Chesterton Humberts has set out a series of demands it would like the government to meet to improve the housing market and in particular encourage more house building.
It is unusual for agencies to set out these demands, sometimes for fear of upsetting commercial clients like developers, and often because they keep their head down' on political issues and leave such demands to umbrella groups like the NAEA.
Nick Barnes, Chesterton Humbert's head of research, has gone on the offensive however and says his want' list from Chancellor George Osborne includes:
- making land available to develop at below market rates in return for taking a share of any future profit made by the developer or investor;
- reducing the time and cost of getting a large scheme through local authority planning;
- levying penalties on developers who cannot produce good reasons for sitting on land banks;
- increasing entry levy' stamp duty threshold (currently £125,000) to a level more akin to the average house price (currently £168,356 in England and Wales);
- more clarification and financial incentives for Build To Rent investors to enter the British rental market, increasing the size and variety of offer within the PRS;
- and clarifying current uncertainty over whether foreign owners of British properties may have to pay Capital Gains Tax should they sell their homes.
With a view to Chesterton Humberts splitting into two in the near future (Chesterton' will be the London sales and letting operation and Humberts' for rural property) Barnes makes a clear pitch to the Chancellor to make the prime central London housing market even more lucrative than it is today.
He calls for no mansion tax, no VAT on private sector rents and no further measures which discriminate against foreign buyers.
Comments
RR, I asked you to explain one of your ideas to me a few weeks back, and to date I have not had a reply.
Would you do me the courtesy or responding please You claim that agents don't want to change or accept new ideas, yet surely you realise that without ideas being explained no-one will ever take them seriously
Thanks.
Now that we have your attention - perhaps you would like to expand on your own particular 'new skool' way of thinking.
If we need to get with the times, you will need to nurse us through the transition.
What a bunch of tossers, the old school type of agent is dead - get with the times.
Also PEEBEE gets +1 from me.
So if Wardy and Peebee are the Dad's Army sergeants, does that make RR Captain Mainwaring who as I recall was a pompous twit who's ideas seldom worked!
Don't tell him your name Pike ;)
Which ideas have I rubbished exactly
You haven't come up with any that I'm aware of. (apart from the one where agents should buy property they can't sell)
You and PeeBee seem to be like sergeants in the 'Dad's Army' of estate agency. You rubbish the new ideas put forward by others, usually owing to lack of knowledge yourself, and are too frightened to put anything new forward yourselves.
Criticising others is just too easy.
Answering a question with a question RR, ohhh come on humor me at least.
Rude and childish.
@Wardy
Aren't you just trying to put words into my mouth as always :p. What have 'you' got to say on the subject
@PeeBee
Facts are things that are generally set in stone but statistics are rather more pliable.
I think there's a long-running general misunderstanding between us. Let's meet up and discuss this. Surely that could lay a few of these demons to rest. Bring Wardy too, why not!
RR,
Hilarious as always. How about a constructive comment on some of the ideas in the ARTICLE.
I've always had you down as a bit of a communist, what do you think about the government getting involved with developers land banks and ease of the planning process
Oh, dear.
"...where did you get those stats"
That would be an official Government document, Sir. HMRC publication for UK Property Transaction Statistics. Look it up - I did.
"Don't you know that there are a huge number of house owners who are unable to sell currently..."
WHICH house owners are you taking about - those currently on the market; or those who can't or won't sell due to potential negative equity situations
"...and an equally huge number of buyers who, for whatever reason, cannot afford to buy"
Only EQUALLY huge Blimey - there was me thinking that there were WAAAAAY more numbers of potential 'stuck' buyers than that. I feel better now - thanks for that.
"Even your compatriots are saying that there are many more 'would-be' buyers than actual sellers currently."
Sorry - doesn't THAT statement completely blow the previous out of the water
"Who are you, by the way, anyway"
Why What does that have to do with anything
It is YOU making the ridiculous points, not me. I'm just quoting you back FACTS.
PeeBee, where did you get those stats
Don't you know that there are a huge number of house owners who are unable to sell currently and an equally huge number of buyers who, for whatever reason, cannot afford to buy
That's what I mean by the need to get the UK housing market back into shape and so, evidently, does the BBC.
Even your compatriots are saying that there are many more 'would-be' buyers than actual sellers currently.
Who are you, by the way, anyway
Mr Realising Reality
The housing market has, according to some, a 'statistical norm' of some 1,000,000 transactions per annum.
Apparently, last year, that figure was achieved, with 1,077,510 completions.
With that being the case, please define 'getting the housing market back into shape'.
Few (in fact no agents so far) appear to feel able to comment on how they could improve the housing market here then.
The BBC are interested in inviting some from the 70s and 80s who had been selling new houses to be on a show.
Surely some have some new ideas on how to get the housing market back into shape