Crackdown on 'rich' council house tenants

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by martyh

Presumably then you never use the NHS and your kids all went to private schools because you would never allow the state to give you anything

Irrelevant

Don't try and justify your <removed> position with pointless comparisons.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Irrelevant

Don't try and justify your <removed> position with pointless comparisons.

Where the <mod edit removed>,you know nothing about me or my financial position <also removed>

---------- Post added at 21:59 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Not the point though is it?

The point is that Marty is living in a council property enjoying a lower than market rate of rent, when he can well afford to pay a market private rent, or mortgage.

Whereas some one who is less well off has to pay the full market rate, or if they are on benefits, the tax payer pays their full market rent.

The most needy should be in council houses.

How do you know that ? what gives you right to make unfounded assumptions about me or anyone else to justify your own prejudices

Originally Posted by papa smurf

look at it this way he and in-fact all well off council house renters could be giving them more profit each month to the tune of 25% more which could go into local gov coffers and benefit all.
my house was built in 1897 i wouldn't offer a rent reduction based on its age .

Twisting things again to suit your prejudice ,how do you know I am "well off" , how long have I been "well off" ,since you seem to know so much about my personal finances how big a mortgage can I afford ?
<removed>

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I can't see where those articles mention that foreign buyers are leaving the houses they buy unoccupied....which is what I thought we were arguing about

Originally Posted by martyh

Presumably then you never use the NHS and your kids all went to private schools because you would never allow the state to give you anything

---------- Post added at 20:48 ---------- Previous post was at 20:38 ----------



http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Fear...ail/story.html

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...t-london-homes

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...y-8702570.html

In fact it is such a growing problem in London that Islington council plan to fine buy to leave investors

We weren't arguing my friend, you might find marty's links helpful though

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by martyh

<mod edit deleted>

ooh, name calling! <mod edit removed>

By your own admission you work full time, earn good money, good enough to afford a mortgage though at your age you have no desire to undertake... Which is totally fair enough.

The whole point of this thread is the proposal that those in your position will no longer be allowed to benefit than a lower than market rent for the size and location of property you live in that may be charged by the local authority against a private property.

You've skirted around the issue pretty well insisting you pay " full rent" as demanded by the LA but been a bit more sketchy around whether that constitutes the market rate for the size and location of you council property.

I'm not an expert in the field but I'm pretty sure that council properties are cheaper than private rental of the same standard, otherwise what would be the point?

Therefore if you can afford to pay the private rate you should pay it. By all means stay where you are, but pay the full rate so that the extra can help some poor sod who can't.

If you complain about that, then you are morally - exposed.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Time for all involved to take a chill pill. Debate the issues but once you start throwing insults at each other you cross a line and the CF Team will intervene and you don't want that.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by martyh

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Fear...ail/story.html

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...t-london-homes

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...y-8702570.html

In fact it is such a growing problem in London that Islington council plan to fine buy to leave investors

That may be but having read those articles, apart from some small super rich areas, it's all 'could' and 'feared'. Looks like they are trying to sell papers by hyping up a possible eventuality.

Hundreds of new homes in Cambridge could be standing empty having been snapped-up by foreign investors, it is feared......
Absenteeism as a problem is peculiar to the smudge of “super-prime” London around Harrods (although there are pockets elsewhere, such as Highgate)


.......could also end up in the hands of “absentee” foreign owners.

But the claims were strongly disputed by developers who insisted under-occupation was “greatly exaggerated” and said international investors only made up a tiny fraction of all purchases across Greater London as a whole.

[Gary L]

I think what we have to remember is that if we've all been supportive of cuts to the unemployed and such. then we can't be a hypocrite and expect ourselves to be excempt from cuts by way of paying a bit more rent

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I think what we have to remember is that if we've all been supportive of cuts to the unemployed and such. then we can't be a hypocrite and expect ourselves to be excempt from cuts by way of paying a bit more rent

Give that man a ceee-gar!

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Give that man a ceee-gar!

I gave up smoking. can I have some e-liquid instead?

Mango flavour.

a Vision Spinner battery would be nice too.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

That may be but having read those articles, apart from some small super rich areas, it's all 'could' and 'feared'. Looks like they are trying to sell papers by hyping up a possible eventuality.

Since when is 75% a tiny fraction and since when is stratford a small super rich area

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...w-8826336.html

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Since when is 75% a tiny fraction and since when is stratford a small super rich area

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...w-8826336.html

That article doesn't suggest that the foreign investors are going to 'buy to leave'

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

That article doesn't suggest that the foreign investors are going to 'buy to leave'

It does if you saw the sales video the developer was criticised for. Hopefully they won't be but I wouldn't put my house on it after seeing so many blocks in the city at night without a light on anywhere.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Hopefully they won't be but I wouldn't put my house on it after seeing so many blocks in the city at night without a light on anywhere.

Could that be due to power saving measures?

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Could that be due to power saving measures?

I mean the residents could be doing that but it isn't mandated or local authority policy.

He is right though most new build flats are marketed as investments in London. Adverts on radio for them boast of the profit that could be made and paper advertisements are accompanied by yield rates. We can also expect it to get worse with the turmoil in the Asian stock markets too.