Jump to content
DOSBODS  
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Should people on benefits be allowed to use their benefits to buy property.


working woman

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, Long time lurking said:

 

how does that work?

Low LTV = lower risk, at this rate those on low LTVs will need to withdraw all the equity to get a good deal :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wherebee

It's insane.

Build council houses in ranks of 1-10.  1 is a mansion, 10 is a tent in a field.  You piss about and break shit, you move down.  You behave, you move up.

PUBLIC HOUSING.  subsided rents, with responsibilities.  You know, like the Uk had until mass immigration and the switch to 'need' prioritisations.

 

  • Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

Gove had a solution to that on JHB this morning.

They will create a special savings vehicle that is outside the scope of the £16k cap where people on benefits can save a deposit.

If they can save up a house deposit, benefits are too high FFS!

Is this going to be another special savings vehicle in addition to SIPPs, NEST, ISAs, LISAs, HelpToSave, Premium Bonds and who knows what else? Another set of administrators. Another set of slightly different rules. Further complexity when it comes to working out entitlements elsewhere.

These proposals didn't even get as far as being committed to the back of a fag packet.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight

I think the plan was to get Boris compared to Thatcher, thinking that will go down well with the traditional conservatives.

The slight fly in the ointment is that almost every Thatcher fan I have ever met thought she was great APART from the council house sell off which they think was one of her worst ideas.

  • Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axeman123
3 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

I think the plan was to get Boris compared to Thatcher, thinking that will go down well with the traditional conservatives.

The slight fly in the ointment is that almost every Thatcher fan I have ever met thought she was great APART from the council house sell off which they think was one of her worst ideas.

Another way to look at it would be that RtB was about moving towards a free market, by eliminating publicly owned housing in a way that it would never be replaced. It was fundamentally conservative. BJs scheme is an ideological dogs dinner combining handouts/state subsidy with crony capitalism and market manipulation/picking winners. It is totally unconservative.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this half baked idea has just been put out there as part of the "moving on" spin BJ is pushing. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yadda yadda yadda
5 hours ago, Long time lurking said:

 

Why has the differential based on loan to value collapsed? People on 95% ltv were paying 2.67% more a year ago than people on 60% ltv but are now paying only 0.63% more. The 90% premium over 60% has gone from 2.1% to 0.3%. Seems very peculiar and must be supporting prices.

  • Informative 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One percent
14 minutes ago, RJT1979 said:

This being slated on c4 news by the HA chief of peabody. He saying this is all nonsense

Well of course he is. He’s got a vested interest. Not saying he’s wrong, just pointing out that he has skin in the game 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long-game
10 hours ago, snaga said:

I just put in some fictional figures, where my mortgage is rent, to see what I'd get if I could use HB for mortgage.

2 adults, each working 16 hours a week on min wage, 2 children under 18, £800pm "rent"

£307pw benefits

or ~£16kpa + extra £1050 for this year.

With our part time jobs, our income would be £33,660 tax free. Plus we'd qualify for all the other benefits, free school meals/trips prescription, home improvement grants etc.

It would be a significant drop in income, but we could live off that and have a far easier work/life balance.

For any households earning less than £50k pa before tax, it's a no brainer really.

Sounds ideal, can they actually access your saving amounts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Long-game said:

Sounds ideal, can they actually access your saving amounts? 

I'll just put all my savings over £16K into my SIPP where it won't count. When I hit the pension lifetime cap, I'll retire.

  • Informative 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Grey Man

I am sure this has been said, but are not such ideas akin to the NINJA  loans? Those repackaged by ratings agencies that turned into weapons of mass economic destruction?

Also noted were comments about the banking sector backing these.

There must be a strong temptation in these plans to make a UK Frannie system.

I guess, speculate, such loans will never end up being paid off. You own your fraction with the added onus of being on the hook for repairs. Likely a government grant available shortly.

I think I read ideas for a like for like replacement. Who foots the bill for the replacement?

If the unthinkable happens and you fall behind what happens then?

Back to social housing?

This really sounds like it was scripted on the back of a fag packet somewhere.

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight

I am quite relaxed about it just as long as they charge them the same interest rate that our students have to pay.

  • Agree 1
  • Love 1
  • Lol 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bobthebuilder
3 minutes ago, The Grey Man said:

This really sounds like it was scripted on the back of a fag packet somewhere.

Its a big round cow pat of bullshit. This will never work, wont get past the treasury, on the other hand, if I can now claim housing benefit with large savings then bring it on.

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight

Also posted elsewhere...

Posters are querying where the benefit bunnies will get the deposit from.

There is no need for a deposit. If you get a 30% discount you are only requiring 70% LTV so no downpayment required and automatically entitled to the best rates.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axeman123
48 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

Also posted elsewhere...

Posters are querying where the benefit bunnies will get the deposit from.

There is no need for a deposit. If you get a 30% discount you are only requiring 70% LTV so no downpayment required and automatically entitled to the best rates.

Let's be real, the 30% deposit won't mean getting 30% free equity. It will mean the developer getting ~50% more than market value, with the extra coming from the taxpayer.

Good point though.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight
11 minutes ago, Axeman123 said:

Let's be real, the 30% deposit won't mean getting 30% free equity. It will mean the developer getting ~50% more than market value, with the extra coming from the taxpayer.

Good point though.

These aren't new houses. It is existing stock so no developer involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axeman123
10 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

These aren't new houses. It is existing stock so no developer involved.

Yeah, but they will be replaced 1 for 1. The discounted price will be the market value, and the replacement that is built will cost the extra. I probably didn't explain that very well originally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight
Just now, Axeman123 said:

Yeah, but they will be replaced 1 for 1. The discounted price will be the market value, and the replacement that is built will cost the extra. I probably didn't explain that very well originally.

Will they be replaced? If so that would be massive news. Surprised it wasn't headlined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axeman123
Just now, Wight Flight said:

Will they be replaced? If so that would be massive news. Surprised it wasn't headlined.

I am certain I read that somewhere, of course that could just have been Gove or whoever freelancing when put on the spot answering basic questions that weren't even considered prior to announcing this shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight
1 minute ago, Axeman123 said:

I am certain I read that somewhere, of course that could just have been Gove or whoever freelancing when put on the spot answering basic questions that weren't even considered prior to announcing this shit.

If it is true they have just nationalised housebuilding. Which I doubt they would do.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Axeman123
3 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

If it is true they have just nationalised housebuilding. Which I doubt they would do.

"In a round of interviews, Mr Gove confirmed there will be a 'cap' on the number of people who can take advantage of the Government's new housing scheme.

When asked what the limit would be, he suggested it would be more than a thousand but said: 'That's something I will be discussing with housing associations.'

...

Mr Gove said the Government will make sure there are new houses to replace those bought by lower-paid workers under new plans where they can use housing benefits to buy their homes and an extension of the right to buy for housing association tenants.

He told Sky News: 'One of the things that we will be doing is making sure that there is a replacement – a like-for-like, one-for-one replacement'."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10900609/Buy-houses-handouts-Boris-launches-drive-lower-paid-property-ladder.html

, 1001 houses in total with no additional funding and they will be replaced.

But of course none of this is actually going to happen, so more fool all of us for getting drawn into BJ's fantasy world.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wight Flight
3 minutes ago, Axeman123 said:

"In a round of interviews, Mr Gove confirmed there will be a 'cap' on the number of people who can take advantage of the Government's new housing scheme.

When asked what the limit would be, he suggested it would be more than a thousand but said: 'That's something I will be discussing with housing associations.'

...

Mr Gove said the Government will make sure there are new houses to replace those bought by lower-paid workers under new plans where they can use housing benefits to buy their homes and an extension of the right to buy for housing association tenants.

He told Sky News: 'One of the things that we will be doing is making sure that there is a replacement – a like-for-like, one-for-one replacement'."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10900609/Buy-houses-handouts-Boris-launches-drive-lower-paid-property-ladder.html

, 1001 houses in total with no additional funding and they will be replaced.

But of course none of this is actually going to happen, so more fool all of us for getting drawn into BJ's fantasy world.

 

I am guessing he had a bit more time to come up with some invented answers after he was skewered by JHB.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...