L’affitto supera le £ 1.000 al mese in più aree: scopri dove
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx28njn2dwpo
di topotaul
Tag
Austria
Belgio
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cechia
Croatia
Croazia
Czech
Czechia
Czech Republic
Danimarca
Denmark
Estonia
Europa
Europe
France
Francia
Germania
Germany
Grecia
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Irlanda
Polonia
Polska
Portogallo
Portugal
Regno Unito
Repubblica Ceca
Repubblica di Turchia
Romania
Serbia
Slovacchia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Svezia
Sweden
Turchia
Turkey
Ucraina
Ucraino
Ukraine
Ungheria
United Kingdom
13 commenti
I was paying £1100 for a 1 bed flat when I moved in 2020
It is honesty crazy that my pals on minimum wage in Bristol are paying £1400 for a one bed flat. I’m “lucky” that my rent is only £1200. At least humans don’t need to eat or stay warm or anything else…
I bought at the top of the market and my mortgage is £1300– it’s insane to think a lot of people are paying that in rent (when house prices have since dropped).
Never felt so grateful to only have a £430 a month mortgage
Soon to be everywhere.
Successive governments have attacked non corporate landlords which led many to sell, with many of those properties purchased by corporate landlords who will aim to push rental income as high as possible.
After each change to taxation on private let’s, second homes etc there has been a period of reduced availability as landlords get their properties ready for sale and while the property was on the market, this also caused rents to rise as demand was high and estate agents are sharks.
Meanwhile, councils are forcing people from social housing waiting lists. They are setting eligibility criteria based on household income. Those earning above the thresholds will be removed or blocked from applying.
Similarly, councils can refuse applications from people who are deemed unable to afford rents.
Provision is in place for councils to charge working tenants a market rent equivalent.
Some people assume that social tenants who pay full rent are still being subsidised by the tax payer. They aren’t. Taxes do not subsidise rents unless someone is getting housing benefit.
Governments ‘subsidise’ housing associations by offering advances so the houses can be built without recourse to heavy interest loans. This enables them to keep rents lower using historic formulas.
Rents still rise annually.
The upshot of this is that a couple nearing retirement who have an assured tenancy but who earn more than the threshold will not be able to apply for social housing adapted to meet their needs.
Due to their age, most mortgages will be unavailable or prohibitively expensive.
For example: a couple wish to buy a house for about 220k. They have a deposit of 10k. The repayments are going to be 2k a month over the shortened period offered. They won’t get 20 years to pay it off.
I’ve seen 800+ for two bed south wales valleys shitholes. It’s got insane.
There’s only one answer really, and that is to build 15 million homes over 5 years and collapse the housing market on purpose.
No one has the political will to do this though.
Sorry, but when was rent under £1,000 a month? I would bet south of England around 2004. I have not knows anyone that played less for the past 20 years
Forgive me if I’m being dense, but I can’t see where in the article it describes what is being rented here. Is this for a room in a HMO? A bedsit? A 1 bed flat? A terrace house? Or everything lumped together and averaged?
The speed of the increase is also part of renter woe. In 5 years the rise meant that saving money by downsizing renting from 2 to 1 bed, or 1 bed to a house share is no longer saving any money.
When I first moved to Sheffield back in 2007 I was paying £625 for a two bed, two bathroom south facing apartment with a large balcony. No parking. The flat was recently advertised and rented at £1600pcm. That sort of jump is insane to me.
Why didn’t this article adjust for inflation? They literally straight up say “there’s also been inflation and wage rises”.
Ok, so are they more or less than the rise in rent? By how much?
What a pointless article.