Newsbot Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 First-time property buyers are to benefit from a further £9.18m of funding to be help them buy their homes. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7051574.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 First-time property buyers are to benefit from a further £9.18m of funding to be help them buy their homes. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7051574.stm That's great, but wouldn't the money be better spent on providing the houses rather than assistance to buy em? Making more people able to buy without increasing the housing stock is just going to push prices up eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 First-time property buyers are to benefit from a further £9.18m of funding to be help them buy their homes. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7051574.stm That's great, but wouldn't the money be better spent on providing the houses rather than assistance to buy em? Making more people able to buy without increasing the housing stock is just going to push prices up eh? Totally agree ! But with D/D controlling over 85%(allegedly) of available building land , it's unlikely ever to happen!. I can't see how it is in the public interest to let one company control so much of the land available .? The Gov'mt are complicite in tying the young people of this island into big mortgages ,on vastly overpriced properties, which will take forever and a day to pay off?. I'm sure all this has been touched on before but it really pisses me off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopsticks Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Can't we have some effective legislation against the commercial buy-to-let brigade? I'm not talking about folks who own one or two extra properties (although they're bad enough), but the rapacious leeches on society's arse who'll cheerfully buy up entire chunks of new developments within 27 seconds of planning permission being granted. No sooner are these new apartment complexes finished than the "FOR LET" signs go up in the windows, and in the case of developments like the Central Apartments, years after they've been finished, some of the units are still for sale or for let, which means that despite massive lists of names on the first-time buyers list, housing stock is just too bloody expensive, and as ai_Droid says, giving people money to buy into an overpriced market just makes Dandara and the buy-to-let brigade even richer. (Plus of course, a lot of folks are going to want real houses to live in (or as close as Dandara are capable of building such a thing), rather than shoe boxes that you couldn't even fit a large pair of shoes into.) We're not like Jersey, we're not short of land to build on, can't the government free up some chunks of land and give another developer a crack of the whip? Until there's a good supply of reasonably priced first-time buyers houses on the market, chucking all the money in the world at the terribly limited stock available isn't going to solve anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Totally agree ! But with D/D controlling over 85%(allegedly) of available building land , it's unlikely ever to happen!. I can't see how it is in the public interest to let one company control so much of the land available .? Easy fix, release more land for building through the planning/zoning process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Can't we have some effective legislation against the commercial buy-to-let brigade? I'm not talking about folks who own one or two extra properties (although they're bad enough), but the rapacious leeches on society's arse who'll cheerfully buy up entire chunks of new developments within 27 seconds of planning permission being granted. Na, you need a rental market, there's a shortage of rental properties as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Can't we have some effective legislation against the commercial buy-to-let brigade?... Unlikely, as one of the things the govt use to promote the island is: There are no restrictions on new residents and the Island has an open property market with no restrictions or qualifications limiting property acquisition http://www.isleofmanfinance.gov.im/relocation/ Granted, it might not be a specific intention to attract the buy-to-let brigade (might not), but it's not going to help first time buyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutley Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Totally agree ! But with D/D controlling over 85%(allegedly) of available building land , it's unlikely ever to happen!. I can't see how it is in the public interest to let one company control so much of the land available .? Easy fix, release more land for building through the planning/zoning process. Building on green field sites is the wrong way to proceed. Owners of brown field sites that are run down or derelict should be instructed to develop them or they should be compulsory purchased by the Govt. There are many many sites like this around the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopsticks Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Can't we have some effective legislation against the commercial buy-to-let brigade? I'm not talking about folks who own one or two extra properties (although they're bad enough), but the rapacious leeches on society's arse who'll cheerfully buy up entire chunks of new developments within 27 seconds of planning permission being granted. Na, you need a rental market, there's a shortage of rental properties as it is. Isn't that sort of a chicken and egg thing though? A lot of folks are having to rent because there's no way on earth they can afford to buy, as much as they'd like to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Isn't that sort of a chicken and egg thing though? A lot of folks are having to rent because there's no way on earth they can afford to buy, as much as they'd like to. Partly, but lots of people just want to rent, particularly our eastern europe invasion force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Totally agree ! But with D/D controlling over 85%(allegedly) of available building land , it's unlikely ever to happen!. Since 25% of any new development has to be sold as affordable housing through the first time buyer scheme, anytime Dandara builds on it's (alleged 85% of all available) land we get first time buyers as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Totally agree ! But with D/D controlling over 85%(allegedly) of available building land , it's unlikely ever to happen!. Since 25% of any new development has to be sold as affordable housing through the first time buyer scheme, anytime Dandara builds on it's (alleged 85% of all available) land we get first time buyers as well. Well that's Ok then! Everybody lives happily ever after ,no problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumble Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Except that the IMF is saying the UK housing market is overpriced by 50% (so the IOM must be higher?) and economists are warning of a recession. Lots of people are going to LOSE their homes if the pundits are correct, and it'll be the people at the bottom end of the market. Buy to let is a convoluted get-rich-quick pyramid scheme of leveraged debt. It should be outlawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Even the often hysterical Daily Mail didn't report the IMF figure as high as 50% In a bleak warning, the IMF found that homes in Britain were overpriced by up to 40 per cent .... The IMF, however, did qualify its pessimism, saying that there were “considerable uncertainties” in its model, which did not take in key factors in Britain such as shortages of supply, boosts to prices from immigration and greater affordability due to the availability of mortgages. timesonline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Except that the IMF is saying the UK housing market is overpriced by 50% (so the IOM must be higher?) and economists are warning of a recession. Hmm, that's a bit missleading. The IMF said the UK property market is 50% over it's predicted values which is based on wage inflation and growth. What the IMF model crucially doesn't take into account is housing stock, so I'm not sure it's particularly good guide. They also went on to say that they expect rises to cool rather than crash. Lots of people are going to LOSE their homes if the pundits are correct, and it'll be the people at the bottom end of the market. Incorrect. http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/ - take a look at their summary of current predictions. Buy to let is a convoluted get-rich-quick pyramid scheme of leveraged debt. It should be outlawed. Arse, it's an investment like any other. If you outlawed borrowing against any kind of equity, the entire basis of pretty much every world market would fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.