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

Chocolatelovinggran

One problem, for those in social housing, can be the lack of attractive alternatives compared to where they live.
A village near me has a small group of local authority housing dating from the thirties. They are three bedroomed homes with good gardens, opposite the primary school, and leading to the village green with a children's playground.
The residents are mostly older. They sit outside their houses, talk to each other and to the parents and children at the end of school. Many have an honesty box for produce from their gardens .
A downsize offer would be a small flat, in the centre of town, with no outside space, because that is all that the local authority have to offer.

How lovely that sounds. Wish everyone had the chance to live like that, it sounds idyllic!

After my husband died, several people asked me if I was planning to move. My family live within easy reach so I am not planning on moving away. The only local possibility would be a retirement flat with its unpredictable service charges. I live in a 3 bedroomed house as we downsized about 13 years ago.

I have a friend whose husband has a life-limiting condition. They live in a huge house with an enormous garden. I think she wishes they had moved about ten years ago whilst they were more fit and able to cope. It will be very hard now.

I cannot imagine any system where homeowners would be forced or incentivised to downsize, but ideally those who rent social housing ( there are no council houses round here as they have been sold off to social housing associations) should be able to swap a house which is too large for something more suitable in the same area, thereby releasing homes for families.

I’m told by a relative who builds houses that getting planning through for social housing takes years. Meanwhile he builds what will sell.

Indeed, Meandrogrog, and you can understand, then, why these people don't want to move!

SporeRB01

Norah

Part of the problem is the planning process, the developers must wait years for their planning to be approved.

I agree, large part of the problem is planning permission.

I do wonder why young families need so many bedrooms?

Nowadays, some people are working remotely or hybrid usually 2 to 3 days in the office and remaining days at home.

The bedrooms are converted to study/ offices to accommodate one or two people working from home.

I forgot, we've made 2 bedrooms into our offices.

Those 2 bedrooms have wall beds.

The bedrooms in the addition still have real beds.

We really don't need excess beds often any longer.

I think we should at first look at the massive increase in population in this country in the last 10 years.
Where do all of these people live?

Who lives where and what sort of homes. Bought, Private landlords
Social housing etc. Who are the priority?

Plus families who just have as many kids as they can.but can't afford because the government keeps throwing benefits at them

I doubt anyone would want a return to the sixties, where some councils bulldozed thousands of Victorian houses on the grounds they were slums, and housed people in concrete blocks of flats. These were builr in a hurry and while they had the amenities the old houses lacked, soon turned into modern slums and were often hated by residents. I would hope a return to cheaply built houses is avoided this time as this failed in the sixties.

I'll happily move out of my 3 bed semi and let a family move in, just as soon as the empty, multi million pound, 7 bedroom mansions owned by absent Russian oligarchs in London are forced to hand over their houses and let families move in. Seems a fair deal.

I'm staying put. TBH I would consider moving if the process was less stressful but it's not so there we are. I love living here, it's the best of all worlds so there's zero motivation to move. We live in a free country so we have the choice of where we live.

The reason houses are not selling at the moment has nothing to do with affordability. There are plenty of people out there who want to move and can afford them. The problem is the very uncertain economic situation in this country and overseas, that mean many people have just put their plans, whether a new home, a new car, or even a holiday overseas, on hold until the economic situation is clearer.

Respectfully, I do not entirely agree MOnica.

Economic uncertainty, global, national, is certainly one of the reasons. But some people - maybe those that are "something in the City", or at least those who can fairly well weather the fluctuations in the economy, and are not badly affected by continuing Austerity - still buy houses because they are not going to be completely stymied by the % increases in their mortgage repayments.

On the other hand, families who have to budget every last 1p from their income simply cannot afford the price of many houses that would suit their needs, regardless. For those, affordability has always been an issue and will continue to be one even if the economy improves. Unless their incomes are hugely hiked, which is unlikely.

Of course, some will put their plans on hold because the economic climate is such that the future is uncertain. But to suggest that it's a one size that fits all is, IMO, incorrect.

I think the need for huge deposits puts people off buying, particularly first time buyers who are paying exorbitant rents. Stamp duty is an awful tax, too.

Doodledog there are some mortgages now where a "huge deposit" isn't required if you have been paying rent and can prove it.
They are known as "Track Record" mortgages.

I know there are at least half a dozen including Skipton.
Most seem to let you put down^up to^ 5%.

Doodledog

I think the need for huge deposits puts people off buying, particularly first time buyers who are paying exorbitant rents. Stamp duty is an awful tax, too.

I agree and it is sad that although so much is nowadays more accessible - travel, education, job choices and healthcare etc, a decent affordable home is seemingly more out of reach to so many. Very sad.

I know, NotSpaghetti, but even so, when rents are upwards of £1000 a month and student loans take a chunk out of young people’s salaries even 5% of today’s house prices can be difficult to save. If a couple has to pay for childcare too, it’s all but impossible.

It was up to 5%
They are happy to accept 0%

When my DS and his GF bought their first (modest) home in the late 90’s, they hadn’t enough for the deposit (should have listened to mum when she suggested saving a bit every pay day!) So the bank of mum and dad lent them it.

Back then, after a few weeks there was some cash back scheme connected to the mortgage, and when they received that, they were able to reimburse us.

Never heard of anything similar nowadays.

It's impossible to save even if you're on a six figure salary. DS earns around £120k, but earning more has actually made him financially worse off due to taxes and national insurance.
The Bank of mum and dad is often the only way to buy property, or to move up the ladder, but, without downsizing, I doubt whether many parents have spare 10s of 1000s lying around? Especially if you have several children. So it's catch 22 all round.

MartavTaurus - surely if you are in the top 5% of earners in the UK you should have significant buying power! Is he wanting to live in Richmond or Chelsea?

I do realise over 100k there is more tax with loss of the taper etc... but even so!

Because childcare support worth 10s of 1000s is withdrawn at that level.

I know there are losses but he is earning in the top 5%.

MartavTaurus

It's impossible to save even if you're on a six figure salary. DS earns around £120k, but earning more has actually made him financially worse off due to taxes and national insurance.
The Bank of mum and dad is often the only way to buy property, or to move up the ladder, but, without downsizing, I doubt whether many parents have spare 10s of 1000s lying around? Especially if you have several children. So it's catch 22 all round.

Well no, it isn’t impossible - but compromises have to be made. My son has saved a very good deposit for his first home, because he moved back home after university. What sucks away younger people’s saving power is often the amount they have to pay on renting, commuting, and living costs, particularly if they are in big cities. It’s not always earning a very high salary but having high outgoings that gets them to where they need to be

OK it's all but impossible , to quote the phrase my post followed.

I think it’s all but impossible for young people who are on minimum wage or low salaries. If they earn an average or above average salary, it’s the choices they have made about what to do with their income that prevent them saving for a deposit. That’s why a lot of couples delay having children, and share housing with others for longer than they did in the past. Once they are on the housing ladder it is often cheaper than renting, certainly after a difficult first couple of years.

MartavTaurus

OK it's all but impossible , to quote the phrase my post followed.

I can see where you are coming from. My son is just about earning nearly double what my husband was earning when he retired. However, he will now have to pay more tax and his student loan will have an extra 3% interest added. He is saving to buy a house and has since he started earning. He also had to ensure that he had enough put by because of the very real threat of redundancy during these troubled times.
Last time we went to see him, we looked at Estate Agents and found that the properties were over £500000 for where he needs to be so instantly he loses the first time buyers stamp duty allowance which means he will have to save to pay for that too. We were also shocked that the prices of everything were so much higher than what we pay and we don't live in a poor area by a long shot.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not saying he is hard done by, but when you look at the higher salaries, you do think that the world is their oyster. He is a lucky boy in so many ways although to be fair, his progress has been through very hard work, but he will be paying rent for an awful long time.

Casdon

I think it’s all but impossible for young people who are on minimum wage or low salaries. If they earn an average or above average salary, it’s the choices they have made about what to do with their income that prevent them saving for a deposit. That’s why a lot of couples delay having children, and share housing with others for longer than they did in the past. Once they are on the housing ladder it is often cheaper than renting, certainly after a difficult first couple of years.

But that has always been the case. This is why, in the past, we built so many council houses. Before the depredations of Mrs Thatcher one third of all households lived in council homes. Secure lifetime tenure, and with maintenance the responsibility of others. Although as so many tradesmen lived in these houses, many were kept in beatiful order by the tenants, and upgraded with central heating, new kitchens and bathrooms etc.

Many of our generation got married at a younger age and therefore had two salaries so were perhaps more able to save for a deposit for a house, although only the man's salary was taken into account when mortgages were offered.

Now so many young people remain single for longer and are trying to do the same on one salary. Rents are far higher proportionately although people do expect to rent a house or decent flat now. We rented three upstairs rooms in an old lady's house when we were first married.
Even on a good salary, house prices in some areas are out of the reach of first-time buyers.