Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

"FTB and key workers to get 30% on new homes"


Recommended Posts

Not entirely sure how they think they can do / afford this? Copied the majority of the article below but here's the original: https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/first-time-buyers-to-get-30-percent-discount-on-first-homes-government-scheme/?fbclid=IwAR1QjBDuEUMJVuNwxJYc8GdUZAXrO-oIsTYAKMU3uo-V6jK4RoWShbcXUyI
 

First-time buyers and key workers and will be able to buy new-build homes with a 30% discount under a new scheme being proposed by the Government.

The First Homes scheme will give people in England the chance to buy a home in their local area for nearly a third less than the market price, saving them an average of nearly £100,000.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Isn't the discount just funded by letting developers off paying s106 and community infrastructure planning levies.

So local councils pay for it. Those funds are normally used to pay for the infrastructure needed to cope with new developments such as roads, schools, GP surgeries, bus routes, refuse collection etc. So presumably the FTBs who get those 30% discounts should pay extra council tax to access those services?!!!

Even the promo ad says its unclear how the scheme will operate - so until they do know how it will work why promote it at all?

For example how do you define 'local' say in a London borough - born locally, lived there for 10 years or two weeks - if you move two miles across the border to another borough do you stop being a local? Can you apply as a local for a development 200 yards away as a local if its in another local authority?

Edited by MARTINX9
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Killer Bunny said:

All it does is raise new build prices by 30%. F'g socialist politicians! ?

Not sure it does this time, nobody likes shared ownership, even the sheeple. They want 100% of the risk/debt (sorry, I mean gains) to themselves.

What's in it for the developer? charge rent presumably on the 30% like all existing shared ownership schemes?

And if 'key worker' also includes the supermarket worker who likes to brush past customers when there's absolutely no need, then it's even more of a joke.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Killer Bunny said:

All it does is raise new build prices by 30%. F'g socialist politicians! ?

It isn't socialism though is it?

It's cronyism dressed up as populism to support a plutocracy.

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

Yeah, Socialism.

Explain how this is funded by the majority of the people for the benefit of the majority of the people in a few sentences or less then.

Something being funded by the government ISN'T automatically socialism.

If you think it is, find the biggest toughest squaddie you can find, then drink his pint. By your definition every army on the planet is socialist, so technically you've paid for some of said squaddie's beer money. ;)

Edited by byron78
Link to post
Share on other sites

Milton Friedman:

“Government has three primary functions.

It should provide for military defence of the nation.

It should enforce contracts between individuals.

It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property.

 

When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.”

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Explain how this is funded by the majority of the people for the benefit of the majority of the people in a few sentences or less then.

That is a slippery eel's definition.

You can't just claim that if something isn't beneficial to a majority of people, then it isn't Socialism.

From Wikipedia:

Quote

Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership[1][2][3] of the means of production[4][5][6][7] and workers' self-management of enterprises.[8][9] It includes the political theories and movements associated with such systems.[10] Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative or of equity.[11] While no single definition encapsulates many types of socialism,[12] social ownership is the one common element.[1][13][14]

Since the Government makes a property claim on all property, including your internal organs (taxation is a property claim, also opt out donation and prohibition of drugs), and the government represents the population, we live in Socialism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Andy T said:

Not sure it does this time, nobody likes shared ownership, even the sheeple. They want 100% of the risk/debt (sorry, I mean gains) to themselves.

What's in it for the developer? charge rent presumably on the 30% like all existing shared ownership schemes?

And if 'key worker' also includes the supermarket worker who likes to brush past customers when there's absolutely no need, then it's even more of a joke.

A lot of folk went down the Shared route. G-d help them.

In their desperation they'll do so again. ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep voting Tories people. This is the pinnacle of what they can achieve. 

It must be the fault of someone else somehow, maybe the EU, because Boris has messy hair and makes harmless jokes about minorities which we can all relate to. He's just a good all round lad, not one of them elite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The scheme looks like Discount Market Sale, that councils were pushing in favour of shared ownership. https://www.samconveyancing.co.uk/news/conveyancing/discount-market-sale-dms-a-path-to-low-cost-home-ownership-8228

The key similarity with this scheme and DMS is the `discount baked in for future purchasers`. This is always put forward as a positive but the reality is that it'll mean the next purchaser will have to meet the same eligibility criteria as the original owner, thereby limiting the uplift and pool of buyers. Almost all aspects of the resale are in the hands of the council/developer and their buyers get first refusal on the property and, if a buyer is found at the council's valuation, then the seller has to accept it. 

It is a really bad scheme but if it's sold as 'shared ownership without the rent' then i can imagine people falling for it, and not feeling any pain until they come to resell. 

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

It will be a shared equity scheme where the developer retains 30% of the property and sells 70%.  

Isn't the intention that local councils - possibly working with housing associations - will manage and administer the scheme. The developers won't want to worry about all that once they have sold the home - and the home is resold in perpetuity to future first time buyers with the 30% covenant still applying. The developers will be long gone.

The developers will also be let off paying CIL levies - so they will get a huge tax break to offset their 30% reduction on market price. They of course still get 100% on the non FTB homes - and get CIL exemptions for those too. For developments in London the CIL saving could be worth millions.

Councils bear the cost via lost tax income - and will have to administer this - the developers walk away sitting pretty!

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/864265/First_Homes_consultation_document.pdf

Edited by MARTINX9
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Keep voting Tories people. This is the pinnacle of what they can achieve. 

It must be the fault of someone else somehow, maybe the EU, because Boris has messy hair and makes harmless jokes about minorities which we can all relate to. He's just a good all round lad, not one of them elite.

Curse those leftist cappuccino-swilling Islingtonians who keep forcing Tory governments to introduce meddling housing schemes instead of letting markets work *shakes fist*

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

Milton Friedman:

 

“Government has three primary functions.

It should provide for military defence of the nation.

It should enforce contracts between individuals.

It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property.

 

When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.”

 

 

 

 

Who do I vote for to get this?

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

Curse those leftist cappuccino-swilling Islingtonians who keep forcing Tory governments to introduce meddling housing schemes instead of letting markets work *shakes fist*

One of the few Tory policies Corbyn promised to keep was help to buy - its good for house prices in Islington and Camden and other liberal luvvie seats.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tulip_mania said:

Not sure this quite deserves its own thread, but good for a laugh.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6154027/help-to-buy-extension

Essentially asking if the potential 'extension' of HTB will mean that the payments after 5 years are deferred for a further 2 years.

To be fair there are a lot of people (often young inexperienced investors and FTBs) there who ask questions we might think are silly - and lots of experts who provide good answers. If you aren't sure - no harm asking.

Thankfully they have closed their Debate house prices and the economy thread - it was full of several posters who absolutely loathe this site!

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.

  • 417 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.