Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
hurlerontheditch

50% of second home owners are over 54

Recommended Posts

They do love it.

Seldom does a family outbid me on a nice family home.

The vast majority of time you drive passed and see the new owners are well passed 60.

Bigger the better!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously anecdotal, but there's a surprising number of 30 year olds owning a second property. In my sons class at Primary school there are 2, and another class has 1 and this is just from the Mum's talking generally so who knows how many more there could be. I live in a nothing special wealth area (not poor, not wealthy, think mix of most professions and house prices for family homes in the range of £150K to £390K and social housing).

Mind you, at least 2 of these parents also get cars on PCPs so perhaps it's all borrowed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The older cohort exploit the younger cohort...perhaps the older cohort will need the younger cohort in time....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

They do love it.

Seldom does a family outbid me on a nice family home.

The vast majority of time you drive passed and see the new owners are well passed 60.

Bigger the better!

In my area in the 1970's throughout to the 1990's people buying houses and moving in were a mix, but mostly families and people in some kind of employment / business. Of course now it's just old people who bought their houses with a houses they already bought before the ponzi debt banker cycle.

 

1 hour ago, Wayward said:

The older cohort exploit the younger cohort...perhaps the older cohort will need the younger cohort in time.... 

Where I live the local news had a section in it asking for someone from the pubic who is fit to be a sort of emergency "first at the scene response person" (no pay of course).

There seems to be a premium charged for dwellings without stairs to traverse (like bungalows) while old age care appears to cost a fortune.

It seems the more needy you are the more you will get charged. Just like how it is for young people and renters who don't own a ridiculously ponzi priced home.

Since many boomers grew up in council housing I think it's a real shame where we are now. There could have been more of a social contract and selfless society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, thewig said:

Buy em all up and just rent em out to the scumbag young I say 

They would say they are buying them for the young.....their own kids and grand kids, their legacy....they are fully aware that without their 'help' their kids would have nothing to provide to their own children.....Hey, why bother having children anyway, do away with that inconvenient little problem......time people learned to help themselves.

.....swap the money for the care?;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Save me from the madness! said:

In my sons class at Primary school there are 2, and another class has 1

Why are these 30 year olds still in primary school ;)

 

Anyway, your point is valid... A lot of young people have put up with crap landlords and now think it's a path to riches 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
18 hours ago, hurlerontheditch said:

cant go wrong with bricks and mortar for a pension...

 

https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/bns/BN237.pdf

ownership.png

 

Also illustrates how large the BOMAD is. Over 50% of those over 56 own a second property.

Post WW2 the electorate fought for housing rights, welfare and a good work life balance, and to a large degree they got it, far more people were included in the wealth that Britain held. Now that a lot of people have lived their lives having had aspiration they have fulfilled they now  want more and now host off the young like parasites while removing everything they had.

I know the 1950's were not perfect, but that's the era I would have loved to have been born into

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that once it was a case of look after what you have got, they are the passport to your future prosperity......now got the whole world to choose from?;)

So much colour and freedom then.....anyone could be anything they wanted to be.

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Slightly different and most are not over 54, some are, but it seems that every new relationship I see with family and friends and they both have mortgaged homes they tend to keep one to live in  and rent the other  out. I have also seen so many cases where a home left in a will is kept and not sold, if their is an  option to have two houses with one in many cases for  investment people will take it.

You can never go wrong with property, Mmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Save me from the madness! said:

there's a surprising number of 30 year olds owning a second property. In my sons class at Primary school there are 2, and another class has 1 

30yrs old and still in Primary school? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, inbruges said:

Slightly different and most are not over 54, some are, but it seems that every new relationship I see with family and friends and they both have mortgaged homes they tend to keep one to live in  and rent the other  out. I have also seen so many cases where a home left in a will is kept and not sold, if their is an  option to have two houses with one in many cases for  investment people will take it.

You can never go wrong with property, Mmmmm

basically once you purchase a property its for life, you never sell. a property is for life not just for Xmas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem really isn't that most second homeowners are over 54 - after all, for most people peak lifetime wealth is just prior to retirement (so age 55-65 generally) and you'd expect that to be the biggest age group for wealth of every single type: cash, shares, property, antiques etc etc

The biggest issue is HOW MANY second homeowners there are, and indeed how many people own not just a second home but a whole bunch to rent out.

We should have a society which encourages everyone to have ONE house, and money for retirement to be channelled into productive investments - rather than a society in which half the population have two houses and half none, with money for retirement channelled into making it ever more difficult for the have-nots to become haves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

The problem really isn't that most second homeowners are over 54 - after all, for most people peak lifetime wealth is just prior to retirement (so age 55-65 generally) and you'd expect that to be the biggest age group for wealth of every single type: cash, shares, property, antiques etc etc

The biggest issue is HOW MANY second homeowners there are, and indeed how many people own not just a second home but a whole bunch to rent out.

We should have a society which encourages everyone to have ONE house, and money for retirement to be channelled into productive investments - rather than a society in which half the population have two houses and half none, with money for retirement channelled into making it ever more difficult for the have-nots to become haves.

Yes....where/when/how did it all go wrong?;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

The problem really isn't that most second homeowners are over 54 - after all, for most people peak lifetime wealth is just prior to retirement (so age 55-65 generally) and you'd expect that to be the biggest age group for wealth of every single type: cash, shares, property, antiques etc etc

The biggest issue is HOW MANY second homeowners there are, and indeed how many people own not just a second home but a whole bunch to rent out.

We should have a society which encourages everyone to have ONE house, and money for retirement to be channelled into productive investments - rather than a society in which half the population have two houses and half none, with money for retirement channelled into making it ever more difficult for the have-nots to become haves.

+1

Share this post


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

The biggest issue is HOW MANY second homeowners there are, and indeed how many people own not just a second home but a whole bunch to rent out.

We should have a society which encourages everyone to have ONE house, and money for retirement to be channelled into productive investments - rather than a society in which half the population have two houses and half none, with money for retirement channelled into making it ever more difficult for the have-nots to become haves.

Reckon you can bet that each subsequent generation will be poorer than the last - rinse repeat for next 100 years or WW3 (whichever comes first)

Share this post


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

Reckon you can bet that each subsequent generation will be poorer than the last - rinse repeat for next 100 years or WW3 (whichever comes first)

WW3 is my bet

Share this post


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

The problem really isn't that most second homeowners are over 54 - after all, for most people peak lifetime wealth is just prior to retirement (so age 55-65 generally) and you'd expect that to be the biggest age group for wealth of every single type: cash, shares, property, antiques etc etc

The biggest issue is HOW MANY second homeowners there are, and indeed how many people own not just a second home but a whole bunch to rent out.

We should have a society which encourages everyone to have ONE house, and money for retirement to be channelled into productive investments - rather than a society in which half the population have two houses and half none, with money for retirement channelled into making it ever more difficult for the have-nots to become haves.

exactly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over 54?

Thats useful.

https://debtcamel.co.uk/pension-safe-bankrupt/

'This is saying if you could have taken money out of your pension and that would have been enough to repay the debts that were included in your bankruptcy, then you were not actually “insolvent” and so should not have gone bankrupt. When you submit your bankruptcy application online, the Adjudicator looks at whether you are insolvent and will reject your application if you aren’t.'

 

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.

  • 152 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.