Watkins Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Watkins Posted June 8, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 Title should have discount before 30%......don't know how to edit it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MARTINX9 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 (edited) 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 June 8, 2020 by MARTINX9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richmondtw Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 It will be a shared equity scheme where the developer retains 30% of the property and sells 70%. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GeneCernan Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 And thus 30% was knocked off the value of those who bought their new build just down the road six months ago. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Killer Bunny Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 All it does is raise new build prices by 30%. F'g socialist politicians! ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paul77 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 Isn't that everyone can be labelled as a key worker? I thought in a free market economy non-key workers sooner or later are made redundant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andy T Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
byron78 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Locke Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, byron78 said: It isn't socialism though is it? It's cronyism dressed up as populism to support a plutocracy. Yeah, Socialism. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
byron78 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 (edited) 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 June 8, 2020 by byron78 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Killer Bunny Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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.” Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Locke Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Peter Hun Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 Discount is a minimum of 30%. Round here 2 bed flats in new build start at about 650k. Even 30% off is still ridiculous. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Killer Bunny Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Switch625 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 20 minutes ago, byron78 said: find the biggest toughest squaddie you can find, then drink his pint ??? ..........? Love it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dugsbody Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
sammersmith Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
longgone Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 why are the comments 4 months older than the puff piece article ? zoopla loosing their chit are they. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MARTINX9 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 (edited) 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 June 8, 2020 by MARTINX9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dorkins Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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* Quote Link to post Share on other sites
doomed Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MARTINX9 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tulip_mania Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MARTINX9 Posted June 8, 2020 Report Share Posted June 8, 2020 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.