An Act of Desperation?

How are they supposed to be hard working when there are no jobs?

How can you prove they are hardworking even if they have a job?

There are a range of unanswered problems about this policy.

1) How will this policy stop first time buyers (FTBs) buying one of these houses and then immediately selling it on at the full market price?

2) If the buyers have to live in the subsidised property for a minimum period what happens if a job move/job loss/unforeseen circumstances mean they have to move before this period is over?

3) Why should a small group of people be given 20% of the value of their house when this is not available to all FTBs, or will the 20% reduction apply to the selling price of the house in perpetuity?

4)) Will this not penalise first time buyers in areas where this housing isn't available or where it is over subscribed or is unsuitable for their needs?

This policy will be paid for by reducing some of the energy efficiency standards that apply to new housing and the subventions developers pay towards local infrastructure.

5) How does it help FTBs, if the mortgage is less but the fuel bills are high?

6) How can a government that trumpets its green credentials and its concerns about global warming justify reducing the energy efficiency of new houses

7) Will the owners qualify for further financial help from the Green Deal to bring their houses up to a proper level of energy efficiency

8) When infrastructure all over the country, especially in the south east is creaking and collapsing under the pressures of rising populations. How can the government justify reducing developer subventions that go towards providing access roads to their new estates, schools for the children who live on them and hospital and medical facilities to care for them?

My nephew works as a teacher and earns around £25,OOO a year. On this salary he can get a mortgage of about £140,000, not enough for a one-bedroomed flat here in the S E., even with 20% off.

impressed he managed to utter 'the right thing' and 'work hard' in the same sentence
agree with lots of what flicketyb said - too many unknowns in the policy but I think they are hoping the headlines will be sufficient to get the 'vote'
house prices need to fall - the current price (value) is not so much about the shortage of homes but the locked in expectation of those who are selling who paid too much in the last 10/15 years (blame Labour's loose financial control for that).
prices were bid up by self-certification, buy to let and flipping and the banks handed out far too much credit.
the genie cannot easily be put back in the bottle under current circumstances
BUT
these schemes to buy votes must stop
interest rates must start to edge up (5 years of low rates is misleading to those still taking out large mortgages to buy an ooverpriced house)
BTL should lose it's favourable tax and borrowing advantages over owner occupation (most BTL buyers target the first time buyer type of house|)

unlikely to happen as the government that fails to keep the plates spinning and house prices high will commit political suicide.

He actually did say if you vote for us!

I agree with you about the energy efficiency, Flickety. If FTBs cannot afford the full mortgage, they cannot afford energy efficiency measures after they have bought at a discount. Any architect or builder knows that energy efficiency measures are cheaper to build in at the start than to add later.

Anyway, if he can do it then, why can't he do it now? Everyone who knows has been telling him to build houses since he came in. Wasn't this government supposed to be the greenest ever?

I'm surprised anyone is surprised by this. Didn't we all expect a vote catcher? Didn't we get that last week from Labour? They all do this before an election so I am not the least bit surprised. That does surprise me is that there is an age limit, isn't that ageist? What is gained but that limit? Surely it should be for all FTBs? I feel another email to my MP coming on.

isn't that ageist?

That is the shout going up in a few places Nonnie.

What irritates me is that it shows they fully understand the problem their citizens are facing with housing but have done nothing about it until they want votes - for a measly 100,000 houses that people have to pay upfront for? And that's a bribe?

Had they substantially increased social housing, that would have been a sure vote winner but, as usual, it's the carrot and the stick approach.

He actually did say if you vote for us!

Don't forget, durhamjen, the proviso is also that he remains leading the Tory party! Talk about looking after number one ...

I've just heard Grant Shapps slating Mr Reckless for his defection. Grant Shapps didn't stop and think why he defected. I have to say I listened to Nigel Farage's speech and he appeared more down to earth then Cameron et al

nonnie there are some properties near where I live that can only be bought by over 55s. I think a further stipulation is that you have to have previously lived in the area, or have a child who does.
So there are obviously ways of getting round the age-discrimination laws.

I have to say I listened to Nigel Farage's speech and he appeared more down to earth then Cameron et al

I think that's what is winning people over isn't it - the fact they come across as more like 'us'. If it wasn't for their anti-gay marriage stance and their NHS possibilities, if I lived in the UK I would vote for them!

What has happened to all the other " schemes?" Fallen by the wayside.
If the idea is so good why is it not happening already?
Am I just synical?
Will the houses be where the need is? Or will they be an expensive rail journey away from where work is?

Where is the catch and who is making a profit? X

j52 there will always be someone who makes a profit or no houses would ever be built. Presumably this is considered an improvement on previous policies.

From a personal perspective I would like them to remove the guarantee of mortgage funding as it is keeping interest rates so low. Yes, it affects me and my savings but also any person trying to save for a deposit as it is very hard for their savings to keep pace with inflation and is therefore a disincentive to save.

I agree that there will always be profit to be made, it makes the money world go round. But I worry about policies that are made to gain unfair profits. ( all parties included)
What shocks me is are the huge mortgage arrangement fees. It seems that mortgage payers are between a rock and a hard place. Pay a huge amount every 2/5 years incase the rate goes up or risk a rising rate.
It was not until my DSs got mortgages that I was aware of this. In our day you got a mortgage, no fee that was that. We did experience double figure interest rates, but did not pay thousands over the years for the privilege of having a mortgage. X

Another desperate attempt to gain votes.

www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2014/09/30/comment-human-rights-law-protects-us-against-ministers-like

I did not know that Grayling was the Lord Chancellor and the first one in 400 years who did not have a background in law.
He has said that lights have to be out at 10.30 p.m. in YOI, despite the fact that those who know about young offenders think differently.

www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/10/02/the-lord-chancellor-is-dismantling-the-rule-of-law

This is what Grayling is going to talk about today.
The man's as much a psychopath as IDS.