Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
labrat

If You Were The Government!

Recommended Posts

Right, so, you're the government!

You now hold the deeds to about 800,000 homes, of questionable value and equity - you know that there is a good chance of you ending up underwriting a significant number more!

You're fully aware that you have a complete undersupply of social housing (ie. owned by govt or housing associations)

You know that if people living in houses under your control are repossessed and sold vacant, as a normal mortgage company then you have a legal responsibility to rehouse the vast majority of those made homeless (families/priority need).

So, what you gonna do?

i) Ride the storm, allowing the people to stay in the homes.

ii) Ride the storm, applying for possession but deferring sale till the market improves

iii) Allow (hope for) a large expansion in BTL, with houses going to private landlords, sold at a loss to public coffers at auction, then rented back to people (often under the risk of that rent coming from public monies)

iv) Pass primary legislation allowing the houses to be taken into public ownership as a new boom in social housing, then rent them back to people.

any other options you can come up with? What would be the effect on the private market values of your suggestion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, so, you're the government!

You now hold the deeds to about 800,000 homes, of questionable value and equity - you know that there is a good chance of you ending up underwriting a significant number more!

You're fully aware that you have a complete undersupply of social housing (ie. owned by govt or housing associations)

You know that if people living in houses under your control are repossessed and sold vacant, as a normal mortgage company then you have a legal responsibility to rehouse the vast majority of those made homeless (families/priority need).

So, what you gonna do?

i) Ride the storm, allowing the people to stay in the homes.

ii) Ride the storm, applying for possession but deferring sale till the market improves

iii) Allow (hope for) a large expansion in BTL, with houses going to private landlords, sold at a loss to public coffers at auction, then rented back to people (often under the risk of that rent coming from public monies)

iv) Pass primary legislation allowing the houses to be taken into public ownership as a new boom in social housing, then rent them back to people.

any other options you can come up with? What would be the effect on the private market values of your suggestion?

If I were the Governement, I would say tough luck to those that lose money on housing, and would advocate a "non-intervention" strategy to allow prices to fall back and correct naturally to their long run levels.

This would include running Northern Crock as a commercial entity, and take all appropriate steps to protect the value of that business to the tax payer: even if it means repossessions and margin calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, so, you're the government!

You now hold the deeds to about 800,000 homes, of questionable value and equity - you know that there is a good chance of you ending up underwriting a significant number more!

You're fully aware that you have a complete undersupply of social housing (ie. owned by govt or housing associations)

You know that if people living in houses under your control are repossessed and sold vacant, as a normal mortgage company then you have a legal responsibility to rehouse the vast majority of those made homeless (families/priority need).

So, what you gonna do?

i) Ride the storm, allowing the people to stay in the homes.

ii) Ride the storm, applying for possession but deferring sale till the market improves

iii) Allow (hope for) a large expansion in BTL, with houses going to private landlords, sold at a loss to public coffers at auction, then rented back to people (often under the risk of that rent coming from public monies)

iv) Pass primary legislation allowing the houses to be taken into public ownership as a new boom in social housing, then rent them back to people.

any other options you can come up with? What would be the effect on the private market values of your suggestion?

You execise your Empty Dwelling Managment Orders that have been law since 2005. That should put the willies up the BTL's. If it aint used they can use it on your behalf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I were the Governement, I would say tough luck to those that lose money on housing, and would advocate a "non-intervention" strategy to allow prices to fall back and correct naturally to their long run levels.

This would include running Northern Crock as a commercial entity, and take all appropriate steps to protect the value of that business to the tax payer: even if it means repossessions and margin calls.

And then you would not be the Govt after the next election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And then you would not be the Govt after the next election.

Correct: and that is my major concern about how this whole thing will play out. However, be sure of one thing: anything will that's done by Government to prolong the problem, will just store up greater pain for later on.

Alternatively, they could just wheel out the "yes it hurt, yes it worked" kind of line that worked for the Conservatives in 92.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You execise your Empty Dwelling Managment Orders that have been law since 2005. That should put the willies up the BTL's. If it aint used they can use it on your behalf.

What he said.

If the mortgage holders default then they should be dealt with on a commercial basis otherwise you might as well go and throw money into the streets. You can't have a system where Crock gets leant upon by the government when the new management try to get the taxpayers money back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id do like i was paid to do.,\

and start to build good, solid council homes on estates no bigger than 20 houses at a time.

over ruling any local objections. and building on the 'greenbelt' if i had to.

the 800.000 nrk mortgage holders.?

id like to help them, but the law says i cant. so i cant.

if they cant pay, they cant pay. they will have to sell.

they will have to stay at the new council homes im building./

which ever way you cut it, a government HAS to build social housing.

theres no scam available. its your job,

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 293 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.