Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Saving For a Space Ship

High rents 'make young people less mobile - inc interactive map

Recommended Posts

This version has a good graph:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/06/high-rents-in-english-cities-forcing-young-to-stay-in-small-towns

 

Quote

 

High rents in English cities forcing young to stay in small towns

One of the defining patterns of English life in which young people move from small towns with limited prospects to bigger cities to seek their fortune is in dramatic decline, research has revealed.

More young people are getting stuck where they grew up or went to university because they cannot afford rents in places where they can earn more money, according to the Resolution Foundation thinktank. It found the number of people aged 25 to 34 starting a new job and moving home in the last year has fallen 40% over the last two decades.

Whereas previous generations were able to move to big cities such as London and Manchester or regional hubs like Leeds and Bristol to develop their careers, the current millennial generation is enduring a slump in mobility caused by rising rents, which can wipe out all of the financial gains of a move.

Even moves over short distances are barely worth making, the data shows. A person on average earnings in Scarborough paying average rent would have been 29% better off if they had moved to Leeds in 1997 and paid average rent and earned average money. In 2018, rising rents and stagnant wages means the benefit after taking into account rent was just 4%.

Moving from Sunderland to York in 1997 would have been worth a 6% rise in earnings after rent, but would now result in a 24% fall. Private rents have risen fastest in higher-paying areas of the country – rising by almost 90% in the highest paying areas, compared to just over 70% in the lowest paying.

Because moving jobs is the best way of increasing pay and being geographically mobile is the best way of finding those jobs, the thinktank said the trend could “stunt young people’s pay and career prospects”.

“Young people today are often stereotyped as being footloose when it comes to work,” said Lindsay Judge, senior policy analyst at Resolution. “But in fact they are moving around for new job opportunities far less frequently than they used to. A key reason why people move around for work is the lure of a bigger salary. But increasingly those pay gains are being swallowed up by high housing costs.”

Hannah Wilde, 30, from Sunderland, said she scrapped a plan to move to London to pursue a career in publishing when she looked at rents in the capital.

“Some rooms in London were the same price as my full monthly wage from my first job in digital marketing in Sunderland,” she said. “Initially I was frustrated because I felt like I was missing out on some fantastic opportunities in the bigger cities due to rising rent. However, I have had some brilliant opportunities with companies in the north-east and have just recently secured a social media manager role for a rapidly growing skincare company in Durham.”

Milo, 25, a video producer from Totnes in Devon, said he decided to move to London anyway, but recognises the financial risks.

“The big cities don’t give you that safety net,” he said. “If you’re short on rent it’s by quite a lot. A hard living forces you to be vigilant and consistently reassess your place there so you’d better be making the most of it.”

The phenomenon is not just affecting the young. Someone working in a school in Cornwall, for example, would be considerably poorer moving to a similar job in Bristol.

A move from east Devon to Bristol in 1997 would have delivered a 19% uplift in earnings after rent but rising property costs there meant that by 2018 that boost was worth just a 1% increase.

Someone moving from Corby in Northamptonshire to Barnet in north London would stand to lose 22% of their income after rent now, whereas they would have enjoyed a 6% rise in 1997.

The findings came as the Affordable Housing Commission released research that found 43% of all renters were now facing affordability problems and that 5.5 million renters were currently unable to buy a home of their own.

The commission, established by the Smith Institute thinktank and chaired by the crossbench peer Richard Best, said that when rents or purchase costs exceed a third of household income for those in work, it can lead to financial difficulties and these problems become critical where housing costs are 40% or more of household income.

 

 

Highlighting that last part because of this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jan/23/uk-rents-fall-for-first-time-in-a-decade

Quote

Rents across Britain fell in 2018 for the first time in a decade, offering relief for tenants after years of inflation-busting rises.

Figures from the Deposit Protection Scheme – a government-backed group that supervises tenancy deposits – showed the average rent fell by £9 (1.17%) from £774 in 2017 to £765.

The typical UK tenant spent 31% of their income on rent in 2018, a fall of 0.5% from the year before, the DPS said.

The biggest percentage fall was in Yorkshire and the Humber, where the average rent dropped by £21 (3.63%) to £546. London recorded the biggest fall in cash terms, with the typical property rented at £1,294 a month, down £30 from a year ago.

Despite the drop, Londoners spend the biggest proportion of their pay on rent, with the typical tenant losing 41% of their monthly wage.

Julian Foster of Computershare Investor Services, which produced the annual report for DPS, said: “This first drop in average annual rents for almost 10 years is good news for UK renters, especially if wages continue to climb in 2019.”

Wages are currently rising at their fastest pace since 2008, up 3.3% on the year to November, according to ONS figures, while inflation has dropped to 2.1%.

The fall in rents confounds forecasts from landlord groups, which said they would have to rise in 2018 to reflect new higher taxes on mortgaged buy-to-let properties.

Dan Wilson Craw, the director of the campaign group Generation Rent, said: “Falling rents are great news and, despite constant warnings of increases from the property industry, these figures demonstrate that landlords can’t simply demand more whenever they want to.

“This should give tenants confidence in negotiating with their landlord – it’s always worth checking rents in the local market if you’re being asked to pay more. For many of us, however, rents are still oppressively high and only a sustained fall will bring about a noticeable improvement in living standards.”

The sting in the tail for tenants is that while the DPS recorded rent falls nationally over the first nine months of 2018, it began to see a small uptick in the final three months of the year.

Landlords said demand from EU nationals had slowed, but insisted rents would have to rise in 2019 to claw back money lost through buy-to-let tax changes and the letting fees ban, which comes into force in June.

John Stewart of the Residential Landlords Association said: “Rics has warned that with demand outstripping the supply of rental properties, rents could increase in 2019 by an average of 2%. Certainly we are seeing shrinking investment in the sector because of the extra taxes being levied on landlords.

“To counterbalance this, uncertainties around the impact of Brexit, including on house prices, may be encouraging longer tenancies, which results in fewer rent increases.

“There is also slowing demand for rental properties from EU nationals, the benefits freeze, and more people are leaving London, which makes up a considerable proportion of the private rental market in the UK. These are all likely to be having a downward effect on rents.”

The average Londoner is paying 41% rent?!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

This version has a good graph:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/06/high-rents-in-english-cities-forcing-young-to-stay-in-small-towns

 

 

Highlighting that last part because of this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jan/23/uk-rents-fall-for-first-time-in-a-decade

The average Londoner is paying 41% rent?!

 

 

 

Yeah but they can get a bagel at 3am and walk into a FREE museum bruv

Share this post


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

This version has a good graph:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/06/high-rents-in-english-cities-forcing-young-to-stay-in-small-towns

 

 

Highlighting that last part because of this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jan/23/uk-rents-fall-for-first-time-in-a-decade

The average Londoner is paying 41% rent?!

 

 

 

38% of net pay for me, 4 day week.  Was 34% when 5 days.  That's for a good sized purpose built 2 bed with proper lounge & separate kitchen in a leafy suburb with big green spaces nearby & 40 min flat to desk commute.
I am going to try to reduce to about 35%.  Rents are softening.
I could reduce to c. 29% by moving to a badly converted 1 bed further from tube stations and open spaces.  Why would I?
I enjoy my job.  This is key.  As soon as I don't I'll get a new job or retire.

Edited by hotblack42
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average young Londoner is still living with parents or family homes.....if it were not for that they would not be living there.....firms benefit greatly from family subsidy or HMO accommodation living for many years after graduation working but living sharing like students......fewer young people are building homes, they do not hold the capital to do so and they are savvy enough not to pay the sky high London rents to do so.;)

Share this post


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

 

The average Londoner is paying 41% rent?!

 

....but the bus fare to work is £1.50 fixed to the end of the line....that has got to be worth something..... front, top deck, can look over all the fences and walls and watch the world go by......it changes every day.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, longgone said:

when i read these stories i understand i really am part of the lost generation. 

Its about boomers or millennials, everyone forgets about the X

X haven't done too badly for themselves, they had decent bites at the reasonable house price cherry in the mid-80s and mid-90s and enjoyed ZIRP mortgages after 2008. Tail end Xers or anybody who lived an unconventional lifestyle in their 20s and 30s are as if not more screwed than GenY though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

X haven't done too badly for themselves, they had decent bites at the reasonable house price cherry in the mid-80s and mid-90s and enjoyed ZIRP mortgages after 2008. Tail end Xers or anybody who lived an unconventional lifestyle in their 20s and 30s are as if not more screwed than GenY though.

i am a tail end X`er 1978  The price boom was well underway age 22 at year 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

 Tail end Xers or anybody who lived an unconventional lifestyle in their 20s and 30s are as if not more screwed than GenY though.

This.

At least if you are a millennial you know it's not your "fault".  I am an X-er coming up 50 and because I didn't choose to buy in my 20s and 30s it's hard to see the gap between myself and those who made different choices be so life-defining.  I wouldn't go back and change my 20s and 30s because I had an absolute blast, but wow, the consequences are now so much harsher than I could have ever imagined.

Share this post


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

i am a tail end X`er 1978  The price boom was well underway age 22 at year 2000.

Indeed. I was still at school in 2000 while Blair, Brown and George/King were signing over my future and my siblings' futures to bankers and landlords via 20-30%pa HPI.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


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

This.

At least if you are a millennial you know it's not your "fault".  I am an X-er coming up 50 and because I didn't choose to buy in my 20s and 30s it's hard to see the gap between myself and those who made different choices be so life-defining.  I wouldn't go back and change my 20s and 30s because I had an absolute blast, but wow, the consequences are now so much harsher than I could have ever imagined.

Honestly, knowing it's not your fault is not much consolation.

Share this post


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

Indeed. I was still at school in 2000 while Blair, Brown and George/King were signing over my future and my siblings' futures to bankers and landlords via 20-30%pa HPI.

well at least you can`t blame yourself. i partly lay blame in the same place as you but blame myself more for my stupidity i purchased a flat off plan in 2003 and that was the biggest mistake of my life although i did manage to sell it for 20k more than i paid for it, add up the EA fees service charges, C Tax and other bills and the loss of interest on the 65k deposit i put down i worked out i would have been 10k better off by not buying it in the first place.  

So first mistake was not buying a old house instead of a shiny new flat and the second mistake was not buying again before HTB. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10m+ of migrants in last 15-20 years, mainly subsidised on tax credits and housing benefit and free at point of use public services.

Remove access to benefits and charge for access to schooling and healthcare and - poof! - 15M leave the UK, lowering rents.

The last 10 years have been an unholy ffing trinity  of ZIRP to support IO BTL to support EErs/migrants,dependent on  TCs/HB.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

X haven't done too badly for themselves, they had decent bites at the reasonable house price cherry in the mid-80s and mid-90s and enjoyed ZIRP mortgages after 2008. Tail end Xers or anybody who lived an unconventional lifestyle in their 20s and 30s are as if not more screwed than GenY though.

I would say X are quite mixed, some might have lost a fortune the 80s boom, others too young to buy at the good time.  Others who were in the sweet spot did very well.

 

The solution of course if to give council housing to people who work full time and not others - perhaps those who don't work full time (or at all) could move to somewhere cheaper and stop paying people to come here from other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

Measuring your success/happiness against various other generations is surely a way to entrench a lifetime feeling of dissatisfaction. 

In other words, pipe down rentslaves.

The only reason you have the vote, the right to own property, free speech etc is because of dissatisfied people in the past who didn't pipe down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spyguy said:

10m+ of migrants in last 15-20 years, mainly subsidised on tax credits and housing benefit and free at point of use public services.

Remove access to benefits and charge for access to schooling and healthcare and - poof! - 15M leave the UK, lowering rents.

The last 10 years have been an unholy ffing trinity  of ZIRP to support IO BTL to support EErs/migrants,dependent on  TCs/HB.

 

Agree. Letting in people to the amount of a city the size of Plymouth every year for 15 years is going to destroy the country.

Share this post


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

X haven't done too badly for themselves, they had decent bites at the reasonable house price cherry in the mid-80s and mid-90s and enjoyed ZIRP mortgages after 2008. Tail end Xers or anybody who lived an unconventional lifestyle in their 20s and 30s are as if not more screwed than GenY though.

Am also an X-er. I knew that time overseas would be a massive boost to my choice of career (which has proven to be the case). I left the UK in '99 for a few years...

I came out of uni with very little debt though, so I don't see my circumstances as bad as Millennials face.

Technically I also could buy a place. I choose not too because they represent such poor value. Like feeling peckish on a long train journey, having a £10 note to hand, and discovering the buffet car offering a bacon roll for £6 and a coffee for £3.50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

In other words, pipe down rentslaves.

The only reason you have the vote, the right to own property, free speech etc is because of dissatisfied people in the past who didn't pipe down.

Ah a classic overreaction to a mild observation. :D

Tell me. Do you think you'd be happy if you were a boomer? Is being a boomer the very definition of pleasure and joy? Does owning a house = happily ever after, all online gripe accounts deleted, sunshine sandwiches for breakfast, lunch and dinner?

 

Or perhaps you'd prefer my situation, having exchanged a loving family for inheritance? The wonderful benefit of dead parents. I'm so very lucky, yes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

Ah a classic overreaction to a mild observation. :D

Tell me. Do you think you'd be happy if you were a boomer? Is being a boomer the very definition of pleasure and joy? Does owning a house = happily ever after, all online gripe accounts deleted, sunshine sandwiches for breakfast, lunch and dinner?

 

Or perhaps you'd prefer my situation, having exchanged a loving family for inheritance? The wonderful benefit of dead parents. I'm so very lucky, yes. 

 

I think you are both right to an extent complaining about things does solve problems but being content with one's lot is a useful thing.

It is tricky to do both to the right level - I am not so wise to say which is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, longgone said:

i am a tail end X`er 1978  The price boom was well underway age 22 at year 2000.

Agreed if you went to university to "earn more money" you may have been better getting a low paid manual job and buying a house right away as here in Norfolk 500k houses where 100-150k at the end of the 90's.  

The family houses that I am looking at now which are 4x+ an average dentists salary where 4-5 x my graduate starting salary in the late 90s.  I think a decent flat in Canary wharf/London was 200-300 back then which like a twit I did not want my parents to help me get into debt for.

If only I knew that I had to buy my lifetime house at 22 years old.

I went to university in London but even then I worked out that working there was just not worth the expense and got nearly the same money in the Midlands.

The generation behind me are completely priced out... I have a house but its 200k + to move up to the next rung which when you actually have kids is a big pita and also to loose if you are brainwashed into thinking its going to plummet the day after you capitulate. 

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, longgone said:

when i read these stories i understand i really am part of the lost generation. 

Its about boomers or millennials, everyone forgets about the X

I think actually the X's probably don't get mentioned because on average what they've got is about "par" - the boomers have ended up with too much and the millennial too little, whilst the Xers on average probably have about a fair slice of the pie.

I say "on average" because obviously within that group (which includes myself) clearly some people will have done better than others, with key areas being (1) when (if at all) did you buy a house and (2) did you manage to sneak into a final salary pension scheme for any part of your career.  (FWIW I have a house but only DC pensions).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

Ah a classic overreaction to a mild observation. :D

Tell me. Do you think you'd be happy if you were a boomer? Is being a boomer the very definition of pleasure and joy? Does owning a house = happily ever after, all online gripe accounts deleted, sunshine sandwiches for breakfast, lunch and dinner?

 

Or perhaps you'd prefer my situation, having exchanged a loving family for inheritance? The wonderful benefit of dead parents. I'm so very lucky, yes. 

 

The problem is that those without an inheritance still get the dead parents anyway. 

There will be people in all generations with poor parents who died and left them nothing. 

The generation(s) who cannot buy a house don't have the advantage of a stable family home which at least my parents could give me. They didn't spend their lives going from one rental to another which is what young families face now. 

it's going from bad to worse for some and not a problem their own parents had to face.

Edited by Flopsy

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.

  • 312 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.