a friend of a friend at a village bbq who works some sort of senior role in the mental health sector

number of safeguarding incidents at high acuity psychiatric hospital was concerning the local (London) council to the extent they called in the regulator for a site visit. Not uncommon by the sounds of it, then the regulator found good practice and nothing of concern, turns out the number of safeguarding incidents were extremely low for that type of hospital and that the council had panicked because the police had flagged with them.

when the hospital provider met with the council to address their concerns the council admitted the reason for their calling in the regulator was the number of incidents would go on the police stats for their borough and negatively affect the local house prices .

nothing to do with patient/public safety, all about those precious houseprices innit.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need less government intervention, not more.

We shouldn't be stealing houses from the wealthy or taxing them more than the poor. Instead, take away the incentive to use property as an investment, by raising interest rates - making other investments pay more, and loans more expensive.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive no problems with people owning property and leaving them empty.

However they should be taxed heavily.

Foreigners should be taxed at ~5% of purchase price yearly

Bent foreigners should have the house repod by the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply unify council tax and business rates.  Why should businesses pay based on the value of the property while a high powered exec for Amazon could work remotely from a million pound penthouse and pay a pittance in council tax.

Ground floor of one Hyde Park place but saw iness rates = 250k.  The top floor with single occupancy discount £2k in council tax... 

If people had to pay business rate levels by golly they'd make sure they were making use of the property 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Better still. CPO them and turn them into council flats.


The owners clearly dont want to live in them.

CPO would involve giving compensation at 'market' values...that's no good.  Confiscation is the answer.  within a legal framework of course

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, satch said:

and the council tax rates are about half those of workers who have to live outside of London and need to commute in .... and these workers also pay rail fares while the properties just sit there unused when we have a housing crisis / shortage.

While there is no magic bullet to the house price problem in this country, the problem of investors buying up large parts of our capital city and turning it into a ghost town could easily be tackled through taxation. 

Second properties should also be tackled - they are a luxury and should be taxed as one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Grenfell apart from being an awful tragedy has asked a lot of questions about housing in the UK andimmigration. I am wondering now how big the UK's illegal Immigration problem is for example going on this sample size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dropbear said:

We need less government intervention, not more.

We shouldn't be stealing houses from the wealthy or taxing them more than the poor. Instead, take away the incentive to use property as an investment, by raising interest rates - making other investments pay more, and loans more expensive.

 

Good start, the first sentence. Re the second, no incentives should be administered. Just remove all the intervention; as far as rates are concerned, let them reflect the natural demand and supply for loans/savings. I.e. CBs out and back to sound money.

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.

  • Next General Election   92 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    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.