Should older people move house to make way for the young?

watermeadow. "There are lots of retirement flats with huge service charges.
There are also lots of old council houses with three bedrooms, occupied mainly by single old people. They couldn’t down-size if they wanted to as there is nowhere at all which is smaller and cheaper.
The answer is, of course, to build lots and lots of affordable homes and housing association homes. That’s not going to happen as builders are only interested in large expensive houses".

We can see this in our area, there are more than 3000 new properties either built or in the planning stage (mainly flats) but a relatively small proportion are social housing or "affordable".
Large developers are doing the work, and many are not suitable for families as they are quite small and have no outside space other than in some cases a small balcony. The ones built for profit are relatively luxurious with extra bathrooms and expensive finishes.
Initially the service charges are not too bad, but we all know that these will go up dramatically as the building ages. There are lifts in the buildings so they could be suitable for older people. However most cost over £435K even for a one bed flat, though a very limited number of "affordable" homes start at £355 with deposit top-ups.

The youngsters are all moaning they can't afford to get on the housing ladder and many of them are staying at mum and dad's until they die

One of the situations affecting the availability of properties in my area ( a seaside town ninety minutes train ride from London) is the huge growth in the Airbnb market.
The returns are good, and none of the potential problems of difficulties with tenants arise.
I have spoken before about an acquaintance who has lived for many years in an attractive Victorian terraced house, in a row of six .
Over years, as each neighbours moved out, the other five have become holiday lets.
None of these houses are, now, available for local families to buy, or rent, and the responsibility for this does not lie with my retired friend living at number one.

Greciangirl

I would love to be able to buy a new build house and gift my present house to my daughter.

What an envious and privileged position to be in.

I didn't mean I would gift the house, although I agree that it would be lovely to be able to do that. I have no idea how it would work, as it's never going to happen, but maybe they could buy a smaller house and we could swap - something like that.

Maybe not move, but I think we should maintain them as family homes. We have a 3 bed close to very good schools, Gp surgery and shops, ideal for family living, however our neighbours has just had their bayh taken out and a walk in shower installed, not really family friendly when you have little children, I would have hated to miss out on bathtime fun with my Dd when she was small. Similar with gardens, keep the grassed areas and don't pave over most of the garden

Swapping houses was what I did with my mother. So when I left university, I became the owner of a 2 bed flat, but when I got married I moved into her 4 bed house, (to fill it with children!), and she moved into my flat.

How ridiculous! I bought my house, it's my prooerty and I love where I stay. We worked hard to get our home. Maybe if builders build more bungalows instead of 3/4/5 bed homes that could free up larger properties

To me this kind of suggestion is typical of the relatively small proportio n of young people who seem to believe that the world owes them a living. News Flash: it doesn't,

We worked hard to be able to buy our homes, and saved hard too. If we want to move, we will move. If not, then we will stay where we are, until or unless ill-health forces us to move.

No-one has a moral obligation to move out of accomodation they like living in.

Admittedly, property prices are high and may will be artificially inflated for all I know, but that will not change so long as buyers either have the money to pay the asking price or can persuade their bank or building society to let them take out a mortgage.

I would love to move to a bungalow due to my increasing mobility problems, however in the area I live there aren’t many I could afford and then when you add stamp duty on top I find them really expensive and that’s without probably having to replace kitchen and bathroom etc.
It may be an incentive if the stamp duty was either scrapped or lowered for over 60s who usually only have pensions to live on

More to the point, do these youngsters think they could afford our larger family homes? I dont think where we live affects them in the slightest. Just another reason to bash the boomers and beyond!

My husband's lovely aunt simply exchanged her huge house with a big garden facing Epsom Common for a much smaller one with a smaller garden, virtually round the corner.

She had met a young couple with small children (three i think) and was happy to exchange. I actually think it was her idea.

The house she left was way too big for her and the one she moved into, though 3 bed was much smaller. The young family did stay in contact with her until she died. No money changed hands. "Well, she said, they need a bigger home and were a terrific help with the move".

Sometimes a house is not an investment - it is somewhere to live that you are happy.

She was a truly lovely lady.
I was not surprised she did this.

Allira

^My family do not live near me so when they visit they stay with me. Am I supposed to put them up in a Travel Lodge?^

Same here - especially as two bedrooms are filled with "stuff" that they use when they come.

We stay in a Premier Inn when we visit DS and family. We used to stay with his MiL, but she is 90 this year and we had started taking all our own bedding, towels etc, which meant changing the beds twice for a three night stay. so hotel it is.

Staying with them means taking ovet there bedroom, which is cluttered with stuff. Hotel is by far the best option

I am sorry for families if this is the case. If one has a huge family home which both my grandparents owned. I used to love tearing around the grounds while on holiday.
My sons have bigger houses than myself, especially one who has a mass of land in NZ

ViceVersa

Maybe I'm not 'getting' it, but say if I was to downsize from a 5-bed house to a 1 or 2-bed, isn't that taking the smaller houses out of the first-time buyer market?

Not really, if the availability of mid-size family homes was eased then first timers may be able to move upwards. What is happening now is that there are few bigger homes so they are scarcer and this drives prices up, so youngsters are extending and removing garages/lofts to make room.

This is more about social housing.

You pay a subsidised rent for years and years in order to bring up your family, and then expect to occupy a large home meant to help other young folks start their own families.

Yes, by all means keep your home if you must, just pay full economic rent for it.

FranP

ViceVersa

Maybe I'm not 'getting' it, but say if I was to downsize from a 5-bed house to a 1 or 2-bed, isn't that taking the smaller houses out of the first-time buyer market?

Not really, if the availability of mid-size family homes was eased then first timers may be able to move upwards. What is happening now is that there are few bigger homes so they are scarcer and this drives prices up, so youngsters are extending and removing garages/lofts to make room.

But if the number of homes available stays unchanged and all are occupied and everyone takes one step up until you get to the top when you step down to take the empty small houses, unless you stop anyone getting on the housing ladder who is not already on it, then it will put pressure on prices at the lowest level as downsizers and new entrants will be competing with each other.

Builders only build houses they know they can sell and the size of the houses they build has no effect on the price of houses overall. The same builders will build large houses in one area and small houses in other.

Where I now live the builders are building flats and small houses because that is what the demand is for. Where we used to live, they are building, flaats and small houses, but also many 4 bedroomed detached houses because the area is a more prosperous area with more people earning higher salaries who can afford to buy these houses.

Builders are businesses, neither social services, nor charities. They build what they can sell. Currently they are building less than the government would like because the economic situation is so fraught people are delaying decisions on any big money purchases, not because they cannot afford them but because of their fears for the future.

M0nica

Allira

My family do not live near me so when they visit they stay with me. Am I supposed to put them up in a Travel Lodge?

Same here - especially as two bedrooms are filled with "stuff" that they use when they come.

We stay in a Premier Inn when we visit DS and family. We used to stay with his MiL, but she is 90 this year and we had started taking all our own bedding, towels etc, which meant changing the beds twice for a three night stay. so hotel it is.

Staying with them means taking ovet there bedroom, which is cluttered with stuff. Hotel is by far the best option

I'm not talking about us staying with them.
How long is your normal visit?

I'm talking about family, possibly from overseas, staying with us. Telling them to stay in a Premier Inn for a month, without a car unless they hire one (nearest Inn is 20 miles away) would not be fair after they have travelled 10,000 miles to visit us. .

What suits you would not suit ever family, we are all different.

As soon as the huge empty 7 bedroom mansions in London, primarily owned by absent Russian oligarchs but rarely occupied, are sold and repurposed for families, I'll consider downsizing from my modest semi. Until then, I won't.

NO is the simple answer, I have lived in a three bedroom bungalow in a rural area for the past 25 years. Worked hard since leaving school, brought up three children attended university as a mature student, while working at weekends. I am fortunate that I’ve never needed to use government benefits or assistance during that time. What I have I have earned through very hard work.
I have had my adult children return home for long periods, due to divorce, relationship break ups etc. I was pleased that I had the room to offer that support when needed.
Even if we did move out I doubt that many young people could afford our homes anyway.
Why doesn’t the government build houses that young people can afford, stamp duty free along with deposit free or small deposit mortgages too. But why isn’t there a push on building affordable starter homes.
Following WW2 there were housing shortages and my parents lived in a static caravan where I was brought up until they get a house. Other relatives lived in prefabs . Surely the government could look at modern easy / rapid build housing schemes to accommodate the young.
Oh but that would require the government applying some common sense. Why would they when it’s easier to blame pensioners for staying put, living longer, have a pension we’ve already paid for. I can’t get my head round the fact that we’ve paid taxes for our future pension so why didn’t they invest this money to accrue interest and build, that’s what private pensions do. Finally we have very low pensions compared to other poorer European countries.
In light of the state of our country, perhaps the politicians should forgo a wage rise, sell their very large houses and second homes and stop claiming unwarranted expenses. Then get rid of the House of Lords a total waste of money. Employ people who have knowledge in the position they are given.
Stop paying people who have been sacked. No other company would pay someone who was sacked due to their incompetence or law breaking. But hey ho the government do. Why should past prime ministers get all the perks they do when they’ve finished their leadership, after all their job is done. I believe if prime ministers fail to put into action the points made on their manifesto’s this is making false claims and breach of promise. This should trigger a new election. After all if I claimed at an interview I would do A B & C then after getting the post failed to do it I would be given my marching orders.
Sorry I have gone off on a tangent, but fed up with the blame pensioners game, for the governments mismanagement and shortfalls.

We have a large house which we have developed and poured money into over the years. Subject to health issues we intend to stay because nearly everyone we know who have ‘downsized’ pine for their previous ( more private) places. There are a lot of retirement villages here and they are all very flash with swimming pools,bowling greens etc but the same people gawping at you every day , not too much privacy. That’s us, though and I know many would disagree.

cc

*watermeadow*. "There are lots of retirement flats with huge service charges.
There are also lots of old council houses with three bedrooms, occupied mainly by single old people. They couldn’t down-size if they wanted to as there is nowhere at all which is smaller and cheaper.
The answer is, of course, to build lots and lots of affordable homes and housing association homes. That’s not going to happen as builders are only interested in large expensive houses".

We can see this in our area, there are more than 3000 new properties either built or in the planning stage (mainly flats) but a relatively small proportion are social housing or "affordable".
Large developers are doing the work, and many are not suitable for families as they are quite small and have no outside space other than in some cases a small balcony. The ones built for profit are relatively luxurious with extra bathrooms and expensive finishes.
Initially the service charges are not too bad, but we all know that these will go up dramatically as the building ages. There are lifts in the buildings so they could be suitable for older people. However most cost over £435K even for a one bed flat, though a very limited number of "affordable" homes start at £355 with deposit top-ups.

Developers submit initial plans for permission and promise to devote a (miniscule) percentage of said developement to affordable housing.

When built, well whaddyaknow? The "affordable" properties have somehow not materialised........

Where are you Dickens? I would be interested in a 5 bed house for cost of(or less) of a new build.😄

MaggsMcG

This is just my opinion: if people are in council or housing association I feel they should be encouraged to downsize, even if they have lived there a long time.
However the council and HA need to give them an incentive because moving isn't cheap and decorating probably needs doing.
I do think if people are in their own owned homes its up to them. Again, its blinking more expensive and disruptive for home owners to move.

The words "encouraged" and "incentive" are, I'm afraid, words often used by central and local government to mask a culture of bullying and co-ercion.

Yes, the social housing are the ones where they probably should feel obliged to down- size for younger,or indeed,larger families to take up the oppertunity they themselves had when they moved in decades ago- my ex in-laws,have a 3bed house still,with an extra downstairs room(which could be used for dining or even an extra bedroom if needed) and a nice big fenced in garden on 3 sides, but theres them,and one very adult child.(46) so could move to a smaller house, or even a bungalow would be better for them- Its not fair to families with maybe 3 or 4 or 5 children.There should be incentives of perhaps removal costs, and decent redecorating grants not just £30! That would barely buy one tin of paint these days.(its what i was offered once when i took a rented house about 16 years ago, & i never even got it in the end!) 😆Sadly i doubt its gone up much.

The 'affordable' houses begin that way, but in 6mths the rent rise is nearly £60 a month.Then again a rise each year till theyre 'unaffordable'.