Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Horseradish

Pretty fishing village unanimously votes against second homeowners

Recommended Posts

Excellent news and while I agree whole-heartedly in principal, I wonder how the economies of such small communities will fare in the long term if the number of holiday properties decline as landlords sell up.

The link implies that over half of the properties in the village are now holiday lets (which is of course obscene) - that's a lot of potential income to lose if their owners gradually sell up over time; assuming of course that they will and at prices the locals can afford..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

Excellent news and while I agree whole-heartedly in principal, I wonder how the economies of such small communities will fare in the long term if the number of holiday properties decline as landlords sell up.

How much of a meaningful economy does a place have if hardly anyone actually lives there anyway? Some of these places are almost abandoned in winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

How much of a meaningful economy does a place have if hardly anyone actually lives there anyway? Some of these places are almost abandoned in winter.

Indeed.. sadly this is a natural consequence of the way our economy and society is going as we've shifted from a nation of producers to one of consumers. Areas that once-relied on production for domestic consumption and export (fishing, farming, energy extraction, manufacturing etc) have been decimated in the face of financialisation and globalisation causing distributed wealth to shrink away from the peripheries and flow into the south east.

Properties in otherwise desirable areas get swallowed up by "London money" for holiday homes while other, less picturesque areas see house prices and standards of living plummet. Of course neither model is a pleasant prospect for those who live there and rightfully breeds a lot of resentment toward "outsiders".


I know a long-time-ex-Londoner who moved to Cornwall some time ago. He retains his accent but isn't your typical "monied playboy" type. Let's just say it's taken a lot of work for the locals not to hate him, and given the general situation I can see why.

I even feel a little like that in the village in which I grew up (North Oxfordshire) - in the '70s my parents bought a fixer-upper on the meagre wages of a teacher and mechanic . The same couple today could never afford to do similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

Excellent news and while I agree whole-heartedly in principal, I wonder how the economies of such small communities will fare in the long term if the number of holiday properties decline as landlords sell up.

The link implies that over half of the properties in the village are now holiday lets (which is of course obscene) - that's a lot of potential income to lose if their owners gradually sell up over time; assuming of course that they will and at prices the locals can afford..

I would think that homes used by people that actually work and live in an area all the time would be far better for the local community........less coming and going, long periods of time empty....local people work locally, spend locally and have a stake in their local community......;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, is it second home or holiday lets.

The issue with both is that the provision of public services is decided on the number of FT residents.

Furnished holiday lets, to give them their proper name, are way too lightly taxed. In fact most dont pay any tax at all *AND* manage to offset any cost - decorating, etc. *And* have tax avantages in estate planning.

They need to classify/remove small business rate relief from holiday lets. Make holiday lets pay the full business rates - typically 4x council tax.

UKGOV can then split the rates income 50.50 with the LA.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

Indeed.. sadly this is a natural consequence of the way our economy and society is going as we've shifted from a nation of producers to one of consumers. Areas that once-relied on production for domestic consumption and export (fishing, farming, energy extraction, manufacturing etc) have been decimated in the face of financialisation and globalisation causing distributed wealth to shrink away from the peripheries and flow into the south east.

Properties in otherwise desirable areas get swallowed up by "London money" for holiday homes while other, less picturesque areas see house prices and standards of living plummet. Of course neither model is a pleasant prospect for those who live there and rightfully breeds a lot of resentment toward "outsiders".


I know a long-time-ex-Londoner who moved to Cornwall some time ago. He retains his accent but isn't your typical "monied playboy" type. Let's just say it's taken a lot of work for the locals not to hate him, and given the general situation I can see why.

I even feel a little like that in the village in which I grew up (North Oxfordshire) - in the '70s my parents bought a fixer-upper on the meagre wages of a teacher and mechanic . The same couple today could never afford to do similar.

To slightly unfux up the mess of QE/ZIRP on property assets, UKGOV needs to aggressively tax no owner occupied property.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

Excellent news and while I agree whole-heartedly in principal, I wonder how the economies of such small communities will fare in the long term if the number of holiday properties decline as landlords sell up.

The link implies that over half of the properties in the village are now holiday lets (which is of course obscene) - that's a lot of potential income to lose if their owners gradually sell up over time; assuming of course that they will and at prices the locals can afford..

I often wonder about this. I live in an area that is also blighted by second homes (although not to the same extent as this place), and also very popular with tourists in the summer. When I look around the permanent residents, I don't see many of us benefiting from this tourism - quite the opposite in fact. Lots of traffic and disruption in the summer months, and of course far busier beaches, but where is the tourist money going? The local pubs do OK, and a couple of shops, but they are not big employers locally and don't pay well, and of course some people are making good money from holiday lets. The flip side is that house prices are much higher than they would otherwise be and the area becomes somewhat unworkable as a place to put "regular" employment due to the traffic and artificially increased land prices. So my argument would be that increased tourism drives out "normal" employers due to priced out locals, higher priced land and congestion, thus leaving tourism as the main driver of the economy - which ultimately brings very little benefit to existing residents. Since tourism is now the mainstay of the local economy, the council try to preserve it and increase it until you are basically left with a holiday park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, winkie said:

I would think that homes used by people that actually work and live in an area all the time would be far better for the local community........less coming and going, long periods of time empty....local people work locally, spend locally and have a stake in their local community......;)

I'd very much like to think so however I think a growing number of communities in Britain have come to rely on the tourist pound.

7 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Well, is it second home or holiday lets.

The issue with both is that the provision of public services is decided on the number of FT residents.

Furnished holiday lets, to give them their proper name, are way too lightly taxed. In fact most dont pay any tax at all *AND* manage to offset any cost - decorating, etc. *And* have tax avantages in estate planning.

They need to classify/remove small business rate relief from holiday lets. Make holiday lets pay the full business rates - typically 4x council tax.

UKGOV can then split the rates income 50.50 with the LA.

 

 

3 minutes ago, spyguy said:

To slightly unfux up the mess of QE/ZIRP on property assets, UKGOV needs to aggressively tax no owner occupied property.

 

Good point about public services  and I totally agree on both fronts.. although will our government act to protect the interests of the impoverished masses or the priviledged few...? No prizes for guessing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

I'd very much like to think so however I think a growing number of communities in Britain have come to rely on the tourist pound.

 

Good point about public services  and I totally agree on both fronts.. although will our government act to protect the interests of the impoverished masses or the priviledged few...? No prizes for guessing...

If it is a nice place, tourists would still come....instead of shacking up in local empty homes that have been taken off the market for local people to use, they would benefit the community far more by the tourists using local hotels, B&B or other full time businesses like holiday parks, camp sites etc.....if the area was that popular more business would open to accommodate them and their needs...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ftb_fml said:

The link implies that over half of the properties in the village are now holiday lets (which is of course obscene) - that's a lot of potential income to lose if their owners gradually sell up over time; assuming of course that they will and at prices the locals can afford..

What income? The holiday lets are owned by people who live in London (probably). The money spent by people on holiday is spent in the big supermarkets and the rest of the time they are probably on the beach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mattyboy1973 said:

I often wonder about this. I live in an area that is also blighted by second homes (although not to the same extent as this place), and also very popular with tourists in the summer. When I look around the permanent residents, I don't see many of us benefiting from this tourism - quite the opposite in fact. Lots of traffic and disruption in the summer months, and of course far busier beaches, but where is the tourist money going? The local pubs do OK, and a couple of shops, but they are not big employers locally and don't pay well, and of course some people are making good money from holiday lets. The flip side is that house prices are much higher than they would otherwise be and the area becomes somewhat unworkable as a place to put "regular" employment due to the traffic and artificially increased land prices. So my argument would be that increased tourism drives out "normal" employers due to priced out locals, higher priced land and congestion, thus leaving tourism as the main driver of the economy - which ultimately brings very little benefit to existing residents. Since tourism is now the mainstay of the local economy, the council try to preserve it and increase it until you are basically left with a holiday park.

Some good points; another being that I'd imagine a lot of the money from the holiday lets goes out of the area - especially those bought more recently at elevated prices that the locals inevitably can't afford for a primary home - let alone a second.

Tbh I'd very much like your model to be the case as I sympathise hugely with those in affected areas and see the conversion of people's once-cohesive and self-sustaining communities into decimated tourist attractions as a disgrace (as I'm sure any rational individual would). That said as you suggest what councils and governments pursue and what's rationally best for the majority are often sadly two different things.. and in an economy that's now 80% service industry driven (with one end arguably feeding the other as the bankers' cash at the top flows into the pubs, resteraunts and other "attractions" at the bottom) I can appreciate the council's rational to an extent.

Makes you wonder what the natural endgame is..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I am quite happy to see what I bet are rich, white middle/Upper class people being made to feel unwelcome in their communities which they are destroying.  I would also have no problem with treating mass immigration and immigrants  in the same way, but then of course the title is changed from class warrior to racist 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, winkie said:

If it is a nice place, tourists would still come....instead of shacking up in local empty homes that have been taken off the market for local people to use, they would benefit the community far more by the tourists using local hotels, B&B or other full time businesses like holiday parks, camp sites etc.....if the area was that popular more business would open to accommodate them and their needs...;)

Maybe - would be nice to think that would be the case. Will be interesting to see how the village in the OP's link is faring in 10yrs time!

7 minutes ago, Errol said:

What income? The holiday lets are owned by people who live in London (probably). The money spent by people on holiday is spent in the big supermarkets and the rest of the time they are probably on the beach.

Yup. Some proportion of the money spent by tourists has to go into the pockets of locals (pubs restaurants, "experiences") , but of course how much is debateable since as you suggest with the supermarket model the bulk of profits go out of the area with workers only being paid for low-grade service jobs while the lion's share goes to the business owners, who may not be local. Would be interesting to know how much tourist expenditure stays in a typical tourist hotspot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is preferable?.......owning one house worth £500k or two homes totaling £500k (pick a total value of choice).......one home here or two homes here, one home here and one home elsewhere?;)

Share this post


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

I am quite happy to see what I bet are rich, white middle/Upper class people being made to feel unwelcome in their communities which they are destroying.  I would also have no problem with treating mass immigration and immigrants  in the same way, but then of course the title is changed from class warrior to racist 

No.

Id welcome them.

Just dont forget to tax the fux out of hem, whic hthe current UK tax system is missing at the mo.

HMRC are currently trying to get holiday lets classed as an ivnestment rather than a trading business. This would result in the income being taxed and stop costs and whatnot being offset agains the income.

The last budgets have seen some moves to make holiday lets less low taxed.

There needs to be some more.

A simple reclassification as an investment by UKGOV wold hammer then.

As far as holiday lets bring money in - they really dont.

Share this post


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

Maybe - would be nice to think that would be the case. Will be interesting to see how the village in the OP's link is faring in 10yrs time!

Yup. Some proportion of the money spent by tourists has to go into the pockets of locals (pubs restaurants, "experiences") , but of course how much is debateable since as you suggest with the supermarket model the bulk of profits go out of the area with workers only being paid for low-grade service jobs while the lion's share goes to the business owners, who may not be local. Would be interesting to know how much tourist expenditure stays in a typical tourist hotspot.

There correlation between UK tourist areas and poverty are pretty clear.

Of course, correlation != causation ... however ...

Speaking as someone from a touristy place, what tends to happen is that the small scale BnB and whatnot dominate the council, so all the council time and money gets spent on supporting tourism businesses i.e. he councillors.
 

UK mass tourism died somewhere around ~1975.

There are only 2 profitable UK tourist business - London city breaks and Centre parcs.

Everything needs propping up with tax money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Tes Tickle said:

Two households could have lived in the two £250k houses, but only one could have lived in the £500k house anyway.

Two for the price of one.......£500k is a lot for most to pay for one house, you could get two households living in one £500k household, depends how many bedrooms there are.😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add thatthis vote on banning 2nd home owners buying these particular houses i daft.

You can get round it by gettign a local to buy it, hen buying it off the local.

Again, this stuff needs topping by taxation nit parish council votes.

Id welcome anyone who's prepared to pay 8k/year business rates for their bijou cottage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

One of my very unlikeable and manipulative rich customers has just bought herself a second home in Burnham market, I remember that place when real people were living there as was the rest of the lovely north Norfolk coast 

I really hope a lot of them get stung, maybe spy idea is better 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, spyguy said:

I should add thatthis vote on banning 2nd home owners buying these particular houses i daft.

You can get round it by gettign a local to buy it, hen buying it off the local.

Again, this stuff needs topping by taxation nit parish council votes.

Id welcome anyone who's prepared to pay 8k/year business rates for their bijou cottage.

It just needs normal i.e. higher interest rates. Then these ****s wouldn't be able to leverage a mortgage using their London money. Try idling a second abode at 10% per annum. 

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.

  • 301 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.