Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The housing crisis (London and beyond)

The only solution is the same one that worked last time round, build a shedload of council housing (like a couple of million of them) anything else like rent controls or landlord licensing is not so much a sticking plaster as trying to stem blood loss with a box of Kleenex on someone who's been shot half a dozen times.
The Tories are ideologically opposed to it and Labour seem to be luke warm at the very best. The private housing sector is evaporating faster than a ice cube on a hotplate so the problem is going to get a LOT worse yet.
something like eirigi's policy of universal public housing would be a possible solution
Got to admit I quite like this idea which has probably almost certainly killed it stone cold dead. Can't see any of the major parties in this country buying into it, especially the rent is a proportion of your income rather than an absolute figure idea.
 
Last edited:
There is still a lot of Social Housing in London, RTB discount of around £120k is not going to help much if you are trying to buy a council flat in Westminster,Islington,Camden, Lambeth or any of the more central boroughs. But the damage was done in the late 80s/90s when RTB had massive discounts and Councils weren't allowed to build again until relatively recently. Housing Associations were supposed to be able to build more but they didn't build enough.

I'd prefer a system of giving grants to tenants to buy somewhere on the open market (I benefitted from such a scheme in 1997) leaving the council property for someone in need. There is some council buy back of former properties but sometimes this is funded by selling off more expensive flats/houses so I'm not sure of the overall benefit of that.

Councils are building again, but you need a massive rebuilding programme to have any impact on the number of homeless and the numbers on waiting lists who are overcrowded, or in need to a different home for medical reasons. Councils spend an absolute fortune on temporary housing, money that would be better spent building homes.

And it's not just Councils or Housing Associations who could make more of an impact, I've long been a fan of rent control - the legislation still exists - the fair rent legislation, but it only applies to anyone who has lived in a private rented home since before 1989 - so there can't be many who still benefit from that. Reasonable private rent would ease the situation and if private landlords pull out, maybe a decent government could fund a buy back of their properties and lease them or sell them on to Councils/HAs, that would be government borrowing money to do something decent.
 
There is still a lot of Social Housing in London, RTB discount of around £120k is not going to help much if you are trying to buy a council flat in Westminster,Islington,Camden, Lambeth or any of the more central boroughs. But the damage was done in the late 80s/90s when RTB had massive discounts and Councils weren't allowed to build again until relatively recently. Housing Associations were supposed to be able to build more but they didn't build enough.

I'd prefer a system of giving grants to tenants to buy somewhere on the open market (I benefitted from such a scheme in 1997) leaving the council property for someone in need. There is some council buy back of former properties but sometimes this is funded by selling off more expensive flats/houses so I'm not sure of the overall benefit of that.

Councils are building again, but you need a massive rebuilding programme to have any impact on the number of homeless and the numbers on waiting lists who are overcrowded, or in need to a different home for medical reasons. Councils spend an absolute fortune on temporary housing, money that would be better spent building homes.

And it's not just Councils or Housing Associations who could make more of an impact, I've long been a fan of rent control - the legislation still exists - the fair rent legislation, but it only applies to anyone who has lived in a private rented home since before 1989 - so there can't be many who still benefit from that. Reasonable private rent would ease the situation and if private landlords pull out, maybe a decent government could fund a buy back of their properties and lease them or sell them on to Councils/HAs, that would be government borrowing money to do something decent.
I don't understand who is in the social housing in Peckham around that school, and why are so many people 'homeless' (which includes temp accommodation etc) with kids?
 
I don't understand who is in the social housing in Peckham around that school, and why are so many people 'homeless' (which includes temp accommodation etc) with kids?
Low waged families
People that have had an unsettled way of life- ie rough sleepers/ overcrowding. People coming from hostel accommodation.
Refugees
People escaping DV etc
People leaving care.
Plus People that have lived in them for donkeys years.

Shrinking social housing and a growing population.

An increase in homelessness is an obvious outcome and consequence of the right to buy scheme.

The Tennants Incentive Scheme was much better cus it gave a lump sum to exsisting HA tenants to put down on a house./Morgatage. However that's long gone and unaffordable in this crazy climate.
 
Last edited:
Low waged families
Refugees
People escaping DV etc
People leaving care.
Plus People that have lived in them for k1
is that the people in social housing or homeless?
my point was knowing there are lots of people round there in social housing, why isn't it these kids?
 
Getting a home on the private market is incredibly difficult, a lot of LLs asking for deposits that people simply don't have

A start might be outlawing deposits of more than a months' rent, as at the moment it sounds like LLs are free to demand anything they want - 3 months, 6 months, a year....
 
Double/treble/quadruple council tax for none occupancy.
That right already exists, Cheshire East (council for my native Crewe) does it. It's double if the house is vacant for more than 2 years, triple for more than 5 and quadruple for more than 10.
Mate of mine and his missus bought a bungalow intending to do it up with the intention of moving in, selling up their existing house and retiring. They got 2 years of paying no council tax on it but then Covid struck and they ended up wasting most of that as a result so now they're paying regular council tax on their house and double on the bungalow whilst they rush to finish the bungalow.
 
Increasingly this isn't just a city thing either. There are desperate people looking for dwindling private rented properties every day on local Facebook groups here in Calderdale. Some of this is due to affluent people from cities moving to the more desirable areas post-covid and also the rise of air bnbs - but people seem to be struggling to find properties even away from the hotspots.
 
Getting a home on the private market is incredibly difficult, a lot of LLs asking for deposits that people simply don't have

A start might be outlawing deposits of more than a months' rent, as at the moment it sounds like LLs are free to demand anything they want - 3 months, 6 months, a year....
And obviously should have been rent caps.

There is still a lot of Social Housing in London, RTB discount of around £120k is not going to help much if you are trying to buy a council flat in Westminster,Islington,Camden, Lambeth or any of the more central boroughs. But the damage was done in the late 80s/90s when RTB had massive discounts and Councils weren't allowed to build again until relatively recently. Housing Associations were supposed to be able to build more but they didn't build enough.

I'd prefer a system of giving grants to tenants to buy somewhere on the open market (I benefitted from such a scheme in 1997) leaving the council property for someone in need. There is some council buy back of former properties but sometimes this is funded by selling off more expensive flats/houses so I'm not sure of the overall benefit of that.
The grant idea is interesting. Otherwise presumably there's no incentive for someone who could buy to really do so and free up the social housing for those more in need. I assume that area of Peckham has older social tenants as someone must be loving there they just don't have kids!
 
In Edinburgh we have a double edged sword of landlords who have realised they can make more money using their property as an Air BnB instead of a long term let, and landlords who have realised they can make more money if they stick some door closers and safety signs up and let it as an HMO flat to three or four students at £850 a room. It means if you are a low wage family looking for a rented three or four bedroom flat (me!) then there is literally nothing available. I've been on the council housing list in Edinburgh since my eldest was five. She is now twenty. I've still got snowball's chance in hell of ever getting a flat because there's thousands of other people chasing every one and I am and always have been currently housed, paying a landlord's mortgage for him with my universal credit, so I don't have priority.
 
Getting a home on the private market is incredibly difficult, a lot of LLs asking for deposits that people simply don't have

A start might be outlawing deposits of more than a months' rent, as at the moment it sounds like LLs are free to demand anything they want - 3 months, 6 months, a year....

and asking for a guarantor, even if you're in a regular job (according to an acquaintance who's trying to move house)

which is all very well if you've got older relatives * who you're on good terms with ** who have got the capital / income to be guarantors ***

* - lets out care leavers
** - lets out some young people - proportionately more LGBTQ+ people
*** - lets out anyone without relatives who are well enough off
 
I think I'll blame "maggie" for this crisis - she wanted to create a "property-owning democracy" ...
She forced councils to sell off their housing and prevented them from using the money raised to build replacements - the house-building industry wasn't that interested in building homes for the average working person as it wasn't "really" profitable ...

That created even more of a shortage of housing ... and the modern trend of greed [profit above all] and lack of a social compass - which she also encouraged "I'm all right, jack" and "no such thing as society" has only compounded the problem ...
 
Yes this - what may look like social housing isn’t anymore. Bought under RTB and sold on to become private rented accommodation.

yes - this (guardian article from a year ago) says 40% of properties bought under RTB are now private rentals - although I have seen other articles saying it's 40% of council flats which isn't quite the same thing.

and then giving badly informed people the opportunity to complain about [whatever group of people it is this week] 'getting council flats'
 
The only solution is the same one that worked last time round, build a shedload of council housing (like a couple of million of them) anything else like rent controls or landlord licensing is not so much a sticking plaster as trying to stem blood loss with a box of Kleenex on someone who's been shot half a dozen times.
The Tories are ideologically opposed to it and Labour seem to be luke warm at the very best. The private housing sector is evaporating faster than a ice cube on a hotplate so the problem is going to get a LOT worse yet.

Got to admit I quite like this idea which has probably almost certainly killed it stone cold dead. Can't see any of the major parties in this country buying into it, especially the rent is a proportion of your income rather than an absolute figure idea.
True. Lots of landlords are selling up*, so their tenants are being served Section 21 [no fault eviction] Notices. Their tenants are struggling to find anywhere else to live that's affordable, so they're self-referring to Council homeless services and being told to stay put until they're evicted by bailiffs, otherwise they will be deemed to have made themselves homeless. Councils have been advised by the government that they should (in law) be stepping in sooner and that if there's a properly served Section 21 Notice then the tenants shouldn't have to go through the whole eviction process and incur court costs and bailiffs fees, but councils just don't have the capacity to rehouse everyone that needs housing so they're failing to comply with the law.

Reasons why landlords are selling up:

(1) Phasing out of mortgage interest relief, which ended in April 2020. For years and years, landlords used to be able to set off the mortgage interest they paid against their tax bill, but that tax perk was phased out, so landlordism started to be less profitable.

(2) Introduction of landlord/property licensing in some cities. Landlords incurring more costs to comply with the licensing schemes. They might have to spend money upgrading their property to meet requirements too.

(3) Over the years, landlords have had to comply with more and more legal requirements/regulations, iirc, gas safety certificates used to be the main one, but now electric safety certificates, fire safety, energy performance certificates, etc.

Of course, all that is in the tenants' best interests and helps get rid of some of the worst of the slumlords, but it's yet another thing, or multiple things, which have eroded the profit margins.

(3) Landlords fears over the costs of meeting higher energy efficiency standards. A while back, the government announced that all rented property had to be at least EPC C by 2025. Lots of rented property doesn't meet that standard. And in order to being it up to that standard would cost £thousands. When you think of how many rental houses, especially in the north of England, are little terraced houses, which might currently be EPC D, or E or F, lots of landlords started to get spooked by how much it would cost to increase insulation, redo central heating systems, install double-glazing if it wasn't already installed, etc. For lots of properties, the amount of money needed to make those improvements* made landlords decide that those properties weren't financially viable as an ongoing investment.

*Particularly bearing in mind that even owner-occupiers will work out the sums and think hard about the payback period, eg how much it would cost to upgrade (£thousands) versus how much they will save on heating bills (£hundreds), so it's a huge upfront cost that pays off/provides a very slow and low return on investment. But in the case of landlords, they're just incurring the cost, it's their tenants who benefit from lower heating bills. Of course, landlords can then increase the rent for the improved quality of the property, but lots of areas have ceiling prices for market rent, and landlords also bear that in mind as a factor, eg in order to do that energy efficiency work, they'd want/need to then increase the rent to X amount, which is above market rates for the area.

The government has recently backtracked - originally, the requirement was for all new tenancies to be EPC C compliant by 2025 and existing tenancies by 2028. But that's been dropped. But many landlords have already sold up.

(4) Recent mortgage interest rate rises. Lots of landlords are now finding that their rental income isn't covering all their expenses. Or it might just about cover their expenses or might provide a little bit of profit, but the landlords are increasingly thinking the returns aren't worth the effort, receiving phone calls at night or at the weekend because a lightbulb needs changing (it happens more than you'd think) or the tenants have broken something.

A broken boiler or a tenant moving out and them having to decorate and re-carpet and pay fees for new tenancy agreements and reference checks etc etc can pretty much wipe out their 'profit' for the year'.

And this is going to get worse, because lots of landlords are over-leveraged. Years ago, in places like South Manchester, you used to get some landlords who were cash buyers who bought up lots of properties and rented them out to students, often properties in scuzzy states. But as 'Buy-to-Let' became a thing, landlords were buying properties with as little as 25 per cent deposit, so they have substantial mortgages. Whereas the old-style cash buyer is quids in, the Buy-to-let landlord is much more susceptible to being financially squeezed out of the market by a variety of factors, just one bad tenant who stops paying rent (leaving the landlord unable to pay the mortgage with rental income) and/or trashes the place (some tenants cause £thousands of damage), and the mortgage interest rate rises are the straw that broke the camel's back for many.

Many landlords will face getting into mortgage arrears and having their properties repossessed over the next few years.

(5) Going back to the issue of Section 21 'no fault' evictions. Landlords were already pissed off by how long it could take to regain possession of their property, even though the relevant government minister had written to councils telling them to stop telling tenants to wait until the bailiffs turned up.

Then the government announced that it planned to change the law to abolish Section 21 'no fault' evictions. Which horrified landlords, faced with the prospect of not being able to regain possession of their property. There have already been countless cases of eg families renting out their homes while temporarily living elsewhere, perhaps even abroad, for studies or work or while travelling, or while military families are on deployment overseas, only to find themselves homeless on their return, because their tenant refused to move out at the end of their tenancy and making them go through the whole eviction process. Or cases where a couple has got together, they've moved in, and one of them has ended up an 'accidental landlord'... fast forward a few years, the relationship breaks down, they serve a Section 21 Notice on their tenant so that they can move back into their original home, but the tenant's told to stay put by the council.

It can already take 6-12 months, or even longer, for a landlord to regain possession of their property. That's particularly problematic if, for whatever reason, the landlord is wanting to sell, they lose buyers because the tenants refuse to move till the bailiffs turn up, which could be weeks or months away.

So now landlords fear that the system will be even worse. If it's already difficult (a long, time-consuming and expensive process) to regain possession of their property, doing away with Section 21 will make almost virtually impossible. So lots of landlords with small portfolios* have been adopting the attitude/practice of 'whenever a tenant moves out, I'm not reletting, I'm selling'.

*Bearing in mind that lots of Buy-to-Let landlords (as opposed to the 'accidental landlords') got into it as an investment vehicle for their retirement fund. Lots of hardworking people of relatively modest means decided to buy property and rent it out because they didn't necessarily trust their works pension fund to provide for them in retirement - (Maxwell, Rover, BhS, etc, lots of little people have been shafted over the years) - and lots of people with relatively modest savings or investments were hit by financial crashes, stock market crash or banks going bust. So they decided it was safer to invest in bricks and mortar.



And before anyone thinks 'Great! Landlords are selling up! That means there will be more properties on the market for people to buy, so they're not reliant on private sector scum landlords!' I have bad news for you.

Not that urban is going to get out their violins and perform a concerto at the thought of landlords having a difficult time, but what comes next might be worse: banks and international investment houses are buying up property and becoming landlords. If you thought the average Joe who'd bought a couple of small terraced houses as an investment to provide an income during his retirement is bad, just think what the vulture capitalists are going to do to the sector. You thought Joe was a capitalist bastard landlord, wait till the capitalist bastards on steroids are your landlord. Think rents are high now? Wait and see how much higher they go. Many small scale landlords have been worried about raising rents to cover increased mortgage costs, because they're conscious of the impact of the cost of living crisis on their tenants, but also they don't want to put the rent up to the point their tenant can't pay and gives notice and leaves them with a void period, because they need the rental income to pay the mortgage. Those big investment houses won't care if some of their properties have void periods, they'll factor it in, they'll just increase and increase and increase the rents anyway, because they can afford to cope with the consequences, unlike the small-scale landlord.

Like I said, I don't expect urbanites to have much, if any, sympathy for landlords, I was just listing the increasing number of various factors, the ways in which landlords are being hit, to make the point that if people thought we were already in the middle of a serious housing crisis, the perfect storm is on the horizon and about to hit hard.
 
Yes this - what may look like social housing isn’t anymore. Bought under RTB and sold on to become private rented accommodation.
The ex-council now housing association estate where I live has around 250 flats and I think half of them are now in private ownership, mine included, I bought mine under the Right-to-Buy in 2009. I know lots of them have been sold on and are now owned by Buy-to-let landlords. I think a three bed flat rented from the housing association costs £500-ish a month (unfurnished)? But rented privately they go for £1,200-1,400 (furnished).
 
Getting a home on the private market is incredibly difficult, a lot of LLs asking for deposits that people simply don't have

A start might be outlawing deposits of more than a months' rent, as at the moment it sounds like LLs are free to demand anything they want - 3 months, 6 months, a year....

No, they can't. The maximum deposit is five weeks rent. (It's one of the thing that irks landlords about pets, they can't ask for an additional amount to cover potential damage by pets.)

But what is increasingly common is if prospective tenants don't pass the affordability checks (iirc, I think it's something like an income double the rent) and don't have a UK-homeowner to act as guarantor, then the landlord asks for 6-12 months rent upfront. I don't think there's a limit on rent up front, but there is a limit on deposits.
 
Also, I'd point out that the social housing sector isn't necessarily the panacea it once might have been.

The housing association that owns my flat - was originally an 'ALMO' (Arms Length Management Organisation) after stock was transferred from the local council - has increasingly been moving away from the provision of social housing and not only building shared ownership properties, but has built developments (on former council land) for market rent. The renting of these properties isn't managed by the housing association, it's managed by a commercial lettings agent.
 
yes - this (guardian article from a year ago) says 40% of properties bought under RTB are now private rentals - although I have seen other articles saying it's 40% of council flats which isn't quite the same thing.

and then giving badly informed people the opportunity to complain about [whatever group of people it is this week] 'getting council flats'
The block of flats I live in is one of three next to each other, I think there might be one or two council ones left or at least bought by the tenant in one of the other blocks but all the rest are owned and rented out by private landlords now. All the 8 in my block are, in fact 5 of them including mine are all owned by one single landlord.
 
Back
Top Bottom