According to hubby who works in the construction sector Housing Associations do not come into this. Builders make little or no profit on Association houses but are forced to build them. The government are literally using bully boy tactics to make businesses pay for the problems they should be paying for. If they sell off PRS houses we end up with the situation Maggie Thatcher started when selling off council houses. The government is effectively breaking the backs of small businesses with its constant burdening of its problems on to businesses. I know of small businesses who have stopped taking on employees and keeping it within a manageable range that they can handle on their own. The same will apply to PRS, who needs it, lets just retire with what we have and live stress free happy lives
christine. I cannot see that builders are forced to build H A houses. They have to be competitive in pricing, that is different. The people who build private houses dont pay a good deal to sub contractors aqnyway, they always complain about it. Housing assoc dont have to comply with the same regs as private landlords as they are supposed to be self regulating Colin3
Hi Colin I will ask hubby tonight but the company he works for have always said that they are forced to build a percentage of houses on which they make little or no profit. It is a big bug bear for them when they could be using their mnn power to build houses
that earn them the profit they deserve. Like I said I will ask my husband about it again.
Ps on the matter of sub contractors my husband sub contracted to this firm before he went on the books with them as site manager. He was always happy with the pay.
he may mean low cost affordable housing as a percentage of homes on a big estate. Some subbys are told the price they must do the job for on a new estate or they dont get the job! I have never worked on a site for this reason, but have worked in peoples homes for 50 years as a builder ,.I tell them the price and they either say yes or no
Not only that Peter, I, and Iâm sure others, own freehold blocks of flats, which mortgage lenders will not agree to subdivide into leaseholds.
So how would they propose to overcome that hurdleâŚ
There are too many variants of circumstances for them to ever make it feasible.
Yes Sue, along with overseas workers renting their own homes, including civil servants, military personnel, diplomats, etc.
Are they going to take away someoneâs home? Not in a million yearsâŚ
Oh to be a tenant⌠Then I could move into a pristine property, turn it into a disgusting pit, damaged and nicotine stained, flee and moth infested, with pet infused aromas, and then move on when it became too uncomfortable to another pristine property. Leaving the landlord an inordinate amount of work effort and expense / lost rent, not now covered by the limits on bonds.
There are always 2 sides to any story Jennifer.
Come to think of it, I would be delighted with this policy if they took over all my properties, paid the CGT for me and all the sales costs. Then I could easily move on and relieve myself of all the pain of being a landlord.
Then I could invest the proceeds in my overseas developments, which would earn me far more money than a few poultry rents, whilst removing investment and tax receipts from the UK.
Keep it up, you hapless bureaucrats, I live in hope!
If/when Labour are elected they wonât be on the side of small landlords but then neither are the current mob, who have done nothing to make our lives easier and plenty to do the opposite. However Labour will have much larger issues on their plates than our portfolios!
The whole thing is pre-election hype on both sides and being exaggerated by the usual suspects in the shock-horror branches of journalism.
Hi Colin right spoken to hubby again. If it costs 100000 to build 2 homes that is what they get paid. There is no profit in building the houses they get back costs only. They can however add a small amount on the land they are built on . It is only small certainly
not enough to justify the time and manpower on this type of build as opposed to a private build. They have to conform to all sorts of legislation and this all takes away from the business making a profit. At the end of the day they are employing people and
can only continue to do so if they are allowed to maximise profits as with any other business. They donât do this work because they want to but because if they want to build any houses they have to comply to their demands. This means that they fork out all
the money for this work that they do not profit on and get back once completed and sold.
Regards Christine
Hullo Christine.I would not be working in that manner. I would take my workers elsewhere. It is not a sin to make a profit
What a load of negative crap youâve written stating âwe deserve it!!!â You can quite history all you like but we are not living in the years of the French Revolution neither do we court a Guilatine in this day and age!
Property rental is a business and the legality of any government forcibly taking property and at a discount from Private ownership will surely be tested in the highest court in the land. It confirms that Labour has communist views and these proposals copy the Nazi practice of throwing people out of their homes to install people of their own choosing.
In the unlikely event that Labour gain power a policy of this nature could see the total collapse of the private rental sector with Landlords leaving the sector and selling their investment on the open market with little government thought to the tenants who couldnât qualify for a mortgage and the obvious fact that local council donât have any housing stock available to offer.
He doesnât he is paid a fair wage but the company has no choice. If they want to build new houses they have to do so many affordable homes or they will not get the planning permission. If they want to build 60 homes at least 20 would have to be affordable.
Christine2 I wonder if that is the same all over the country as I see estates going up on Merseyside and all of the homes on some estates are around 250 to300k .Affordable there has got to be under ÂŁ150k
Yes they donât go for more than that. Maybe they should build in Merseyside. The other houses go for between 250 and 350000 but definitely not the affordable.
Geoff, itâs not crap. As we are all witnessing with Brexit, there is an enormous amount of anger out there. The anger is there because people have an unconscious understanding that a great injustice has been committed by the haves against the have nots:- they have had a decade of austerity, seeing their libraries, childrenâs centres and youth clubs close, whilst being told âweâre all in this together!â Of course this is a lie, because the rich are as rich as ever. Meanwhile the gap just gets bigger and bigger. If you let it get bigger and bigger and do nothing, donât be surprised if the anger turns to rage, and the rage turns to disorder. At that point insurance, the Law, or your property rights might not be enough to preserve things âas they areâ.
Remember though, I own a property too, and just like you, I donât want to have it taken away.
Perhaps the most apt quote is from Bismark. âThe one truth about history is that no one ever learns anything from it.â
Considering you own a rental property then you ought to make more positive statements than âwe deserve it !!! God!! Iâve seen more fight in a flamin Goldfish. And quoting history and historical events is not a solution other than Corbyn and his team of idiots are just a team of Communist Nazis and god help us all if they reach power with what there so called manifesto of gloom is. So Nicholas, when the hypocritical Labour idiots come canvassing your door for a hen election please please!! drop your negativity, do something constructively positive and tell em to piss off!!