Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
comment by The Process (U20671)
posted 25 minutes ago
It's as bad in Dublin also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct and it will be the number 1 political football at the next election.
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 49 seconds ago
Spoiler alert, I am fairly certain Trump Form will comment on this thread standing up for landlords
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TBF, if they have worked hard and purchased a 2nd property, fair play to them. Lots of families would be homeless if there wasn't a private rental market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who needs 2 properties ?
Some place you’re going to use for 3 or 4 weeks of the year in summer while a local family can’t get on the ladder
comment by hounslows-finest (U6180)
posted 4 minutes ago
Become West Ham fans and live in caravans .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Periwinkle blue
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 10 seconds ago
Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can inceease it at renewal by however much they like. If the tenant takes it to a tribunal, they would look at the going market rate for the area. If you are within that, you are fine. If you exceed the market rate, they may rule the increase should be lower.
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
RDD, at least you’re doing your bit for population numbers declining with all your multiple personas
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious.
But no, as it happens I just have a brain and a touch of empathy
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Colombian jungle
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 10 seconds ago
Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can inceease it at renewal by however much they like. If the tenant takes it to a tribunal, they would look at the going market rate for the area. If you are within that, you are fine. If you exceed the market rate, they may rule the increase should be lower.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't there used to be a law in place where you could only increase is a certain percentage per year, unless you had made significant improvements to the property?
We've started to address the problem here in Wales with a council tax premium on second/holiday homes that don't have at least a 182 night occupancy per year.
It is a problem. My home town has approx 5,000 living there and there are over 350 second/holiday homes there. Too much.
I own a second home there too to be fair but it's rented out to someone who wanted it but couldn't get a mortgage. Three bedroom house £450 a month. We've not raised the rent since 2017 when she moved in either. It wouldn't be right to do so. I'd rather sell the house to br honest but the tenant is happy there so we'll keep it while she's still there.
Second homes in Wales though do make a lot of damage. It erodes community and the language.
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s disappointing as I had planned to possibly spend my later years in Ireland living a nice cheap life. Is it much better on the west coast? Galway etc
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious.
But no, as it happens I just have a brain and a touch of empathy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is your empathy and solutions for who the thousands of people squeezed our of the housing market?
There are stories here of people earning $100k salaries and living in tents.
—
Feck that, not with all the evil spiders and creatures that live there. I’d emigrate. To NZ it looks better anyway.
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those people are not renting the type of properties people are discussing in this thread, including the OP.
You must be a dream for the daily mail editors... someone that will pin the blame on the most hard up rather than engaging your brain for a single second.
Check out diafol the property tycoon
Joking aside fair play for not raising the rent mate. 450 a month would not get a room in Dublin
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The same as what happens to them now.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
We've started to address the problem here in Wales with a council tax premium on second/holiday homes that don't have at least a 182 night occupancy per year.
It is a problem. My home town has approx 5,000 living there and there are over 350 second/holiday homes there. Too much.
I own a second home there too to be fair but it's rented out to someone who wanted it but couldn't get a mortgage. Three bedroom house £450 a month. We've not raised the rent since 2017 when she moved in either. It wouldn't be right to do so. I'd rather sell the house to br honest but the tenant is happy there so we'll keep it while she's still there.
Second homes in Wales though do make a lot of damage. It erodes community and the language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fecking Londoners
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s disappointing as I had planned to possibly spend my later years in Ireland living a nice cheap life. Is it much better on the west coast? Galway etc
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be less mate although not by a huge amount. It would be far better to buy a property outright there. Would cost way less than Dublin
Is this where our 90s metal bar will be located?
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those people are not renting the type of properties people are discussing in this thread, including the OP.
You must be a dream for the daily mail editors... someone that will pin the blame on the most hard up rather than engaging your brain for a single second.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course they rent the same type of properties you moron.
Sign in if you want to comment
The rental crisis
Page 2 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 14/6/23
Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
posted on 14/6/23
comment by The Process (U20671)
posted 25 minutes ago
It's as bad in Dublin also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct and it will be the number 1 political football at the next election.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 49 seconds ago
Spoiler alert, I am fairly certain Trump Form will comment on this thread standing up for landlords
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TBF, if they have worked hard and purchased a 2nd property, fair play to them. Lots of families would be homeless if there wasn't a private rental market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who needs 2 properties ?
Some place you’re going to use for 3 or 4 weeks of the year in summer while a local family can’t get on the ladder
posted on 14/6/23
comment by hounslows-finest (U6180)
posted 4 minutes ago
Become West Ham fans and live in caravans .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Periwinkle blue
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 10 seconds ago
Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can inceease it at renewal by however much they like. If the tenant takes it to a tribunal, they would look at the going market rate for the area. If you are within that, you are fine. If you exceed the market rate, they may rule the increase should be lower.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
posted on 14/6/23
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
posted on 14/6/23
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
posted on 14/6/23
RDD, at least you’re doing your bit for population numbers declining with all your multiple personas
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious.
But no, as it happens I just have a brain and a touch of empathy
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Colombian jungle
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 10 seconds ago
Add to that insane rent increases here. I know someone who is paying $600 per week and their landlord raised it to $900 per week. Rental controls are needed. The only place they exist in Oz is Canberra - and why? Because the greens are partly in power. How is it in England ? Can a landlord up the price by such an amount?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can inceease it at renewal by however much they like. If the tenant takes it to a tribunal, they would look at the going market rate for the area. If you are within that, you are fine. If you exceed the market rate, they may rule the increase should be lower.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't there used to be a law in place where you could only increase is a certain percentage per year, unless you had made significant improvements to the property?
posted on 14/6/23
We've started to address the problem here in Wales with a council tax premium on second/holiday homes that don't have at least a 182 night occupancy per year.
It is a problem. My home town has approx 5,000 living there and there are over 350 second/holiday homes there. Too much.
I own a second home there too to be fair but it's rented out to someone who wanted it but couldn't get a mortgage. Three bedroom house £450 a month. We've not raised the rent since 2017 when she moved in either. It wouldn't be right to do so. I'd rather sell the house to br honest but the tenant is happy there so we'll keep it while she's still there.
Second homes in Wales though do make a lot of damage. It erodes community and the language.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s disappointing as I had planned to possibly spend my later years in Ireland living a nice cheap life. Is it much better on the west coast? Galway etc
posted on 14/6/23
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really are a facking bellēnd aren't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somebody tells me this guy has been in a social housing for 4.5 years 😄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious.
But no, as it happens I just have a brain and a touch of empathy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is your empathy and solutions for who the thousands of people squeezed our of the housing market?
posted on 14/6/23
There are stories here of people earning $100k salaries and living in tents.
—
Feck that, not with all the evil spiders and creatures that live there. I’d emigrate. To NZ it looks better anyway.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those people are not renting the type of properties people are discussing in this thread, including the OP.
You must be a dream for the daily mail editors... someone that will pin the blame on the most hard up rather than engaging your brain for a single second.
posted on 14/6/23
Check out diafol the property tycoon
Joking aside fair play for not raising the rent mate. 450 a month would not get a room in Dublin
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Pierre Reedy (U1734)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle (U4388)
posted 2 seconds ago
"Social housing should therefore only be available to someone for a max period of 5 years. That should be enough time for most to get themselves in a position to buy or private rent."
Not remotely possible in any way, if after the 5yrs they weren't in a position to buy or rent private what do we do with them? where would they go?
--------
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
This would soon see people questioning if they can afford baby number 3 or 4.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the kids should be looked after max 2 months then if they can't find food for themselves then they can starve.
What are your views on abortion RDD?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the kids fault you moron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if one of those kids, let's say they are 13, gets pregnant? What do you do with them and the baby?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The same as what happens to them now.
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
We've started to address the problem here in Wales with a council tax premium on second/holiday homes that don't have at least a 182 night occupancy per year.
It is a problem. My home town has approx 5,000 living there and there are over 350 second/holiday homes there. Too much.
I own a second home there too to be fair but it's rented out to someone who wanted it but couldn't get a mortgage. Three bedroom house £450 a month. We've not raised the rent since 2017 when she moved in either. It wouldn't be right to do so. I'd rather sell the house to br honest but the tenant is happy there so we'll keep it while she's still there.
Second homes in Wales though do make a lot of damage. It erodes community and the language.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fecking Londoners
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Robb #gotheSwans (U22716)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 3 minutes ago
I don't know what can be done but it's pretty disgusting at how high rent prices are everywhere.
I'm in the Midlands and you're talking £750+ to rent anywhere that's not a sh!thole. When you then factor in all the other costs like electric bills and council tax then you basically need to be on £30k just to survive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It can be €2000 a month in Dublin for a property and that’s nothing special
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s disappointing as I had planned to possibly spend my later years in Ireland living a nice cheap life. Is it much better on the west coast? Galway etc
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would be less mate although not by a huge amount. It would be far better to buy a property outright there. Would cost way less than Dublin
Is this where our 90s metal bar will be located?
posted on 14/6/23
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 34 seconds ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin (U2958)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Dave the Save (U22987)
posted 4 minutes ago
A tower block for a max of 2 years. Then, if after 7 years, if you can't provide a home for your kids, they should be removed from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly , wow
Secondly, how in hell would that solve anything... Now you have loads of kids that need to be homed.
BuT PeOpLe WiLl StOp HaViNg KiDs...
Well, the population of most western societies have been dropping, yet we are still in this housing crisis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It would solve the issue in that people would have to start considering if they can afford to not work, work part time, have 2,3 or 4 kids. Genuine consequences would change things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Those people are not renting the type of properties people are discussing in this thread, including the OP.
You must be a dream for the daily mail editors... someone that will pin the blame on the most hard up rather than engaging your brain for a single second.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course they rent the same type of properties you moron.
Page 2 of 8
6 | 7 | 8