A slippery slope to being forced to downsize?

In addition to your own opinions on this, petitpois (with which I agree), I don't even agree with the basic claim made in the title of the article. Call me stupid, but if taken literally, I don't see how downsizing frees up any homes at all. Not unless the 25m people/households who free up a bigger home somehow evaporate into thin air, without moving into another property.

I can see why this might be good for business - estate agents must be rubbing their hands together with glee at the thought of all the extra money they could potentially earn if 25m extra houses suddenly went on the market, and again as they sell other properties to those 25m households, but as to solving the housing crisis, I very much doubt it would make a jot of difference.

Well it doesn't exactly make sense, does it?

If 25 million homes are vacated by older people, they have to move somewhere.
So unless 25 million dwellings are built for them to move into, no homes are going to be 'freed up'.

It's only the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, Petitpois. I don't think they'll be issuing us with compulsory purchase orders just yet.

Sorry Mamacaz I didn't see your post before I sent mine.
#greatminds

I did see a report the other day about this, and I thought 'here we go again'.

We are such a problem, we oldies, carrying on living in our houses that we bought on a high interest mortgage, probably paid for, now needed for younger families who may not be able to afford them anyway.

Anything guaranteed to make me dig my heels in and stay where I am is this sort of report; one was written by a woman who lives with her husband in a five bedroomed house (just the two of them). However, she is not 'elderly' so that's apparently OK then.

www.telegraph.co.uk/active/11885825/Elderly-people-should-be-given-emotional-support-to-encourage-them-to-downsize.html

If we need 'emotional support' to help us to downsize, why not leave us where we are?

Of course, if they send 'practical support' ie come and decorate my house all through, put in new carpets, a new kitchen, do the garden etc to make it marketable and pay stamp duty, estate agents fees, solititor's fees - oh yes and find me somewhere in an equally nice location but smaller then I may think about it.

Oh, but what is the family from overseas wants to come and stay? Will they put them up in a hotel at their expense?

Why should be be forced into doing something we may not want to just because they have failed to provide enough houses suitable for younger people?

we be! not we we!

Lynda Blackwell, who lives in a £1.28million house with five bedrooms, was accused of making ‘lazy and wrong’ assumptions and blaming retired people for the problem. The financial regulator she works for was forced to insist it does not have a policy of wanting older homeowners to move out of their large properties. But it would not comment on whether the 55-year-old, who shares her spacious south London home with her partner, would apply the same rule to herself. Miss Blackwell, the Financial Conduct Authority’s head of mortgages, told a debate on Thursday that older people who ‘sit quite happily in a very big house’ should be encouraged to downsize to free up the market. She said Britain had a ‘real issue with the last-time buyer’, adding: ‘Does there need to be thought given to trying to encourage older persons to actually move away – build proper housing for retired people in the right places?

Does she mean 1 bedroomed reitrement apartments without gardens?

some typos in my posts above, not checked before posting

I agree with you all petitpois, MamaCaz and janeainsworth. This is yet another deflection from what is actually needed.

“Almost a third of over 55s have considered downsizing in the last five years; yet we know that only 7% actually did,”

I wonder why only 7% actually moved; could it be because there is nowhere to move to - just the same as there are no properties for the young, middle-aged or any other group.

Quite ridiculous but sadly some "body" may take it seriously.

No doubt some bright spark will start thinking about making everyone who has more bedrooms than they need, pay for their own care.....a sort of bedroom tax but applied to the owner occupier.

I am going to rant because these stupid people saying we should all down size, all seem to think that all old people watch television all day and a nice little one or two bedroome flat is all we need.

To begin with old usually means 60 and with more and more people living into their 90s and more that covers two generations and 40 years and housing needs and requirements differ between the newly retired and very old.

Supposing we lumped everybody between the ages of 20 - 60 together in one group and talked about the housing needs of this group, which would cover families, single people and childless couples at both ends of the age spectrum, people, like those pontificating on the needs of older people would say this is ridiculous and immediately start breaking the group down, well the same applies to older people who can be a generation apart, have very different life styles, states of health and other demands on them. One idea does not fit all.

It is the same when they say that 50% of older people want to move. and infer that 50% want to downsize. 50% of older people may want to move, but not all want to downsize. Some want to retire to the coast, or the country, or into town, or to be near the grandchildren, but do not necessarily want a dinky little retirement flat, they want houses the same size, bigger, with more land etc etc. Do none of these people watch 'Escape to the country' and other life style housing programmes? An enormous proprtion of the people wanting smallholdings for horses and pigs and chicken or requiring large gardens to grow veg are the newly retired or about to retire

The other thing is that older people use their houses much more than younger people, we are in them more. Most retired people I know, like me, live very busy lives, but we still spend much more time in our houses than before and often have actiities and hobbies that require space or extra rooms.

Now younger people, 20 - 60s are, generally, out at work all day and out meeting with friends etc in the evenin s and weekends. The amount of time they spend at home and not sleeping is very small compared with retired people. So surely before putting all us older people from are well occupied, well used homes into tiny little flats, all those singletons and child free couples (not those planning families) who are living in three plus bedroomed properties, which they are hardly ever in should move out and downsize to properties commensurate with the time they actually spend at home. There are several millions of them. Once they have done that, then we can talk about the elderly downsizing.

Oh that feels better!

This is yet another ageist attack by the media. Firstly us OAPs are over-funded because many of us have final salary pensions in addition to state pensions, we are clogging up the NHS because we are an 'ageing population', we're responsible for global warming and now it's our fault that young people are unable to get on the housing ladder.

Wonder when we'll be asked to wear arm bands with '60+' on them and herded into ghettoes residential homes - room sharing of course.

The other thing is that older people use their houses much more than younger people, we are in them more. Most retired people I know, like me, live very busy lives, but we still spend much more time in our houses than before and often have actiities and hobbies that require space or extra rooms
That's a very good point, MOnica

Someone I know downsized after they retired; she then bemoaned the fact that they 'couldn't get away from each other'!!
We all need our own space sometimes.

Older people often do voluntary work, which may need a study for all the extra paperwork; if we are at home a conservatory is lovely to spend an afternoon doing craft work, eat a meal etc.
Then the DGC come, we need to keep toys for them somewhere - and spare beds.
Often the DC use us as a storage facility too.

The list is endless.

Or we could all go over to visit granjura in Switzerland ....

We are selling our family sized 4 bed, 2 bathroom, plain new decor house.

The majority of younger viewers have rejected it because it is not to their particular style, taste, including the one who said the bedrooms faced the wrong way!?

Who really wants to go through this in order to downsize?

x

Yes. MOnica makes a very good point. As you probably know we are downsizing from a three bedroom bungalow to a one bedroom conversion at the end of the garden but it won't be the dinky little abode it might have been if we hadn't given lots of thought to how we want to live in the future. The kitchen/dining/living area is based on what we already have because that's what we use all the time. I couldn't bear to have a home that's not a productive unit. I hope it's a very long time before we spend our days slumped in front of the telly.

We have a very large garden and I want to spend as much of my active life as possible in it not doing housework. DH spends most of his time in his workshop which is just across the yard so we won't be under eachother's feet (I hope)

The issue of accommodation for visitors will hopefully be taken care of by keeping the large mobile home (also in the garden) which DD and the DGSs have been living in for the last year. Decorating it and making it a bit quirky will give me a project once the annexe is finished.

So..... we're freeing up a three bedroomed home for a family. [smug] emoticon.

Ah, but your OWN family Merlotgran, I don't think we can allow that!
However you could fit a few pensioners into the newly decorated mobile home in the garden so I will give the authorities a ring on your behalf and offer this freed up accomodation.

The idea of down sizing doesn't really work because if all the older people move into one or two bedroom homes what is going to be left for first time buyers? DD is just about managing in her one and a half bedroom flat but there is no way she could actually afford a three or four bedroom house.

roses They'll be very welcome so long as they provide the and do their fare share of the weeding.

I've always fancied a bit of a commune here but it would have to be mixed age groups. As my mother used to say, 'Old people give me the pip' and she was in her nineties

That'll be us then, Merlot, we are both handy around the garden, and have a few nice bottles of the red stuff put by.The tax man will never find us living ( like fairies) at the bottom of the garden!

Do they mean people who own their own homes? If so, how could they be "forced" to move? Unless some sort of "under-occupation" rate on council tax was introduced. I don't think that would be fair - I didn't think it was fair for those in social housing to be charged for under-occupancy either. I think it is quite reasonable to have one spare bedroom.

However, some older people in large, heavy maintenance houses, might like to move to something smaller if there were attractive places available, with a garden if it was still wanted. Sometimes the cost of moving - which can be considerable and which could significantly deplete the surplus money left from the sale - would prevent people from moving so perhaps some contribution towards the cost might give the necessary incentive. If enough larger houses were made available through such a scheme, presumably that would bring the price of larger houses down and the knock-on effect would continue down the line - welcome for those hoping to buy their first home but presumably not for others. But would it be very fair for people who already have a fairly expensive asset to be able to get financial assistance to move? There are all sorts of things to consider - it's not straight forward.

I'm inclined to think there should be some sort of land tax to stop companies and individuals hanging on to land as an investment, because it is the shortage of land which fuels its ever-increasing cost and which pushes up the price of building new developments.

I also agree that some restrictions should be placed on foreign investors who just leave properties empty - there are areas of London that have been described as being like "ghost towns". If these properties were made available for rent or, if not, owners had to pay a substantial surcharge for leaving them empty, it should reduce rents across the board.

Do you think that just maybe at the bottom of the article is the need for more people to BE moving because the surveyors are finding work thin on the ground and want more surveys to do?
Why do all these institutions feel the need to tell people the size of home they need to live in? In my experience and looking at the current family we all need a fair sized home - us because we spend more time in and around it - especially in the winter months - and those with children ranging from babies to young adults because babies need equipment such as prams and high chairs which need storing somewhere and those with older children/ young adults need space to get away from each other at times. The only one I can see who can manage in a slightly smaller home is DD who at the moment is living alone - but even so has four rooms to herself plus kitchen and bathroom etc - she still complains about lack of room but in her case nowhere in the small garden for a shed for her bike!
Homes have been built consistently smaller over the years and that in itself causes problems and the need for families to upsize more than downsize. I do think however that people who own houses left vacant and needing maintenance or refurbishing should be made to do it and get the building back in the housing pool whether rented out or sold - or a compulsory purchase order served and then bought by the local council for something like 75% of the market value. That should get a few more back in the system.

I can't see the Queen agreeing to downsize from Buck House to a semi in SW1.

As I said on another thread my parents moved to a large and very roomy two bedroomed bungalow when they retired. They soon found that it just wasn't big enough, my father needed an office, my mother a workroom and bedrooms for the family. In their mid 80s, as grandchildren grew to big to share a bedroom with their parents they decided that enough was enough and they would sell the bungalow and buy a larger property. Sadly, my mother died suddenly, and my father decided not to move.

My mum and dad moved into sheltered accommodation, sadly he died shortly afterwards but mum made many friends and lived there for a further 20 years. The problems started to show up when she and her friends got into their 80's and 90's and were joined by the over 55's whose interests were entirely different.

Everybody I know is trying to downsize their possessions rather than their house!