Bristol: van-dweller capital of UK (1 Viewer)

[The Wino]

Selling them wasnt/isn’t the issue.

Not being able to build more was the issue.

Only if they were sold at a price that funds building another one and the funds are ringfenced for that purpose.

 

[dash300]

You need someone to deliver your takeaways!

Had another 5k this winter alone don't need anymore!

 

[Abacist]

A current problem is councils investing in commercial ventures they should have nothing to do with. Far better to change the law to allow councils the right to build housing and change things so there is no right to buy. Our local council has bought the town centre redevelopment that was built years ago. Bought it from a pension company - did it occur to them to wonder why the pension fund was selling? Some empty shops, town centres crippled by online shoppers. They would be better off building and renting out houses!

 

[Silver-Fox]

Apparently not - https://www.safeguarduk.co.uk/carav...ou park a caravan,it isn't parked dangerously.

More of a grey area then.

I do know if it’s not hitched up it’s not insured.

This I was told by an isurance company.

 

[monzer]

We're, inevitably, focusing more on the sociopolitical aspects of this but the truth is a lot of these people will simply be embracing the van life. More and more people are going down this route and it seems Bristol is at the forefront of it right now.

I'll admit I'm a bit of a caravan snob. They just don't look right parked up on a grassy verge roadside. The messy ones just look abandoned.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

But what happens if you stay in one place for a month then move to a different area through the year?

The same as if you moved house once a month. You probably wouldn't pay. I’m not justifying what councils do, just informing you, as your response to weejocky

Sites that pay business rates mean that is taken care of.

Showed you were unaware that councils can charge vans and motorhomes council tax if they are being used for residential purposes

 

[Silver-Fox]

Only if they were sold at a price that funds building another one and the funds are ringfenced for that purpose.

It’s not a problem selling at a discount.

Funds would still cover building new properties.

 

[Guigsy]

Our local council has bought the town centre redevelopment that was built years ago.

Managing the facilities and amenities in a town centre, enabling them to promote a good balance of shops and local traders rather than letting them all go to the ones to turn a quick buck, so grow the local community... Sounds like something a council should be interested in.

 

[Nanniemate]

Managing the facilities and amenities in a town centre, enabling them to promote a good balance of shops and local traders rather than letting them all go to the ones to turn a quick buck, so grow the local community... Sounds like something a council should be interested in.

They do support the local shops because they ate inside the congestion zone and can't agora to move

 

[Gromett]

Selling them wasnt/isn’t the issue.

Not being able to build more was the issue.

The strange thing is, there was no housing crisis until the 2000's. I agree with you that councils should have been able to build more, but that is not the cause of the current serious issue.
It was poor regulation of the banks causing the banking crisis in combination with the government of the day not restricting immigration of new EU members. Then the current government giving up all pretence of immigration control.
If you look at my post #40 above you will see exactly where/when the housing crisis kicked off.

There was always some people who had difficulty with housing and there always will be. What is new is that it has spread to pretty much the entire lower/middle tiers of the population.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[The Wino]

The strange thing is, there was no housing crisis until the 2000's. I agree with you that councils should have been able to build more, but that is not the cause of the current serious issue.
It was poor regulation of the banks causing the banking crisis in combination with the government of the day not restricting immigration of new EU members. Then the current government giving up all pretence of immigration control.
If you look at my post #40 above you will see exactly where/when the housing crisis kicked off.

There was always some people who had difficulty with housing and there always will be. What is new is that it has spread to pretty much the entire lower/middle tiers of the population.

But your graph looked at the number of properties available to rent I think rather than how affordable the rents were. The big thing thats changed is the amount of property available to rent that people can afford I think a recent survey showed us to have the highest rental and mortgage costs in Europe I'll have a look for it.

 

[Gromett]

But your graph looked at the number of properties available to rent I think rather than how affordable the rents were.

No that graph was housebuilding. Said it right in graph itself.

If the total housing stock does not keep up with the population. It doesn't matter if the housing stock goes to renters or buyers. When you have an increase in demand that is not met by supply prices rise. Basic economics. Whether that price is rent or outright purchase makes no difference it will rise.
Here it is again to save you going back.

 

[The Wino]

No that graph was housebuilding. Said it right in graph itself.

If the total housing stock does not keep up with the population. It doesn't matter if the housing stock goes to renters or buyers. When you have an increase in demand that is not met by supply prices rise. Basic economics. Whether that price is rent or outright purchase makes no difference it will rise.
Here it is again to save you going back.

View attachment 881833

You're quite right about it being supply and demand it's also competition. If there's a big stock of social housing at low rents it affects the market and keeps private rents down. If as now it's near enough impossible to get social housing and there a shortage of property it makes rents increase.

 

[Gromett]

You're quite right about it being supply and demand it's also competition. If there's a big stock of social housing at low rents it affects the market and keeps private rents down. If as now it's near enough impossible to get social housing and there a shortage of property it makes rents increase.

Social housing rents are set based on number of factors but the market value of the property is the biggest component as I understand it. Therefore the overall housing shortage caused by failure of housebuilding to keep up with population directly impacts the cost of social housing as well. There is no way to isolate any component out. If you are not building enough houses then everything is affected.

 

[Gromett]

The Wino I just went and checked and I was wrong. It has changed. only 30% of the rent for social housing is based on the property value. But a big chunk is based on the national average rent (including private rent) adjusted by local earnings.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[The Wino]

Social housing rents are set based on number of factors but the market value of the property is the biggest component as I understand it. Therefore the overall housing shortage caused by failure of housebuilding to keep up with population directly impacts the cost of social housing as well. There is no way to isolate any component out. If you are not building enough houses then everything is affected.

I agree that the problem is the shortage of property. But the way rents are set in the private sector is largely just what you can get away with! ( I know because I'm a landlord!)

 

[JJ]

Don't worry about mass immigration folks...

The problem is soon to be over.

Six or seven "illegal" asylum seekers are going to be sent to Rwanda.

That will sort it out.

Isn't it wonderful that Blighty has such an intelligent government!



JJ

 

[Gromett]

But the way rents are set in the private sector is largely just what you can get away with

Which is dictated by supply and demand which is what I have been saying

 

[VXman]

When it comes down to it - the area near the Bristol Downs are very affluent with very expensive, pretty and historical housing. It's a lovely area.

Would you really want this on your door step?

 

[The Wino]

When it comes down to it - the area near the Bristol Downs are very affluent with very expensive, pretty and historical housing. It's a lovely area.

Would you really want this on your door step?

View attachment 881858

What does it matter how expensive and posh the houses are? Are you saying that people in posh houses have more rights over whats parked on the public road outside their house than anyone else?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[tacr2man]

If one buys such a house the expectation is that it wont be in an area resembling a traveler site

 

[The Wino]

If one buys such a house the expectation is that it wont be in an area resembling a traveler site

If you want rights over the road buy on a private road! I think just because you spent a lot of money on a house doesn't give you any more rights over who parks outside your house than anyone else otherwise we're moving back to a society where the aristocracy have rights over serfs and the law doesn't apply equally.

 

[nicholsong]

I agree that the problem is the shortage of property. But the way rents are set in the private sector is largely just what you can get away with! ( I know because I'm a landlord!)

As a landlord myself, not professional as the I only rent out my old house, I look at the rent I set in a different way: the rental income is the major part of my 'pension income and I need to keep it at a certain level.

Last year the net return had dipped below 3%, which was less than I could have got by selling and investing elsewhere. Had I not achieved a 10% increase I would have been close to the decision to sell. Fortunately that 10% was just below the average rental increase for the area.

A lot of professional landlords have been selling for the same reason of low net returns on capital, This reduces the housing stock available for rent and itself pushes up rents.

Landlords cannot be expected to hold investments that return less than available investing elsewhere - bonds and dividend income for example, which do not have maintenance costs, like property.

 

[The Wino]

As a landlord myself, not professional as the I only rent out my old house, I look at the rent I set in a different way: the rental income is the major part of my 'pension income and I need to keep it at a certain level.

Last year the net return had dipped below 3%, which was less than I could have got by selling and investing elsewhere. Had I not achieved a 10% increase I would have been close to the decision to sell. Fortunately that 10% was just below the average rental increase for the area.

A lot of professional landlords have been selling for the same reason of low net returns on capital, This reduces the housing stock available for rent and itself pushes up rents.

Landlords cannot be expected to hold investments that return less than available investing elsewhere - bonds and dividend income for example, which do not have maintenance costs, like property.

We did something similar it's a pension investment for us too. We actually probably charge a little less than market rent and although as you say the percentage return just on rent isn't a fortune we have benefitted from an increase in property prices too (although that won't be certain until we sell). I do however think a lot of landlords aren't so reasonable in their approach for instance when our kids were at uni there were some landlords who would charge a lot in repairs at the end of the tenancy that I suspect were never done

 

[Viennese]

The rental market in Bristol is pretty brutal. And the article suggests it is the most expensive city for accommodation outside London.

I think Oxford is more expensive.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[mikebeaches]

I think Oxford is more expensive.

It could be and perhaps Cambridge also?

 

[VXman]

What does it matter how expensive and posh the houses are? Are you saying that people in posh houses have more rights over whats parked on the public road outside their house than anyone else?

No it does matter how posh or expensive places are - but I would care if that was across the road from my house. It's not pleasant to look at and the value of my house would obviously fall. I do care about what I see outside my house. Why on earth do I cut the grass, plant flowers, keep it looking tidy, paint the house, not dumping rubbish on my doorstep etc etc .

You really don't care about what the surroundings you live in are like?

 

[VXman]

The rental market in Bristol is pretty brutal. And the article suggests it is the most expensive city for accommodation outside London.

I think Oxford is more expensive.

It could be and perhaps Cambridge also?

Brighton is up there too.

hmmm.... interesting....

The most expensive cities outside London

The capital tops the list, followed by university cities Cambridge and Oxford

theweek.com

 

[mikebeaches]

Brighton is up there too.

hmmm.... interesting....

The most expensive cities outside London

The capital tops the list, followed by university cities Cambridge and Oxford

theweek.com

Ah, yes Brighton - that was mentioned in the Times article as a hotspot for van-dwelling.

The article in your post is about purchasing property, which of course will mostly align with rental costs, but not quite always perhaps?

 

[jerryz]

I moved away from Brighton this year as its a nasty place to live now used to be best place in UK , I was born therein 1958 up till 1990s it was glorious always been pricey but it was good place to live ,,, but now its a very expensive lawless, jammed, woke , unpleasant shithole

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}